Len Moskowitz wrote:
Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>People here invest their time and effort (but usually not money for
>promotion), mostly because they're techies who want to to build
>something that they really need/want. Businesses invest money for
>another reason, because they want to develop and promote commercial
>products. They're mostly two different worlds (though there is
>crossover).
Would you agree that the commercial side of Linux Audio development is
not currently showing much support for the community then? Would you
consider it to be partly (if not largely) because there is an image
problem.
I'd say that it has nothing to do with image. Businesses have no reason to
support general Linux Audio development. They should be supporting the
development and promotion of products, and at the moment Linux Audio is not
a product, nor is it yet a stable foundation for product development.
I think that the responsibility for why there are no commercial Linux Audio
products is shared. Part of it is that the developers are too busy to take
on commercial consulting and therefore the commercial community doesn't have
anyone to help them adopt Linux. There are exceptions, but they are few.
There are other roadblocks to commercial development, not the least of which
is the lack of a stable Linux envorinment -- it seems that every few weeks
(or day! or hours!) there's a new distribution, a new CVS, a new Unstable.
Start developing using Suze/Redhat/Debian version X.x and
ALSA/JACK/OSS/ecasound/snd/USB-services/PCMCIA services/files system
services version X.x and in a few weeks, if you try to get support the
response is: "We no longer support that version -- upgrade to the latest
one." Developers might love that kind of world, but small companies can't
live with that - they need a stable development environment.
Fair point. However final Scratch would would suggest that things can be
done if you are willing to take a snapshot and fine tune that. I don't
think that there will ever be a completely stable version of anything in
Linux.
>Perhaps there's no need to promote Linux Audio; perhaps instead there
>is a need to promote useful products. If those products happen to need
>Linux (and ALSA & Jack) as a foundation, then Linux will get promoted
>as a side effect of successful products. Much like MacOS.
>So if you want Linux Audio to be promoted, either make broadly useful
>products or assist the companies that want to turn your work into
>broadly useful products.
Are you making an offer? ;)
Yes, I am now and I have in the past. It's not easy to find takers.
Have you specific projects that you want to see done or are you looking
for people to present you with concepts? I am particularly interested in
making djing machines and portable recording devices. If there is
anything I can do for you please let me know.
If we had a community run organisation that lead by example do you think
it would make you feel more motivated to promote Linux as a platform to
your customers? Esp. If you could show them that your company has an
active part in supporting the community?
If commercial companies could get the cooperation of the few key Linux
developers who work on ALSA, USB for sound, drivers for sound hardware and
recording/playback/editing software, they'd be more likely to fund the
development and marketing of Linux-based products.
In my experience I have had a lot of very useful help from core
developers and I am not able to offer anywhere as much finacial
assistance as companies like your own.
But I don't think that Linux developers care much, in general, about
developing Linux sound applications for commercial use, or for that matter,
in promoting Linux.
I wouldn't say they don't care. I prefer to think in terms of everyone
has strengths and software developers are not particularly reknowned for
being great communicators. (That is an obvious stereotype which I use to
highlight the point. I think that LADers are extremely good
communicators). No man is an island and coding is particularly straining
on mental facilites. Investing as much energy into promotion is a low
priority I think.
I think that their motivation is more to develop useful
tools for their own use and to be part of a larger community of their
technical peers. They want to do their thing, distribute it freely, and not
have to deal with the licensing and access issues associated with
commercial products (most specifically Microsoft and their Windows
products).
That's true if you take it at face value but their are many ways to do
business and the M$ way is not the only one. It's New economy vs Old
economy. I think a lot of the developers around here would love to see
their work being used in professional projects assuming they didn't have
to give up their rights in the process.
They also seem to have a bit of wariness of getting involved with a
commercial product that might make their code less openly accessible; the
wariness is only partly offset by the opportunity to earn some money --
money is not what motivates them.
It's a fine line.
Eg. Official status in the form of certification or advertising space,
naming rights, awards in your honour...
As I said before, perhaps there's no reason for companies to promote Linux
Audio; instead they should develop and promote products which build on (and
therefore) require Linux. That would result in Linux having a higher public
profile in the audio world.
So what products would core-sound be willing to invest in?
--
Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd.
For the discerning hardware connoisseur
Http://www.boosthardware.com
Http://www.djcj.org - The Linux Audio Users guide
========================================
"Um...symbol_get and symbol_put... They're
kindof like does anyone remember like get_symbol
and put_symbol I think we used to have..."
- Rusty Russell in his talk on the module subsystem
