Excellent points, Karlheinz, and a right-on perspective. I'm going to chime in in support. I am an experienced performer and musician, have recorded (commercially) a number of my own albums and CDs, and at one time owned and operated my own analog recording studio. My other hat is as the owner and operator of an online (LAMP-based) web and email hosting service, FMP Computer Services, and as a Linux system administration consultant. I get paid for this, too :-)
On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 10:28 -0500, Karlheinz Noise wrote: > > First, there > > is the contradictory thought process that wonders why more people don't > > contribute to projects like this, while at the same time frowning on people > > who complain about a tough user experience and telling them to just learn > > the 'right' way or whatnot. > > This is important. I blame the fact that the Linux community has too > large of a programmer-to-user ratio. That's completely understandable > for any sort of DIY community, but if any variety of GNU/Linux wants > to break out of its niche market, it needs to explicitly change its > goals to attract a user base that is less computer literate. Classically, the F/OSS community doesn't care if it "breaks out" of, or breaks into any market. Market share isn't a goal, just a byproduct of creating software software that meets a very high standard of excellence, and excellence is the objective. The appropriate response to any criticism would be "if you don't like it, go buy Pro Tools." On the other hand, defining excellence with regard to A/V software has to mean that any reasonably intelligent and resourceful studio engineer or producer can use the software in a way that allows him or her to focus on the rather complex issues of production, recording, mixing, punching, etc. and not on configuring the software. One of the objectives of good A/V software design should be transparency. > There are reasons for that relative computer illiteracy, and they are > not bad ones. For instance: If you tell a recording engineer to just > learn the task the "right" way, are you going to pay them $100/hour to > do it? That's how much they'd lose in studio time. Good point! Developing competitive skills as a recording engineer is a major educational undertaking. Everyone who goes through this kind of educational experience, doctors, engineers, whatever, becomes more conservative about their tools. > Here's one suggestion: Stop thinking about Linux vs. Windows, and > start thinking about Linux vs. Mac. For at least ten years, NOBODY in > the A/V industry used Windows. Even today, almost all my musician > friends use a Mac if they have a choice. The Mac has been the de facto standard platform for the A/V industry for years, going back even longer than the 10 that Karlheinz cites. Windows-based tools have made some inroads, but the Mac and Mac OSes are still the standard platform. Pro Tools on the Mac, and the various software and hardware components that work with it are the gold standard for digital recording. Pro Tools has pretty much defined the look and feel of the UI that recording and production people expect. I've used Ardour2 and like it rather well, but it's godawful difficult to figure out how to do various jobs on it, and the documentation is pretty sketchy. There are features in it that I have no idea how to use, or understand, and no time to explore when I'm using it to do a musical job. One indicator of an immature technology or tool is that the development of it gets way ahead of the documentation. This isn't necessarily bad, just an indication that it's still very much a Work In Progress. > Another suggestion: Stop thinking of A/V programs as computer > programs. Get up from your computer, and go browse the shelves of > Guitar Center. Remember back in the 80's, when digital synths were > coming around? Remember having to scroll through all those menus on > your DX7 or K2000? That interface style is mostly gone now, and > there's a very good reason for that. Better still, go visit one of your professional recording engineer friends and watch as he or she uses modern commercial digital recording tools. > I don't know the official numbers, but ALMOST ALL of my Linux-using > friends use Ubuntu, and the main reason is user-friendliness. For me, it's not just user-friendliness. I can handle the system admin stuff, but I like software that's solid around the edges and doesn't flake out, break or do weird and unexpected things. Ubuntu partakes of Debian's quality, which is considerable. I don't care for the attitudes of a lot of Debian QA and developer people - they tend to have their noses stuck straight up into the air - but Ubuntu people seem to be much more friendly and socially apt in this regard. > That way, you could focus less on keeping up with the Joneses, and > focus on releasing only after the system is rock-hard stable. Rock-hard stable and reliable is _very_ good for a software tool that basically needs to do a complex technical job and stay out of the way. > Like I said, this is just talk on my part. Feel free to reject any or > all of what I just said. You make a lot of good points, Karlheinz. -- Lindsay Haisley |"Fighting against human | PGP public key FMP Computer Services | creativity is like | available at 512-259-1190 | trying to eradicate |<http://pubkeys.fmp.com> http://www.fmp.com | dandelions" | | (Pamela Jones) | -- Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
