-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ralf Mardorf wrote: <snip> > it's a question because of the thoughts about what people nowadays > expect from a studio in the box, something what 64 Studio is also for. > If many people will use Vista for Windows, than many people will have > computers, that comply with the requirements for a Linux running > KWin/KDE, while using Linux audio applications. > This is the wrong question IMO. FLOSS is where it is because people wrote software that *they* themselves wanted. The question of mass appeal is IMO irrelevant. If FLOSS does not do what you want it to, either make the changes yourself or hire someone to do it.
> I guess that GNOME was a good choice for 64 Studio 2.1, because it's a > DE that won't force people to read manuals or just to radically change > their habits, if they know Fluxbox, KDE, Win 98se or Win XP, they easyly > can work with GNOME. > > While companies for proprietary stuff do market research, because they > will make money, they not only will manipulate the customers, they also > will satisfy real needs for professional audio studios and homerecording > people. > That is their prerogative to do so and I have no problem with that. > Apple and Microsoft should be enemies, but it would be clever not to > ignore the needs of non-computer-freaks, that are just users. The users > aren't enemies, even if many from the Linux community treat "stupid > users" like enemies. This is where there is confusion. What most FLOSS people are hostile to are ignorant users who take no personal responsibility. I paid no one for the first Linux distro that I installed. I was pleasantly surprised that there was a community that supported this software, for no cost. All that was expected is that I took the time to do basic research, use my own brain, and then ask questions. The fact that some people take offence when it is suggested that they RTFM, well I suspect we are better off without them. > > You misunderstood my question and you are right, if I would know for > myself what Windows I should run, I should and I would ask this where > people might be, that have more experiences with Windows. > > I'm thinking about, what would be the best way, that Linux audio should > go. Maybe it should be for people with the interest to know a lot about > the OS they use, for people with unusual habits and needs for audio work > and perhaps it should be for people having classical habits, when > working with audio and some of them might not be interested in how the > OS they use, will work. Linux audio should go where Linux audio will go. Apart from being cryptic, this means that the developers will take it where they see fit. If I have a strong desire for it to progress in a certain fashion, I can contribute code or dollars, the amount of which would likely be proportionate to the strength of my desires. Otherwise I do not *expect* my desires to be satisfied. Having said that, I am continuously impressed with the quality and usefulness of FLOSS to me, in nearly all of my computational endeavours. > > What should be the WM/DE for 64 Studio > version 3.0? > Does it really matter? For those of us who have a strong preference, we can install the WM/DE of our choice. For everyone else, I doubt that they would know the difference or even care. > The better question is, what MacOS and what Windows do producers for > audio use and what are the reasons for that? Followed by the question, > are there some points that should Linux also do the way a MacOS or > Windows does? > I don't care. I care what this FLOSS stuff does/can do for me. I think that the FLOSS community spends way too much time worrying about what Apple or Microsoft is doing. The KDE4 project is not trying to implement features because some other project or company is, they are basing their work on plan based on usability studies and their own experience. So, in this limited example, what the other OSs are doing would limit the KDE4 people's ability to truly innovate. This is not to say that there are no lessons to be learned from these other projects, I just mean to say that we should not obsess with them. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJLw0iwRXgH3rKGfMRAuOBAJsGaxipDbg5JLj7es/X1YNx0AO2/ACgiJTX umQOi79D6RjjDPusAmiC3T0= =K1LP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ 64studio-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users
