The solution to this problem will be fixed for 14.04, namely, the user will have the choice which metas to install. Maybe it might even be worth thinking about per package selection, but this remains to be seen.
In your case it sounds to me that what you want to do is not install any metas, and add individual packages afterwards, am I correct? The whole point of the metas is to provide all possible workflows, and at the same time work as a showcase for new users. It's a way to show what is available. There's no way we can make the metas suite every individuals particular needs. And if someone wants to see a wider range of metas, I'd like to see compelling reasons for doing so. Currently, the ISO is quite small, about 2.5 GB. The menu is not cluttered, thanks to our custom categorization. >From my POV, it's pretty well organized in that sense. Ardour is not more advanced than it needs to be for what it is designed for. It's the only decent recording/mixing application for Linux, if you ask me. Audacity is not a recording tool at all. It's an audio wave editor. All though you can use it to both do multitrack recording and mixing, that is not what it was designed for, and it's quite poor at it as well. There's no getting around it. If you need to perform a task, you need to learn how to do it. Sometimes, what you need is to code stuff yourself, which is what I've found and which is why I use puredata. But, granted, not everyone will want to do that. Not everyone will want to use LMMS either. And some people will only want to use supercollider. Making applications easier to use is not something we can change in Ubuntu Studio, other than providing documentation and doing tutorials. If you need smarter applications, you need to either code them yourself, or help develop existing ones. We just provide them on our ISO. There's been talk about providing an abstraction, in the form of an application or by using existing tools for sessions management, to make it easier for new users to find how to use the existing applications in the system. But, someone will need to develop that.. On Sun, Oct 6, 2013, at 07:44 PM, Gord Williams wrote: > 2013/10/6 Gord Williams<i...@gordlwilliams.com>: > > > This is appropriately named as it does collide with the intent of > > Ubuntustudio which is a ready made studio for artists and musicians... > > > > Perhaps its appropriate at some point for Ubuntustudio to consider forks. > > Ubuntustudio -dev - would cover it. Personally I would like to see > > Ubuntustudio voice - for tracking and mastering voice projects. Weeding out > > synths and guitar boxes takes quite a bit of time after an install. > > /Um, I believe that just makes Ubuntu Studio hard to use for > everybody.../ > > > Nice you believe that, but you don't say why. If you get the just tools > you need > without having to uninstall many things then the OS is easier to use or > at least its > right sized. By your statement, it seems you just are reticent to > consider that or I > haven't expressed myself in a way that you find pleasing enough to > consider. > > If all the packages are grouped together into audio, video, > photography, etc. Then > wouldn't it be easier on the user to be a bit more granular in what they > install? > > Someone doing a bit of video, voiceover, and photography will never > touch a program language > except for kicks or learning. Forcing the install of puredata or > supercollider on the end user is > just wasted space on that persons hard drive. THAT is harder on the > user, particularly beginners. > > I can easily remember when I routed through all the programs to figure > out what they were. Linux developers > are notorious for non functional descriptions like "XXX apps aims to be > the best (easiest to use) IDE for > musicians and producers, a must have. It is written in C by programmer > Charles Lindburg." eTC, etc. > If you don't know what an IDE is, you have to discover that don't you? > Its harder to weed out things that > are useless in general from app descriptions, and sometimes even > websites themselves are sort of the same. > > Basically its just time consuming to weed through 8 synths you will never > use, 4 guitar boxes, dozens of jack apps and so on. Its kind of the > pile on theory when there is an abundance of things that belong on the > side of the fence you don't play in. An app being the latest or neato > shouldn't be the criteria. Being the only one of its type also seems to > be a trend for inclusion in a distro. > > I was just saying its easier and its possible to sort apps by their > discipline, such as adding Mixxx and IDJ if you intent to dj on line, > and leaving it off if you don't. You can always install it if you find > out what it is and want to try it or use it later. > > Ardour is too much for some people and a large learning curve, so maybe > Audacity is a good app to include in just about every recording scenario, > but the thing is as it stands now when programs get weird and want you > to sign up for a buck to download them, it makes it rough on us all - > coming from a distribution disc or not. Things change. Two editions > ago, Ardour wasn't like that. I would hate to figure out how to include > the latest version if I was creating a distro. > > I understand that probably I am asking for too much in suggesting that a > wizard interface or my original suggestion of forks of the distro can > really help an end user establish early on the system that works best for > them. I believe that ultimately a finely focused distro means the > potential of adoption of Linux overall by out doing what OSx and Windows > does not. Its simply not the same sandbox, and it out fox's the fox. > > I wasn't planning to write all this, but I believe it needs to be said. > I have noticed over the years of using Linux that distributions, even > specific use ones are driven more by programmers/developers than end > users or more specifically use. > > I have paired down Ubuntustudio to be what I need it to be and also a bit > of what I desire it to be. Anyone can do that, but in an era where > people are expecting to be able to dance to the music as soon as they > open the box, without knowing what the box does, the other ones with > their proprietary ways and huge marketing are going to get their way. > > I have always felt that Linux is often the little operating system that > could and there is no reason to say no. There are probably more reasons > to say yes. But please, enjoy and direct as you like. > > -- > 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 -- 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
