Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 8th Jan 2008 22:28 UTC, submitted by BSDfan
Multimedia, AV "4Front Technologies is proud to announce the release of the source code to Open Sound System v4.0 under the BSD license for FreeBSD and other BSD compliant operating systems. OSS is a cross platform API that provides drivers for most consumer and professional audio devices for UNIX and POSIX based operating systems, including Linux. Owing to its open architecture, applications developed on one supporting operating system platform can be easily recompiled on any other platform. Open Sound System is also available for Linux under the GPLv2 license and OpenSolaris under the CDDL license. It is also available for commercial and proprietary operating systems under the 4Front commercial license."
Order by: Score:
Woohoo
by coolvibe on Tue 8th Jan 2008 23:54 UTC
coolvibe
Member since:
2007-08-16

This *is* good news. Go 4Front!

Not to sound like a fanboy, but OSS just is the standard for sound under any unix (or unix clone). I hope Linux ditches ALSA for this. The reasons I prefer OSS over ALSA are mostly practical: OSS is *the* cross-platform standard API that everyone knows and implements (as standard as BSD sockets almost, but then for sound), and the documentation is way (and I mean way) better than ALSA's.

Thank you 4Front!

Edited 2008-01-08 23:55

Reply Score: 6

RE: Woohoo
by AlexandreAM on Wed 9th Jan 2008 00:42 UTC in reply to "Woohoo"
AlexandreAM Member since:
2006-02-06

I Have to second that, although you should take my opinion with a ton of salt, since i know pretty much nothing about the implementation details of both.

I would just like to see an unified system under which every *nix system could be programmed for sound without too much hassle.


Way to go!

Reply Score: 1

v RE: Woohoo
by sardaukar on Wed 9th Jan 2008 09:01 UTC in reply to "Woohoo"
RE: Woohoo
by vermaden on Wed 9th Jan 2008 10:03 UTC in reply to "Woohoo"
vermaden Member since:
2006-11-18

Yes, OSS is a great sound architecture with great documentation and all apps support it.

I do not know why Linux still keep this ALSA shit, while OSS is avialable, even at their beloved GPL2.

ALSA documentation, is as good as Linux documentation [very poor], check options.c for more info ...

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Woohoo
by gilboa on Wed 9th Jan 2008 16:16 UTC in reply to "RE: Woohoo"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

No idea...

Oh wait, maybe because emu10k1 works in 5.1 configuration -out of the box- on my Audigy 2?
Or maybe because the nVidia HD sound works in 5.1 and 7.1 configuration, again out of the box, on my Gigabyte/Athlon64 combo?
... And I can continue. (~30 different configurations)

Alsa may not work for you, but it works out of the box for me - on a -large- number of machines/configurations.

(Well deserved) sarcasm aside, OSS will closed source when Linux switched to Alsa.
OSS is ~4 years too late.

- Gilboa

Edited 2008-01-09 16:17 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE: Woohoo
by Quake on Thu 10th Jan 2008 07:59 UTC in reply to "Woohoo"
Quake Member since:
2005-10-14

ALSA was a dream come true! OSS was so hard to configure, even to configure the 5.1 speaker config or something as simple as the Treble/Bass.

So I say, unless OSS changes, it's never going to be the default in Linux.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Woohoo
by BSDfan on Thu 10th Jan 2008 16:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Woohoo"
BSDfan Member since:
2007-03-14

Your post is irrelevant "Quake".

OSS is the de facto "Unix audio" standard.. most Unix systems either have their own OSS emulation layer, or a commercial licence from 4-front.

Now that it's BSD licenced, OSS emulation layers can be improved.. or even replaced with the actual 4-front code base.

Linux is the entity that always seems to break with tradition.. it's as if Linux developers don't think twice about "Cross-Unix" portability.

Idiots..

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Woohoo
by Janizary on Thu 10th Jan 2008 19:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Woohoo"
Janizary Member since:
2006-03-12

You operate under a false assumption, the assumption that Linux is in any way a Unix. It's not and is not trying to be, that's why it ignores all real conventions. The Unix-likeness of Linux was useful when Linux was trying to become popular, at the time it was Unix-enough and free, and that remains the case, but that doesn't mean it's trying to be Unix.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Woohoo
by Quake on Fri 11th Jan 2008 19:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Woohoo"
Quake Member since:
2005-10-14

BSDfan, I'm talking from a customer point of view and my experience was better with Alsa than with OSS.

If OSS can be better at handling the simple sound configuration, good to them. But for now, Alsa has the lead.

Not everybody is technical.

Reply Score: 1

Good move for Unix, bad move for 4Front.
by madcrow on Wed 9th Jan 2008 01:01 UTC
madcrow
Member since:
2006-03-13

The GPL and CDDL rather limited the comercial, proprietary use that could be made of OSS by parties outside 4Front. Now with a release under the BSD license, 4Front have esentially given away the ability to use OSS in closed-source products, while not getting anything for it. In one fell swoop, then just did away with their business.

Reply Score: 1

binarycrusader Member since:
2005-07-06

The GPL and CDDL rather limited the comercial, proprietary use that could be made of OSS by parties outside 4Front. Now with a release under the BSD license, 4Front have esentially given away the ability to use OSS in closed-source products, while not getting anything for it. In one fell swoop, then just did away with their business.


The GPL did, the CDDL did not (not from any practical standpoint).

Reply Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

In one fell swoop, then just did away with their business.


Yes, I'm sure they didn't in any way at all investigate the different options and instead let some random engineer make the decision.
And how could they have forgotten to consult the business model experts at the OSNews forums?

Reply Score: 9

vegai Member since:
2005-12-25

Read here.

http://www.4front-tech.com/hannublog/


It seems that they killed their revenue by going to GPL/CDDL. So BSD shouldn't hurt more.

Reply Score: 2

Flatland_Spider Member since:
2006-09-01

The grammar in the comments section is horrible, but it has some funny moments. It's like the lolcats were giving advice.

"Let Red Hats acquires you." ^__^

Reply Score: 1

bad move?
by mibh on Wed 9th Jan 2008 01:17 UTC
mibh
Member since:
2008-01-09

In one fell swoop, then just did away with their business.


BSDL hasn't really hurt ISC's business. Nor has it hurt the Kerberos, Apache, or X11 people. If a company holds the primary expertise in a field (like ISC has for BIND, ISC DHCP, and so on) then revenue opportunities will follow.

A software author need not control the users or redistributors of their work in order to make a living.

Reply Score: 4

oss
by nulleight on Wed 9th Jan 2008 06:49 UTC
nulleight
Member since:
2007-06-22

Well the damage is done and alsa will probably stay. The problem with oss is that after maintaining it for linux the author went commercial, which is not bad thing by itself but it is rather a huge disadvantage to have to pay for an essetial part of the operating system, especially one that is distributed under gpl2. I don't know the details, but i've heard the alsa architecture is not pretty either but thank god threre are alot of audio abstraction libraries out there.

Reply Score: 5

good, but too late
by Redeeman on Wed 9th Jan 2008 21:57 UTC
Redeeman
Member since:
2006-03-23

This is good news, however its too late for linux, we needed this 5-7 years ago, now ALOT of effort went into alsa, and i doubt very much linux will ditch it, even though we might wish it.

Reply Score: 1

Licence
by Janizary on Wed 9th Jan 2008 22:07 UTC
Janizary
Member since:
2006-03-12

There are a couple ways to spell, "licence," the English way, and the American way, "license." The, "c," and the, "s," are changed depending on one's dialect. However, "lisence," is not one of the ways to spell, "licence." [See article headline.]

Reply Score: 3