When OSS can support 8-channel, 32 precision, and 192k sampling rate, as well as other feathere, what is the specific niftier features that it is lack of compared with ALSA?
Thank you Freeman Jon Trulson wrote: > On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > >> Hi! >> >> > > >> Glynn asked me (as the upstream PulseAudio maintainer) to respond to >> this thread, so here I go. I'll try to respond to all the points >> raised in this thread: >> > > >> Richard Hamilton listed a couple of sound servers, claiming that it >> was a problem to adopt a sound server because there were so many of >> them. That's not really true. All sound servers he listed are either >> dead (MAS, ESD, aRts), prehistoric in its feature set (NAS, ESD) or >> not suitable for desktop use (Jack) or not a sound server at all >> >> > > Well I maintain NAS - have for about a decade now. No, it does not > support 7.1 dolby-whatever, but it doesn't need to. It does what it > claims to do, no more no less. > > [...] > > >> Then, "Unix Admin" asked mumbled something about whether we might >> want to install Solaris on my machines. Thanks, but no thanks. I >> already got a good operating system, which is called "Fedora", and >> its audio system is what I am payed to work on by Red Hat. >> > > That must be nice :) I'd love to be paid to work on NAS. Provides > alot of opportunity to improve/code things doesn't it? > > One of the reasons the other sound servers you mention (like MAS for > example) aren't viable anymore is precisly because no one wanted to > pay someone to work on it. You should consider yourself to be quite > lucky - a paid engineer working on 'free' software. Cool. I want > that gig :) > > >> Because the underlying audio APIs of Solaris (OSS and SunAudio) are >> not nearly as powerful as ALSA many of the niftier features I am >> currently working on will most likely not be available on Solaris >> anytime soon, though. >> > > Oh come on... I think you are thinking of the ancient OSS that linux > ships (or used to ship with). I've seen the ALSA API. I'll pass, > thanks. > > SunAdudio I'll agree with, but not OSS, sorry. > > >> Shawn Walker claimed that PA wasn't adopted yet. As mentioned above, >> we have been adopted by all relevant Linux distributions. There's not >> much left we could win in Free Software land, except maybe that >> little OS that starts with "Slow" and ends with "aris". ;-) Oh, and a >> > > Ah... Again, you obviously haven't run a recent Solaris either (or > ever??), have you. heh. > > >> couple of device manufacturers ship PA on mobile phones and GPS >> devices. And Nokia is now working on integrating it into Maemo >> > > What on earth for? > > >> too. So again, adoption is a non-issue. Besides maybe OpenSolaris, >> everyone who could adopt it has adopted it. >> > > I don't know what you mean by 'adopted'... I don't really see any > need to 'adopt' a sound server at all, whether it be PA or NAS. If > you need it, get it, else, who cares? > > > [...] > >> Shawn's claim that OSS will give you better audio support than "most >> GNU/Linux", is an adventurous claim, at best. Also, good "audio support" >> also requires good RT support, and afaik out-of-the-box Linux still tops >> Solaris by far on that. >> >> > > Yes... I suppose that 'afaik' was a wise move... > > [...] > >> PA is not made redundant by OSS. PA provides desktop integration, stuff like >> moving live streams between devices, network support and whatever. This is >> all stuff raw OSS cannot do. >> > > I'm sorry, but how many people really need to move audio streams > between devices for 'desktop use'? > > Granted, it's a nice toy, but... > > Anyway, thanks for the condescending rant! :) > > [...] > > > > _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
