Linked by Rahul on Wed 25th Feb 2009 15:30 UTC
Fedora Core Internet News writes about a major mark for Fedora 10 release. Fedora remains the only distribution to publish it's statistics and gathering methods openly and transparently. In any case, they reached 1 million active installations of Fedora Linux 10.
Thread beginning with comment 350762
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Quake
Member since:
2005-10-14

Pulseaudio has been a nightmare for me. Sometimes, it took 90% off the processor and I had to kill it in order for the audio applications to work.

I removed that virus.. And I'm in heaven again.

Reply Parent Score: 1

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Heh, Pulse has been both demon and savior, depending on the version I'm running and what hardware I'm running it on. On some hardware configurations I don't need it, but when I start dealing with certain USB audio devices that do not do hardware samplerate conversion or do it badly, or internal cards that have this difficulty (ens 1370/1371 and various 8x0 cards), then Pulse is sometimes the only thing that even allows the audio system to function well. Without it, problems can range from artifacts in the audio to a nasty, ear-splitting hiss/screetch depending on what rates it attempts to mix together.
On the other hand, certain versions of Pulse have actually made it worse. Version 0.99.11, for instance, caused a nightmare with the soundcard I was using, causing the audio to only play for perhaps a quarter second before abruptly cutting off.
Pulse, I think, will eventually become a good solution. I do not think, however, that it was ready for general consumption when Fedora and Ubuntu started pushing it, nor do I believe it is at that level now. It still has quite a few quirks and a good deal of latency under certain tasks.

Reply Parent Score: 2

sorpigal Member since:
2005-11-02

Pulse audio, also known as "Let's re-invent ESD again, because it worked so well the last five times," is truly horrifying. Rather than solve the Linux audio problems correctly someone decided it would be a good idea to write a user space management program with all of the problems of the old management programs, only it's better now honest.

Some of the /theory/ in pulseaudio sounds great and should be in the kernel. The implementation suffers from acute "Doesn't Work" syndrome and has the lovely effect of making something simple really complex. It's nice that someone cares about audio, but it would be nicer if they wouldn't introduce yet-another universal audio API. If there's something wrong with alsa, fix alsa.

If there's nothing wrong with alsa, why are we using pulseaudio?

Reply Parent Score: 2

Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

Fedora, Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, Mandriva and many others use PulseAudio by default and do it for good reasons. ESD and PulseAudio are both sound servers. Beyond that they are not really comparable. One is dead and broken. Other is actively maintained and has a lot more features. ALSA is too low level to do a number of features that PulseAudio does and that competing systems like Vista and OS X have done for a long time as well. Handling of bluetooth headphones or per application volume control for example.

Reply Parent Score: 1

gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

A. ALSA depends on hardware mixing and not all sound cards are capable of reliably mixing different sources.
B. ALSA cannot (and should not) be able to control the volume level of each source stream. (Try listening to a Internet radio while playing a -loud- computer game)
C. Pulse is network transparent.
etc.

I don't use pulse on most of my Fedora machines (I tend to disable it) - but I have no doubt that I -will- use it once it matures.

- Gilboa

Reply Parent Score: 2