>Also, with much of the audio/desktop stuff still under development, I
>experienced much less of the linux/server stability...
>
>Some months ago, the alsa driver would freeze my system whenever I tried
>to use the sequencer interface. More recently, the dri-driver for my
>radeon keeps doing the
"Richard Bown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't know about "many" but it's happened to me. I've looked for
> > software engineers to assist in developing a Linux-based audio
> > product and had difficulty finding development/consulting help. And
> > this was for a funded project.
>
> Yeah
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:48:00PM -0500, David Gerard Matthews wrote:
>
> D R Holsbeck wrote:
>
> >I guess stability is not an issue?
> >
> It's not the potential drawing card that it once was. OSX is as stable
> as Linux, and even 'doze XP is getting there, from what I hear.
> -dgm
>
Also,
Well considering OSX runs on top of BSD I am not surprised. As for
windoze XP, I dont see it, maybe if you compare it to the rest of the
windoze long line of garbage. But that would not take much, though DOS
was pretty stable ;-)
On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 20:48, David Gerard Matthews wrote:
>
> D R H
that's not really what i meant. anybody who has read this list over a
reasonably period of time or who conducts a rudimentary lookup on my
name using google will very rapidly get the impression that i'm
probably available for any consulting projects related to linux, audio
and MIDI. and indeed,
Or price?
Hopefully it should be possible for vendors (including Paul :) to ship
preconfigured linux boxes with wodges of software and without any
licensing costs.
- Steve
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:28:28 -0600, D R Holsbeck wrote:
> I guess stability is not an issue?
>
> > To attract commerci
>> nobody has ever offered or even talked about hiring me as an
>> employee. only 2 companies have talked about using me as a
>> consultant. i think its reasonable to conclude that the offers of work
>> are not out there at this point in time.
>
>For DAW applications, you're probably right.
that's
On Tuesday 12 November 2002 17:05, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> To attract commercial attention, a Linux audio application would have
> to offer either a unique feature (or group of features) that's
> commercially attractive or a significant customer base unreached by
> Windows/OS products.
I don't thi
>> I don't know about "many" but it's happened to me. I've looked for
>> software engineers to assist in developing a Linux-based audio
>> product and had difficulty finding development/consulting help. And
>> this was for a funded project.
>
>Yeah so you keep on saying but when I send you an ema
On Tuesday 12 November 2002 16:00, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> I don't know about "many" but it's happened to me. I've looked for
> software engineers to assist in developing a Linux-based audio
> product and had difficulty finding development/consulting help. And
> this was for a funded project.
Ye
"Paul Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> nobody has ever offered or even talked about hiring me as an
> employee. only 2 companies have talked about using me as a
> consultant. i think its reasonable to conclude that the offers of work
> are not out there at this point in time.
For DAW applications, yo
"Mark Knecht" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...Are you saying you can't
> find developers to hire? Or are you saying you only want to hire them for
> the duration of the project design? The former take a real monetary
> commitment to put people on staff. That's pretty difficult financially.
Most a
"Simon Jenkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But where would they have been now if they had taken the fully
> open route? Somewhere better? Somewhere worse? Where could
> a hypothetical competitor who started now, from scratch, with a
> fully open model get to? Would they catch up and overtake? Wo
"Taybin Rutkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think that it's a prime cause. I'd say that it takes a company with
> > commercial interests to see a product through development to the point
where
> > it is ready to release to customers for sale.
>
> We must be misunderstanding each other. You
Paul Davis is on permanent record as saying:
:
:and lets suppose they did so. how many extra units would they actually
:sell? my guess is less than a dozen or so in a given year. notice that
:i said "extra". the chameleon doesn't run linux, we're talking about
:developers who want to work on linux
>If they're unable or unwilling to tell the difference between "free
>software" and "software that is written for free" then there's
>probably never going to be a linux sdk for their hardware. Its just
>too specialised and complex for someone to do it for free, or to
>modify anything that's already
>Yep, this is what the whole Embedded Linux market is about, and the model
>works in the audio area quite well. Look at DigiDesign with Pro Tools. Thee
>isn't a reason that they couldn't offer PTLE here if they can offer it on OS
>X, right?
as i've mentioned previously, if you take a look at ardou
> Paul Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> OS X is a major challenge to the linux audio religious faithful.
It's an opportunity, too, though -- there's a segment of the Mac
population that can barely justify the cost premium for Mac hardware,
because they use the hardware for recreation or avoca
om: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:linux-audio-dev-admin@;music.columbia.edu]On Behalf Of Simon
Jenkins
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 9:22 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: image problem [was Re: [Alsa-devel]
help for a levelmeter]
If they're unable or unwilling to tell
>> Not to be sarcastic, but I'm pretty sure that LAD programmers refusing
>> offers of work isn't the cause of the lack of linux-based audio products.
>
>I think that it's a prime cause. I'd say that it takes a company with
>commercial interests to see a product through development to the point wh
>>Like the soundart chamelon http://www.soundart-hot.com/
[ ... ]
>That's exactly the kind of hardware I was thinking of... and exactly the
>kind of
>business model I *wasn't* thinking of.
>
>Maybe they, or someone like them, could sell more hardware if they "let go"
>of the software? (They'd
Thanks paul,
I have this problem once in a while as a die hard opensource fan I didn't
go out and buy software for years now and - a point that even in the linux
community many people don't seem to understand - not because I'm a cheap-
skate or ex-w4r3z kid that doesn't understand how commercial s
>Another way a company can make money off free software is to
>embed it, with suitable modification, in custom hardware.
>
>Audio-related examples might include things like:
[ ... ]
>When enough end-user linux audio apps are "ready for prime-time"
>somebody should be able to make a lot of mone
>I really dont see much point in going from using Logic on a Mac to Logic
>on Linux.
for MacOS pre-X, stability and performance would be a great pair of
reasons to do this. but now that OS X is here, and apps like logic are
more or less available for it, no, i don't see much point in doing
that ei
On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 07:15:02AM +, Simon Jenkins wrote:
> Audio-related examples might include things like:
>
> Making a multi effects rack unit with pro-audio i/o, a heap of DSP
> power, front panel display and controls, and filling it with the
> pick of the available open source algorith
OTOH
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 07:06:47PM -0500, David Gerard Matthews wrote:
> I would shell out for a fully-functional version of Ardour if Paul
> decided to charge $400 for it, I doubt that many people
> who are not already running Linux would be.
Hell yeah. If it was still GPLd, and especially
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 07:06:47PM -0500, David Gerard Matthews wrote:
> But at this point, much as I prefer free software, I'd be willing to
> plop down $400 USD for a Linux version of
> Logic. PT, Cubase, or Cakewalk.
OK, thats interesting, but I wouldn't. One of the reasons I use linux for
aud
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 07:06:47PM -0500, David Gerard Matthews wrote:
> not true. And of course, there is the whole (somewhat
> discredited by present economic circumstances) argument that you *can*
> make money of off free software.
there are some business models that seem to work.
Zope Corpor
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 03:18:54PM -0500, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> I think that it's a prime cause. I'd say that it takes a company with
> commercial interests to see a product through development to the point where
> it is ready to release to customers for sale.
Who are these audio companies that
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 12:45:30 -0500, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Len Moskowitz wrote:
>
> > My point was that if Linux audio developers had the time and inclination to
> > offer their design and/or consulting services to commercial companies, it's
> > likely that more Linux-based
ECTED]
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: image problem [was Re: [Alsa-devel]
help for a levelmeter]
Taybin wrote:
> > My point was that if Linux audio developers had the time and inclination
to
> > offer their design and/or consulting services to commercial companies,
it's
>
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> Taybin wrote:
>
> > > My point was that if Linux audio developers had the time and inclination
> to
> > > offer their design and/or consulting services to commercial companies,
> it's
> > > likely that more Linux-based audio products would come to market
Taybin wrote:
> > My point was that if Linux audio developers had the time and inclination
to
> > offer their design and/or consulting services to commercial companies,
it's
> > likely that more Linux-based audio products would come to market.
>
> Not to be sarcastic, but I'm pretty sure that LAD
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> My point was that if Linux audio developers had the time and inclination to
> offer their design and/or consulting services to commercial companies, it's
> likely that more Linux-based audio products would come to market.
Not to be sarcastic, but I'm pre
Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> So what products would core-sound be willing to invest in?
This is a topic better discussed privately.
My point was that if Linux audio developers had the time and inclination to
offer their design and/or consulting services to commercial companies, it's
likely that more
>IMO it would be much better if the link to details about the card would
>not say "Install' but instead indicate that details about the card can
>be found there (alsa soundcard matrix), I mean the column is named
>appropriately drivers&docs but the item in column is always 'Install'.
>It has most
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 02:00:54PM -0400, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> Paul Winkler wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I didn't understand this exchange. What's being offered?
>
> Compensation for assistance with Linux audio-related product development.
What a radical concept! :-}
too bad /me is too busy with endles
Paul Winkler wrote:
> Sorry, I didn't understand this exchange. What's being offered?
Compensation for assistance with Linux audio-related product development.
> Nice to see you here, Len.
Thanks -- nice to see you too, Paul.
> (We met at that NYLXS audio-related meeting a while back.
> Geez,
Takashi, thanks for these corrections!
It'd be great to see yet more reports about successes, failures, suspected
problems, etc, etc concerning different soundcards and chipsets on
alsa-user (and other lists)! It's much easier to make purchasing decisions
if you know that at least someone has ha
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 11:54:40AM -0400, Len Moskowitz wrote:
> > Are you making an offer? ;)
>
> Yes, I am now and I have in the past. It's not easy to find takers.
Sorry, I didn't understand this exchange. What's being offered?
Nice to see you here, Len.
(We met at that NYLXS audio-related m
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 comm
On Thursday 24 Oct 2002 18:32, Kjetil S. Matheussen wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Peter L Jones wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > I don't want to have to learn about DSPs and stuff to be able to identify
> > a _good_ sound card. I've currently got a shortlist for my next machine:
> > * MidiMan Delta Audiophil
> this is what's on the page:
>Creative Labs | Soundblaster Live Platinum | EMU10K1 | Install |
>(4)[A][B]
> bottom of the page:
>
>(4) Hardware mixing supported
>
>...
>
>NOTE: Just because an I/O is listed does NOT mean it is guaranteed to
>be supported. Please check the mailing
>list archi
>> Plus the sound matrix at
>> http://www.alsa-project.org/alsa-doc/ doesn't say there are problems
>>getting docs from manufacturer.
>Perhaps someone should add a note.
I thin there is right at the bottom of the page. But I will make a more
noticible note.
> professional system or not, I wou
On Tuesday 22 Oct 2002 22:10, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Peter L Jones wrote:
> > When I run latencytest0.42-png from [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get about 99%
> > sub 2ms latency. But jack still complains of xruns of about 50ms.
> > There's something here I'm simply failing to understan
> -Original Message-
> From: Patrick Shirkey [mailto:pshirkey@;boosthardware.com]
> Eric wrote:
> >it is also pretty much useless for general users. I mean if I can't
> >listen to mp3 and browse the web at the same time ...
> (without sound
> >servers which were discussed recently and
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter L Jones [mailto:peter@;drealm.org.uk]
> On Tuesday 22 Oct 2002 20:27, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> > Peter wrote:
> > >All these things just make life _easier_. I want to get on with
> > >developing code, not wondering why my hardware isn't performing. I
> >
At Wed, 23 Oct 2002 00:07:22 +0300 (EEST),
Kai Vehmanen wrote:
>
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Peter L Jones wrote:
>
> > I don't want to have to learn about DSPs and stuff to be able to identify a
> > _good_ sound card. I've currently got a shortlist for my next machine:
> > * MidiMan Delta Audioph
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 04:26:41PM -0700, Paul Winkler wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 07:15:39PM -0400, David Gerard Matthews wrote:
> > I can certainly sympathize with that one. Supposedly there is some work
> > being done on supporting
> > USB audio devices under ALSA; that may be our best ho
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 07:15:39PM -0400, David Gerard Matthews wrote:
> I can certainly sympathize with that one. Supposedly there is some work
> being done on supporting
> USB audio devices under ALSA; that may be our best hope. (Yes, I know
> USB has potentially
> horrible latency. )
There
>Then explain it this way, and do not contradict yourself by initially
>saying Jack will never replace other sound daemons, and then mention
yes, i think i wrote contradictory things. i sometimes do that. my
original point was that JACK was not *intended* to replace other sound
daemons. its design
>> When I run latencytest0.42-png from [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get about 99% sub
>> 2ms latency. But jack still complains of xruns of about 50ms. There's
>> something here I'm simply failing to understand... but I don't know where to
>
>
>Are you running JACK as root with "-R" or with "-R --asio"
On Tuesday 22 Oct 2002 20:27, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> Peter wrote:
> >All these things just make life _easier_. I want to get on with
> >developing code, not wondering why my hardware isn't performing. I
> >don't _want_ to have to learn _that_ part of the system. Because I'll
> >only need to d
> > JACK *isn't* intended for general use, and i get tired of
> > suggestions that it should be.
and then later...
> the reason for not doing this is that there isn't manpower to do it. i
> am focused on JACK as the engine for a set of apps that i want to be
> able use (and i want others to be
* Kai Vehmanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Oct 22 02 16:09]:
> - snd-intel8x0 (nice chipset, is suitable for low-latency use)
Actually, I've had terrible results with this. It could be due to the
fact that it got pushed to a higher IRQ by my other card, however.
--ant
On Tuesday 22 Oct 2002 12:55, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
[snip]
> > JACK is not yet finished, and it has some definite usability issues
> > that need to be resolved. but it is not, and i hope will never be
> > (primarily) a general purpose sound server.
>
> In other words, development&testing help is welc
> -Original Message-
> From: Kai Vehmanen [mailto:kai.vehmanen@;wakkanet.fi]
>
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Conrad Parker wrote:
>
> > it might save you some hassles if you changed the intro to
> jack's web
> > pages, which currently read:
> >
> > JACK is a low-latency audio server, writt
On Tuesday 22 Oct 2002 17:42, Paul Winkler wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 11:14:52AM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> > I can't answer this properly, but there is some issue to with mmap mode I
> > believe. It is a very small number of cards that dont work.
>
> We should compile a list of them, and m
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 11:14:52AM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> I can't answer this properly, but there is some issue to with mmap mode I
> believe. It is a very small number of cards that dont work.
We should compile a list of them, and maybe put it in the JACK FAQ.
--PW
--
Paul Winkler
"Welco
Patrick wrote:
> >If you will be making money from a Linux-based product, then you
> >*should* be investing your own money for promotion.
>
> I am. What's your point?
Other people (people who are not in business) need not and likely won't
invest money to promote Linux Audio.
People here invest
>> > all, you basically have a box that wouldn't run an ASIO device
>driver
>> > under windows or macos.
>
>So, in essence Jack is yet another ASIO wannabe. If I wanted ASIO, I'd
>be working on Windows or MacOS.
does it occur to you that there might actually be something *good*
about ASIO? that JA
> -Original Message-
> From: Joshua Haberman [mailto:joshua@;haberman.com]
>
> "Paul Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >So why, having studied the docs, am I completely stumped
> with jack? It
> > >refuses to play. I don't consider any solution based on a
> piece of software
> >
>> JACK *isn't* intended for general use, and i get tired of suggestions
>> that it should be. there are lots of people working on solutions for
>> "general use". JACK is intended for people who are serious about
>> audio.
>
>I'd like to add that not all JACK developers are as strict about this as
On 10/22/2002 - 04:46:47, Richard Bown said:
> On Monday 21 October 2002 20:21, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> > But am I just wasting my breath because the Agnula crew are going to
> > do all the work for us?
>
> Oh well _now_ you come on to my pet subject.
>
> > Anyone from the Agnula project have a
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 08:51:01 -0700, Joshua Haberman wrote:
> I fully understand that crappy consumer interfaces are not going to be
> able to run JACK with 128 frames per period, but surely any card could
> handle JACK if you bumped that size high enough. Is there any reason
> that a particula
On Monday 21 October 2002 20:21, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> But am I just wasting my breath because the Agnula crew are going to
> do all the work for us?
Oh well _now_ you come on to my pet subject.
> Anyone from the Agnula project have a position on this?
A while ago I got involved in a flamespa
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Ivica Bukvic wrote:
> of good PRO apps (contrary to your definition of OSS-based "toys" in one
> of your previous e-mails) do not, and will not support it (i.e. RTcmix)
> [either due to fact the apps are not being constantly updated any more,
> or maybe the developers are skep
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Paul Davis wrote:
>
> > >So why, having studied the docs, am I completely stumped with jack?
It
> > >refuses to play. I don't consider any solution based on a piece of
> software
> > >_I_ can't operate suitable for general use.
> >
> > JACK *isn't* intended for general use,
"Paul Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >So why, having studied the docs, am I completely stumped with jack? It
> >refuses to play. I don't consider any solution based on a piece of software
> >_I_ can't operate suitable for general use.
>
> JACK *isn't* intended for general use, and i get t
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 02:53:14 +0900, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> > Some of us have really been trying for a while now. I think they would
> > have to do something if they were overwhelmed with success stories from
> > our community. But that requires people to pull finger and actually
> > writ
Hi Paul,
it might save you some hassles if you changed the intro to jack's web
pages, which currently read:
JACK is a low-latency audio server, written primarily for the
GNU/Linux operating system. It can connect a number of different
applications to an audio device, as well as allowi
>So why, having studied the docs, am I completely stumped with jack? It
>refuses to play. I don't consider any solution based on a piece of software
>_I_ can't operate suitable for general use.
JACK *isn't* intended for general use, and i get tired of suggestions
that it should be. there are l
On Sunday 20 Oct 2002 21:38, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Oct 2002, Peter L Jones wrote:
> > I also want to be able to do this on my current machine, a Celeron
> > 400. Jack won't run - my machine's too slow. MPlayer won't run - my
> > machine's too
>
> As for JACK requiring a +400Mhz machine
> > >The occasionaly discussed jack session
> > > saving gizmo would be a knock dead feature.
> >
> > And any offering to the general public that doesn't contain this feature
> > will probably end up just plain dead. Be patient.
>
>
> I'm not a patient man ;)
I didn't mean you. I meant th
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 11:42:34 -0700, Tom wrote:
> > Things like jack have to be graphically wrappered or hidden too, no
> > scrolling text windows of xruns. The occasionaly discussed jack session
> > saving gizmo would be a knock dead feature.
>
> And any offering to the general public that
> Things like jack have to be graphically wrappered or hidden too, no
> scrolling text windows of xruns. The occasionaly discussed jack session
> saving gizmo would be a knock dead feature.
And any offering to the general public that doesn't contain this feature
will probably end up just plain
>Maybe, but the people I'm thinking of are looking for a replacement for
>thier protools+logic systems, not cubase or cakewalk.
>
>Home users are important too, but...
>
>> It's probably up to the bread and butter products to drive the bespoke,
>> studio-end products. The complete, finished solut
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 04:49:43 +0100, Richard Bown wrote:
> We launched RG from a desktop icon all last week. It now has
> Logic-style status messages on the splash screen while you're waiting
> for it to start and (while they can be a little naff) touches like that
> are give it a profession
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 04:50:18 +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> > Things like jack have to be graphically wrappered or hidden too, no
> > scrolling text windows of xruns. The occasionaly discussed jack session
> > saving gizmo would be a knock dead feature.
>
> mmm a jack controller app that you c
> Things like jack have to be graphically wrappered or hidden too, no
> scrolling text windows of xruns. The occasionaly discussed jack session
> saving gizmo would be a knock dead feature.
mmm a jack controller app that you could configure (with a mouse) start jack
and check the current state, us
On Friday 18 October 2002 15:49, Steve Harris wrote:
> Notice the future tense. I dont think its a good idea now, better to
> wait 'til we have a nice bunch of jack'd (+ alsa midi/whatever),
> stable, documented apps, all playing well together than put people
> off with the kind of stuff we're pre
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 02:55:28 +0100, Richard Bown wrote:
> > I see your point. But feel that the problem is not that it is too
> > difficult or ugly for the majority of people but that we have not
> > done a good enough job of showing how worthwhile it is to spend long
> > hours on figuring out
Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>I am willing to collate this information and write it up into an
>official site and document (no prob for me these days).
http://www.djcj.org/LAU/openads/
--
Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd.
For the discerning hardware connoisseur
Http://www.boosthardware.com
Http:
On Friday 18 October 2002 13:51, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> I see your point. But feel that the problem is not that it is too
> difficult or ugly for the majority of people but that we have not
> done a good enough job of showing how worthwhile it is to spend long
> hours on figuring out how to get
Patrick Shirkey wrote:
While I was in Thailand I spent most of my time pondering how to make
more impact. I have a few ideas which require serious investment of my
time and energy.
One of my ideas was to get a community fund for advertising in the
correct publications.
I know several people
Richard Bown wrote:
On Friday 18 October 2002 09:23, Richard Bown wrote:
it's time that there was a clear distinction between Linux Sound/Audio
and Linux for Music. The latter has a clearly defined marketplace,
the former doesn't.
Sorry, that's not quite right. The former does too, but it's
On Friday 18 October 2002 09:23, Richard Bown wrote:
> it's time that there was a clear distinction between Linux Sound/Audio
> and Linux for Music. The latter has a clearly defined marketplace,
> the former doesn't.
Sorry, that's not quite right. The former does too, but it's just a
little mor
87 matches
Mail list logo
