On Sat, Jun 22, 2002 at 07:13:43AM +0200, David Olofson wrote:
>Well, I'll try to get started before you get bored... ;-)
;-)
Well, I read all the stuff you wrote and I agree.
Especially the idea of logical vertices and lines
is a good one and most of the time, though not
always beautiful ideas
On Saturday 22 June 2002 15.38, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, David Olofson wrote:
> > Actually, I have to agree, although it's not as simple as "XMMS
> > is bad". There are two parts; the GUI and the window management.
> > XMMS messes with *both*, for no good reason, and it doesn't
On Friday 21 June 2002 21.30, nick wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 18:40, Michael Toomim wrote:
> > Why don't you just use Evas? It was designed for just what
> > you're talking about.
> >
> > http://www.enlightenment.org/pages/evas.html
>
> Ive been thinking of using that myself. hardware acceler
On Friday 21 June 2002 19.40, Michael Toomim wrote:
> David Olofson wrote:
> > * Fast, high quality rendering with OpenGL style
> > blending effects and the like. (In fact, I'll
> > probably use OpenGL for the first implementation.
> > I've been messing a bit with 2D-on-OpenG
On Friday 21 June 2002 19.29, Vincent Touquet wrote:
[...]
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 11:20:20PM +0200, David Olofson wrote:
> >The design I have in mind could be implemented inside any toolkit
> >that provides access to the underlying "drawing toolkit" - or
> >directly on top of the rendering targ
On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, David Olofson wrote:
> Actually, I have to agree, although it's not as simple as "XMMS is
> bad". There are two parts; the GUI and the window management. XMMS
> messes with *both*, for no good reason, and it doesn't even result in
> a good user interface. The bypassing of
"STEFFL, ERIK *Internet* (SBCSI)" wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Joern Nettingsmeier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > "STEFFL, ERIK *Internet* (SBCSI)" wrote:
> > >
> > > that said I have to admit we're not there yet, I am just
> > trying to get
> > > soundblaster live! to reco
On Friday 21 June 2002 16.27, Bill Bland wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 04:05:47PM +0200, Vincent Touquet wrote:
> > I was thinking about some callback model:
> > you provide the callback to redraw your
> > knob after you changed the parameters.
>
> Sounds quite like the way FLTK works to me (se
On Friday 21 June 2002 16.05, Vincent Touquet wrote:
[...]
> >It's like replacing the graphics of a game; drawing a bunch of
> > images for each object, whereas normal ("GTK+ style" themes
> > consist of generic textures and images used by all widgets.
>
> Thats exactly what I'm aiming at :)
> I d
> -Original Message-
> From: Joern Nettingsmeier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> "STEFFL, ERIK *Internet* (SBCSI)" wrote:
> >
> > that said I have to admit we're not there yet, I am just
> trying to get
> > soundblaster live! to record something (audio) and it just
> doesn't:-)
>
> ass
"STEFFL, ERIK *Internet* (SBCSI)" wrote:
>
> that said I have to admit we're not there yet, I am just trying to get
> soundblaster live! to record something (audio) and it just doesn't:-)
assuming you use alsa, try scrolling a little to the right in alsamixer:
there is another control named "
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 12:36:49PM -0700, STEFFL, ERIK *Internet* (SBCSI) wrote:
> freeamp allows you to specify bitmaps of arbitrary size/shape for gui
>elements and place them where you want (there's an xml file that specifies
>the GUI), you can omit the GUI elements you don't need/want in part
> -Original Message-
> From: David Olofson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
...
> However, there's one thing that's seriously worrying me: Software
> piracy. I saw a poll somewhere, that indicated that a vast *majority*
> of computer users considered piracy more or less "OK". It's like they
>
> -Original Message-
> From: David Olofson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
...
> That said, the XMMS/WinAmp model *is* in fact of the first kind I
> mention above; GUIs with custom graphics. A skin for such an
> application is basically just a set of images that replace the
> original custom
On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 18:40, Michael Toomim wrote:
> Why don't you just use Evas? It was designed for just what you're
> talking about.
>
> http://www.enlightenment.org/pages/evas.html
Ive been thinking of using that myself. hardware accelerated gfx. mmm :)
nick
___
Cool, they must be lucky I didn't
think of patenting it when I just
thought of it now ;)
vincent
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 11:05:10AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
>Sounds quite a lot like the way almost every GUI toolkit I've looked
>at works (see XForms, GTK+, Qt, Gtkmm for examples) :)
>
>--p
David Olofson wrote:
> * Fast, high quality rendering with OpenGL style
> blending effects and the like. (In fact, I'll
> probably use OpenGL for the first implementation.
> I've been messing a bit with 2D-on-OpenGL anyway,
> to implement the SDL API on top o
On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 11:20:20PM +0200, David Olofson wrote:
(cut)
>of programming. It looks like it would be a fast and easy hack, as
>everything's so visually "obvious" and intuitive, but that's just an
>illusion...
I think I agree, though my GUI programming
experience is quite nonexistant :
>It's like replacing the graphics of a game; drawing a bunch of images
>for each object, whereas normal ("GTK+ style" themes consist of
>generic textures and images used by all widgets.
well, sort of.
a full GTK+ theme actually consists of:
a) methods to draw a set of low level primitives:
>> as a history, GtkCanvas is essentially the same as the Gtk+-1.2
>> GnomeCanvas, but available in a separate package and with functions
>> renamed accordingly. GnomeCanvas used to be available only as a
>> part of the Gnome libraries.
>>
>> the Gtk+-2.0 version of GnomeCanvas is available as a s
>On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 04:05:47PM +0200, Vincent Touquet wrote:
>
>> I was thinking about some callback model:
>> you provide the callback to redraw your
>> knob after you changed the parameters.
>
>Sounds quite like the way FLTK works to me (see www.fltk.org).
Sounds quite a lot like the way
> However, there's one thing that's seriously worrying me: Software
> piracy. I saw a poll somewhere, that indicated that a vast *majority*
> of computer users considered piracy more or less "OK". It's like they
> simply don't consider it a crime at all.
Can you honestly say that pirating softwar
On Thu, 2002-06-20 at 00:26, David Olofson wrote:
> On Thursday 13 June 2002 00.07, nick wrote:
> [...]
> > I suspect, however, as you have alluded to - that there arent many
> > graphic artists hanging around on this mailing list...
>
> Well, although it was some time ago I spent considerable am
On Thu, 2002-06-20 at 00:28, David Olofson wrote:
> On Thursday 13 June 2002 00.25, nick wrote:
> > IMO, the GIMP has never really had those polishments(?) - artists
> > still prefer photoshop and the like, and certainly people i know
> > just dont get on with the interface, choosing paint shop pr
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 04:05:47PM +0200, Vincent Touquet wrote:
> I was thinking about some callback model:
> you provide the callback to redraw your
> knob after you changed the parameters.
Sounds quite like the way FLTK works to me (see www.fltk.org).
Cheers,
Bill.
--
Dr. William
On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 11:28:14PM +0200, David Olofson wrote:
>That said, the XMMS/WinAmp model *is* in fact of the first kind I
>mention above; GUIs with custom graphics. A skin for such an
>application is basically just a set of images that replace the
>original custom graphics.
>
>It's like
On Thursday 13 June 2002 00.25, nick wrote:
> IMO, the GIMP has never really had those polishments(?) - artists
> still prefer photoshop and the like, and certainly people i know
> just dont get on with the interface, choosing paint shop pro
> instead, much to my horror ;)
Well, I almost forgot h
On Thursday 13 June 2002 00.07, nick wrote:
[...]
> I suspect, however, as you have alluded to - that there arent many
> graphic artists hanging around on this mailing list...
Well, although it was some time ago I spent considerable amounts of
time doing graphics, I consider myself at least 0.5
On Thursday 13 June 2002 14.02, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> > The problem seems to be either...
> >
> > A) That there aren't enough of these people to go around.
> >
> > B) That these people aren't in touch with the people who
> > want to write code, or just have a hard time coordinating wit
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 14.56, Paul Davis wrote:
> >The way I'd like to do it is by throwing "live" objects into the
> >canvas, assign various graphic shapes or images to them, and then
> >connect them to the logic through callbacks, events or whatever.
> > The point is that "basic" stuff like c
On Thursday 13 June 2002 02.03, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Paul Davis wrote:
> > welcome to the {Gtk,Gnome}Canvas.
>
> BTW. This is only somewhat on-topic, but...
>
> as a history, GtkCanvas is essentially the same as the Gtk+-1.2
> GnomeCanvas, but available in a separate package an
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 23.15, Kasper Souren wrote:
[...]
> > Well, a man can dream...
>
> Certainly. And a man can hope... that AGNULA will be a success.
> Since then the userbase will be expanded big time.
Well, considering the number of people playing and creating music in
one way or anothe
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 11.20, Vincent Touquet wrote:
> Continuing in the thinking out loud department,
> so I don't have to study ;):
>
> Seems a waste to hardcode all the GUI stuff though.
>
> How do they get about theming their controls
> in Xmms / mplayer ... ?
>
> Slider bars get different
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 14.40, Paul Davis wrote:
[...]
> There are rumblings in the GTK+ camp that a distant version of GTK+
> might switch entirely to the canvas model, and all widgets would
> just be canvas items that drew themselves onto the canvas RGB
> buffer.
Sounds like my way of thinkin
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 22.37, you wrote:
> On 12 Jun 2002, nick wrote:
> > What would be really good is if people donated money to the
> > projects they find useful (paypal/nochex), because I sure as hell
> > dont see the major distros supporting media apps development any
> > time soon. Maybe
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 16.18, Billy Biggs wrote:
[...]
> But that's sort of the thought behind ttrk: be a useful hardware
> sequencer. I can't stand piano roll views, they just don't make
> sense for the music I'm writing. I usually write electronic dance
> music where I want to see everyth
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 11.17, Vincent Touquet wrote:
> I have never done any GUI programming before.
>
> Writing these comprehensive widgets
> with cool knobs, smooth slides,
> graphical equalizers etc. seems
> difficult though.
GUI programming is not really difficult IMHO, but the difference
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 11.04, Michael Toomim wrote:
> David Olofson wrote:
> > ...and wants to hack a *really* complex one for a music
> > application. You also need to find a good GUI designer, unless
> > you're lucky enough to find someone that can do both.
> >
> > I'm quite sure it's not rem
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Fred Gleason wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 June 2002 16:37, Billy Biggs wrote:
>
> > I see only two options: Go all the way, ask all users to pay, lose
> > personal ownership of the project and turn it into a product, or ask
> > nothing and expect nothing. Anything in between p
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 16:37, Billy Biggs wrote:
> I see only two options: Go all the way, ask all users to pay, lose
> personal ownership of the project and turn it into a product, or ask
> nothing and expect nothing. Anything in between puts everyone in a bad
> position: users might fee
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 02:02:49 +0200, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> One of the things I'm always slightly disappointed in Linux apps (including my
> own) is the lack of originality of interface and ideas, too many clones of
> existing solutions - when we have the freedom and lack of commercial worries
> The problem seems to be either...
>
> A) That there aren't enough of these people to go around.
>
> B) That these people aren't in touch with the people who want to
> write code, or just have a hard time coordinating with them.
>
> or C) That these people aren't very deeply invol
Chris Butt wrote:
>
>
> But yeah, could something like agnula or the lad site have a 'so you
> want to help but you can't compile alsa' or 'things for people with
> little skill but enthusiasm'?
sounds like a very good idea to me. i'll think about it some more.
ideas welcome. (preferably off-li
>My exams are over in just over a week, and I intend on getting my pc
>running linux full time with alsa and stuff. I really want to help do
>/something/ in the linux sound area - at the moment I'm very definetly
>on the needing help stage.
Great, more power to you !!
If you need help, post on
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Paul Davis wrote:
> welcome to the {Gtk,Gnome}Canvas.
BTW. This is only somewhat on-topic, but...
as a history, GtkCanvas is essentially the same as the Gtk+-1.2
GnomeCanvas, but available in a separate package and with functions
renamed accordingly. GnomeCanvas used to be
> The problem seems to be either...
>
> A) That there aren't enough of these people to go around.
>
> B) That these people aren't in touch with the people who want to
> write code, or just have a hard time coordinating with them.
>
> or C) That these people aren't very deeply invol
On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 22:15, Kasper Souren wrote:
> nick wrote:
> > Exactly. I mean, I'm happy to let others use my software, but ultimately
> > I write it because I want a tool to do a particular thing. If people
> > want useability features etc.. then really someone's going to have to
> > pay fo
On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 22:03, Michael Toomim wrote:
> nick wrote:
> > Exactly. I mean, I'm happy to let others use my software, but ultimately
> > I write it because I want a tool to do a particular thing. If people
> > want useability features etc.. then really someone's going to have to
> > pay f
Vincent Touquet wrote:
> Continuing in the thinking out loud department,
> so I don't have to study ;):
>
> Seems a waste to hardcode all the GUI stuff though.
>
> How do they get about theming their controls
> in Xmms / mplayer ... ?
Same way GTK and QT have themes... I don't see what's differ
nick wrote:
> Exactly. I mean, I'm happy to let others use my software, but ultimately
> I write it because I want a tool to do a particular thing. If people
> want useability features etc.. then really someone's going to have to
> pay for it. I don't see how anyone could have the time it takes to
nick wrote:
> Exactly. I mean, I'm happy to let others use my software, but ultimately
> I write it because I want a tool to do a particular thing. If people
> want useability features etc.. then really someone's going to have to
> pay for it. I don't see how anyone could have the time it takes to
On 12 Jun 2002, nick wrote:
> What would be really good is if people donated money to the projects
> they find useful (paypal/nochex), because I sure as hell dont see the
> major distros supporting media apps development any time soon. Maybe
> that's what's needed - a distributor making music sys
On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 19:27, Billy Biggs wrote:
> Personally I see this as the 'flaw' with free software: most of it is
> code first and application second. And I'm totally ok with that, although
> it's awkward to read posts from users who expect things to work the other
> way around. I just
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, xk wrote:
> Of course, because your tracker it's written for your own personal use
> it's normal to not spend time implementing things you don't need.
>
> But developers which make software intended to be used by a large
> number of users should try to implement things peopl
> But that's sort of the thought behind ttrk: be a useful hardware
> sequencer. I can't stand piano roll views, they just don't make sense for
> the music I'm writing. I usually write electronic dance music where I
> want to see everything that happens on one beat all at once, and it is
> _ess
On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 15:50, nick wrote:
> > i don't know about xmms, but the GTK+ crowd, particularly havoc,
> > really don't like xmms since it violates most of the basic "rules"
> > about using GTK+.
>
> really?
> any examples of thing *not* to do? (is there a discussion of this
> somewhere?)
On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 12:26, Vincent Touquet wrote:
> Hm, nice project by the way :)
Thanks :)
> It's just that such a thing is not available yet
> IMHO, but it should be otherwise I think lots
> of good audio developers start wasting
> their time on the same thing:
> writing (sometimes ugly) wi
On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 13:50, Paul Davis wrote:
> >How do they get about theming their controls
> >in Xmms / mplayer ... ?
>
> i don't know about xmms, but the GTK+ crowd, particularly havoc,
> really don't like xmms since it violates most of the basic "rules"
> about using GTK+.
really?
any exam
On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 13:21, Steve Harris wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 11:19:56AM +0100, nick wrote:
> > (cut)
> > >Theyre not *that* difficult really, it's just the initial learning which
> > >already (this is from my experience writing amSynth
> > >http://amsynthe.sf.net). The problem is t
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, David Olofson wrote:
> Well, I'm *interested* - I've actually downloaded it and looked at
> it! :-) Problem is that I don't really like the traditional tracker
> idea anymore. I just record stuff from the keyboard and prefer
> editing notes using some kind of piano roll vi
On Wednesday 12 June 2002 06:19, nick wrote:
> But yes, a library of these would be damn sweet. in the style of gtkext
> (extra widgets for gtk) we could make one, but then the problem is the
> user must have this extra library installed, and us developers hate
> extra dependencies to worry about
Paul Davis wrote:
> The {Gtk,Gnome}Canvas is a thing of beauty and people should get to
> know it and probably its Qt counterparts well.
I can only speak from the Qt side of things but I quite agree. We use
QCanvas and QCanvasView with a bunch of QCanvasItems and specialisations
thereof for our
>The way I'd like to do it is by throwing "live" objects into the
>canvas, assign various graphic shapes or images to them, and then
>connect them to the logic through callbacks, events or whatever. The
>point is that "basic" stuff like catching clicks, handle dragging,
>control Z order etc, s
>How do they get about theming their controls
>in Xmms / mplayer ... ?
i don't know about xmms, but the GTK+ crowd, particularly havoc,
really don't like xmms since it violates most of the basic "rules"
about using GTK+.
>Slider bars get different sizes and sometimes
>shapes in such programs, y
>Paul: didn't you write some sort of a GUI
>widget for Ardour ?
>What do you think about this ?
gtkmmext contains several relevant widgets, the most relevant of which
is Gtkmmext::MotionFeedback. this takes a set of pixmaps, a
Gtk::Adjustment and a few other arguments, and uses the set of pixmaps
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 11:19:56AM +0100, nick wrote:
> (cut)
> >Theyre not *that* difficult really, it's just the initial learning which
> >already (this is from my experience writing amSynth
> >http://amsynthe.sf.net). The problem is that everyone likes a different
> >toolkit.. for example, I
Keep this idea on hold for a while
(but keep on discussing :).
I'm going offlist for a while
(won't read it till end of June),
cause exames are up and I always
find a good excuse inhere not to study ;)
so see you later !
regards
Vini
On Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 11:19:56AM +0100, nick wrote:
(cut)
>Theyre not *that* difficult really, it's just the initial learning which
>already (this is from my experience writing amSynth
>http://amsynthe.sf.net). The problem is that everyone likes a different
>toolkit.. for example, I used GTK--,
On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 10:17, Vincent Touquet wrote:
> I have never done any GUI programming before.
>
> Writing these comprehensive widgets
> with cool knobs, smooth slides,
> graphical equalizers etc. seems
> difficult though.
Theyre not *that* difficult really, it's just the initial learning w
>> Of course, since I have a market size of 1 (myself), and pretty much no
>> interest from the open-source community, the project hasn't gone
>> anywhere else. But I'm quite happy with it. :)
>
>Make that two!! :) ttrk has been one of my favorite >audio apps for a while
>now. Thanks to the we
Continuing in the thinking out loud department,
so I don't have to study ;):
Seems a waste to hardcode all the GUI stuff though.
How do they get about theming their controls
in Xmms / mplayer ... ?
Slider bars get different sizes and sometimes
shapes in such programs, yet they
retain their bas
I have never done any GUI programming before.
Writing these comprehensive widgets
with cool knobs, smooth slides,
graphical equalizers etc. seems
difficult though.
I think an effort should be undertaken to
get a group of people to write these damn things :)
I fear model-view-controller separati
David Olofson wrote:
> ...and wants to hack a *really* complex one for a music application.
> You also need to find a good GUI designer, unless you're lucky enough
> to find someone that can do both.
>
> I'm quite sure it's not remotely as easy as you suggest.
I don't see what the big deal is.
Alexander Ehlert wrote:
> You just have to find someone who likes GUI programming...
I like GUI programming!
On Tuesday 11 June 2002 19.37, Billy Biggs wrote:
[...]
> The same holds for software as well: interface is almost
> everything. I would much rather have a sequencer with less
> features and a good UI than a fully-featured one that's annoying to
> use. When composing it's important to "forget
On Tuesday 11 June 2002 12.29, Alexander Ehlert wrote:
> > That's basically why I think inventing Yet Another, Although Much
> > Cooler Looking GUI Toolkit would be worth the effort, if it could
> > help cutting GUI development time without dropping chrome and/or
> > features. (Whether or not it's
On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 03:48:27AM +0200, David Olofson wrote:
> Then again, We Have Paul! :-)
Huh? Wha'd I do? ;-)
--
Paul Winkler
www.slinkp.com
"Muppet Labs, where the future is made - today!"
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 18:36:33 -0400 (EDT)
Billy Biggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
>
> > Make that two!! :) ttrk has been one of my favorite audio apps for
> > a while now. Thanks to the well-defined set of functionality and
> > the way it is implemented,
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
> Make that two!! :) ttrk has been one of my favorite audio apps for a while
> now. Thanks to the well-defined set of functionality and the way it is
> implemented, there just isn't much to complain about. ;)
Wow! That means alot to me to hear that, ma
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Billy Biggs wrote:
> The same holds for software as well: interface is almost everything. I
> would much rather have a sequencer with less features and a good UI than a
> fully-featured one that's annoying to use. When composing it's important
> to "forget technology: thi
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Alexander Ehlert wrote:
> [...] The programs you mentioned cost a lot of money and their
> programmers work full time on it. And they have to do those nice GUI's
> if they want to sell it. Having a shiny metal interface doesn't mean
> their sound better, anyway. If I compare
> That's basically why I think inventing Yet Another, Although Much
> Cooler Looking GUI Toolkit would be worth the effort, if it could
> help cutting GUI development time without dropping chrome and/or
> features. (Whether or not it's possibly is another issue. Guess I'll
> just have to try it...
On Tuesday 11 June 2002 04.19, Juan Linietsky wrote:
> > That's basically why I think inventing Yet Another, Although Much
> > Cooler Looking GUI Toolkit would be worth the effort, if it could
> > help cutting GUI development time without dropping chrome and/or
> > features. (Whether or not it's p
On Tuesday 11 June 2002 04.09, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, David Olofson wrote:
> > That's basically why I think inventing Yet Another, Although Much
> > Cooler Looking GUI Toolkit would be worth the effort, if it could
> > help cutting GUI development time without dropping chrome
On Monday 10 June 2002 18.52, Alexander Ehlert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Why we dont have apps such as Reason, Reaktor, Sonar, Sound
> > Forge, etc? I dont mean full apps, but at least projects aiming
> > for that kind of thing.
>
> Because only 2% of the linux audio programmers try to make a living
> of
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, David Olofson wrote:
> That's basically why I think inventing Yet Another, Although Much
> Cooler Looking GUI Toolkit would be worth the effort, if it could
> help cutting GUI development time without dropping chrome and/or
> features. (Whether or not it's possibly is anot
> That's basically why I think inventing Yet Another, Although Much
> Cooler Looking GUI Toolkit would be worth the effort, if it could
> help cutting GUI development time without dropping chrome and/or
> features. (Whether or not it's possibly is another issue. Guess I'll
>
> just have to tr
On Monday 10 June 2002 07.46, Paul Davis wrote:
> >I think this raises some questions.. My feeling is that most
> > people aiming to write music on this OS is expecting to have apps
> > with super easy and intuitive interfaces, where you only go
> > trough displays, knobs, sliders and paintabe are
On Monday 10 June 2002 07.45, Ivica Bukvic wrote:
> However, forgot to mention, that it would be still nice to see
> user-friendliness become a standard in Linux ;-)
Yes - although one should keep in mind that *user* friendliness is
not the same thing as *beginner* friendliness. (I've had it wit
On Monday 10 June 2002 07.41, Ivica Bukvic wrote:
> What I think is that this is great since there is less likelihood
> that someone else will be using the same tools I do and hence less
> likely will my music sound like thousands of others :-)
Yeah... :-)
That's pretty much the reason why there
On Monday 10 June 2002 07.10, Juan Linietsky wrote:
> I thought this may be of interest to the list.
> In a k5 poll about usability of linux audio apps,
> ( http://www.kuro5hin.org/poll/1023512126_OSelOkZS )
> So far, out of 38 answers the results are:
>
> -How do you like music software for Linux
Hi,
> something like that, forgot the name), Eyesweb, Glame, pd, jmax, Visual
cglame even compiles on MacOSX, the problem is that mmap doesn't
work the same way as it does in Linux and so our swapfile backend doesn't
work. As richi and I are proud owners of iBooks we might resolve that
problem. A
Hi,
> Why we dont have apps such as Reason, Reaktor, Sonar, Sound Forge,
> etc? I dont mean full apps, but at least projects aiming for that kind
> of thing.
Because only 2% of the linux audio programmers try to make a living of
that.
I personally dislike GUI programming, programming soundfx is
dware and software
> support the gap is even more widening.
>
> Sebastien
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002
>I read:
>>
>> What tools are you talking about? I mean, I own both PCs and Macs, and
>> except Digital Performer I don't know about any other major package
>> that only exists on the Mac.
>
>max/msp
>supercollider
>
>regards,
>
>x
Except that max/msp is coming to Win platform this fall (and
Juan Linietsky wrote:
>
> I thought this may be of interest to the list.
> In a k5 poll about usability of linux audio apps,
> ( http://www.kuro5hin.org/poll/1023512126_OSelOkZS )
> So far, out of 38 answers the results are:
^
anyone home ?
while it never hurts to discus
>In reply to the 'not having the same sound as
>everybody else', I think this is a question of how you
>use software and not what you use. You can play a
>million things/styles etc on a guitar. The same goes
>for software synths etc.
Yes, but guitar still sounds like a guitar (with the exception
I read:
> What about jMax and Reactor?
I'm not sure what you mean reaktor runs on win and mac and jmax
runs on linux,osx,win32,irix
but max/msp != jmax and certainly not reaktor
supercollider is totally different from all the above
hmm..
x
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Postmodernism is german
What about jMax and Reactor?
Sebastien
Original Message -
From: "CK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Poll about linux music audio app usability
> I read:
> >
> > What t
I read:
>
> What tools are you talking about? I mean, I own both PCs and Macs, and
> except Digital Performer I don't know about any other major package that
> only exists on the Mac.
max/msp
supercollider
regards,
x
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Postmodernism is german romanticism with bet
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
