Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 7th Jul 2011 17:36 UTC, submitted by vivainio
Linux Linux.FR has an interview with Lennart Poettering of PulseAudio and systemd fame (among others). Regarding PulseAudio: "I can understand why people were upset, but quite frankly we didn't really have another option than to push it into the distributions when we did. While PulseAudio certainly wasn't bug-free when the distributions picked it up the majority of issues were actually not in PulseAudio itself but simply in the audio drivers. PulseAudio's timer-based scheduling requires correct timing information supplied by the audio driver, and back then the drivers weren't really providing that. And that not because the drivers were really broken, but more because the hardware was, and the drivers just lacked the right set of work-arounds, quirks and fixes to compensate for it."
Permalink for comment 480154
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Broken audio hardware
by Alfman on Fri 8th Jul 2011 20:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Broken audio hardware"
Member since:


"For me the part in bold is what counts. Progress is painful. I've been using Linux since 1998 and there have been bumpy rides, but the system always got better, even after a temporary regression."

But I strongly disagree with the notion that progress has to be painful. There was no technical reason in this case to make it so painful.

If a for-profit (non-monopoly) company were to do this regularly with it's product lines, then it would likely have irate customers who would be inclined to do business elsewhere. I would add that the company even deserves to loose business.

I'd seriously like to know why linux is different? (yes, I know it's free).

"It is in the nature of people to bitch and moan about temporary setbacks. Look at the abuse we all gave MS over Vista. ... Yet vista was necessary to get to Windows 7. (Yes, a Linux user can praise MS...)"

Wow, I'm astonished to hear this. If microsoft wasn't a monopoly with strong staying power, this would have put it out of business. Vista was not ready, and microsoft deserved all the criticism it received.

"If you can't be on the bleeding edge..."

The problem isn't with the bleeding edge in my opinion, it's that compatibility with the existing model was almost deliberately broken.

Reply Parent Score: 2