Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th May 2009 19:06 UTC
Linux We all know them. We all hate them. They are generally overdone, completely biased, or so vague they border on the edge of pointlessness (or toppled over said edge). Yes, I'm talking about those "Is Linux ready for the desktop" articles. Still, this one is different.
Thread beginning with comment 364457
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: *sigh*
by DavidSan on Wed 20th May 2009 00:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: *sigh*"
DavidSan
Member since:
2008-11-18


Do you speak English? Do you understand what preemptive kernel BY DEFAULT means?

It means it is optional, it is not required, you can by pass it.


So your argument is flawed. With linux you can have kernel the way you want with Windows you are stuck with one kernel which can't be good for every use. Do you agree ?

"DEFAULT with most distributions" ... but not all, right ? How about http://www.jacklab.org ?


You are completely out of the discussion. The main reason and the main problem with Linux is that it is its heavily fragmented user base. Everyone is pulling its own way.

Do you honestly believe that a normal user who just want to edit audio is gonna start asking: Which distro has preemptive kernel? Where is my C ompiler to make the stuff work? There are no good audio apps I am gonna make my own!

Get real. You were telling Linux is wonderful for audio, I told you what the problem with audio was. You said it is fixed. No it is not fixed. Other people in the thread have told you distros by name that do not come with preemptive kernel by default. And then you start telling me I am spreading FUD... I am not spreading FUD, I am telling you the problem with Linux on Audio.

Now you expect a normal user to be hunting a distro, or compiling the code themselves. If you really believe that's the strategy for taking control of the desktop... Keep dreaming. Linux is not cool if you can do your work with it or if you have to become a computer geek to make it work, because there are other computers that just work.

What most audio people use? Mac OS X, and some Windows.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: *sigh*
by lemur2 on Wed 20th May 2009 05:50 in reply to "RE[7]: *sigh*"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Get real. You were telling Linux is wonderful for audio, I told you what the problem with audio was. You said it is fixed. No it is not fixed. Other people in the thread have told you distros by name that do not come with preemptive kernel by default. And then you start telling me I am spreading FUD... I am not spreading FUD, I am telling you the problem with Linux on Audio.

Now you expect a normal user to be hunting a distro, or compiling the code themselves. If you really believe that's the strategy for taking control of the desktop... Keep dreaming. Linux is not cool if you can do your work with it or if you have to become a computer geek to make it work, because there are other computers that just work.

What most audio people use? Mac OS X, and some Windows.


Sigh!

Once again, yes it is fixed, and it has been so for many years.

"apt-get install ...." is not compiling anything. It is just installing a piece of software. In this case, that software is the real-time low-latency version of the kernel.

Here is an example for you: on Windows, if you want a gaming rig, then apart from the base OS install you are going to have to install directx from Microsoft and a better video driver from the manufacturer. You need to do this because the one OS cannot by default be all things to all users, and so full gaming support is not the default.

Likewise, on Linux, if you are going to be doing professional audio, you need to install the pre-emptive real-time version of the kernel, because your requirements are a bit specialised.

The kernel version you need is already compiled for you, it is waiting in the distributions repositories (just like directx is waiting for you, already compiled, on Microsoft's website), but it is not the default (just as directX is not the default on Windows).

Edited 2009-05-20 05:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[9]: *sigh*
by DavidSan on Wed 20th May 2009 13:23 in reply to "RE[8]: *sigh*"
DavidSan Member since:
2008-11-18

Get real. You were telling Linux is wonderful for audio, I told you what the problem with audio was. You said it is fixed. No it is not fixed. Other people in the thread have told you distros by name that do not come with preemptive kernel by default. And then you start telling me I am spreading FUD... I am not spreading FUD, I am telling you the problem with Linux on Audio.

Now you expect a normal user to be hunting a distro, or compiling the code themselves. If you really believe that's the strategy for taking control of the desktop... Keep dreaming. Linux is not cool if you can do your work with it or if you have to become a computer geek to make it work, because there are other computers that just work.

What most audio people use? Mac OS X, and some Windows.


Sigh!

Once again, yes it is fixed, and it has been so for many years.

"apt-get install ...." is not compiling anything. It is just installing a piece of software. In this case, that software is the real-time low-latency version of the kernel.

Here is an example for you: on Windows, if you want a gaming rig, then apart from the base OS install you are going to have to install directx from Microsoft and a better video driver from the manufacturer. You need to do this because the one OS cannot by default be all things to all users, and so full gaming support is not the default.

Likewise, on Linux, if you are going to be doing professional audio, you need to install the pre-emptive real-time version of the kernel, because your requirements are a bit specialised.

The kernel version you need is already compiled for you, it is waiting in the distributions repositories (just like directx is waiting for you, already compiled, on Microsoft's website), but it is not the default (just as directX is not the default on Windows).


No matter how you put it. It is not user friendly. Most users just tell you: On my Mac I don't have to do that and it works flawlessly. Don't kid yourself, most people do not know what a kernel is, or what a preemtive kernel is. If you want to believe that, well, that's your idea of the world, but you cannot expect a normal user to understand how Linux works to have a tool that can get elsewhere easily.

And no, it is not fixed... Why just not make all distributions with preemptive kernel by default... Well preemptive kernel is too new to make it mainstream. and yes, 2-4 years is too new in Kernel land.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: *sigh*
by transom on Wed 20th May 2009 13:16 in reply to "RE[7]: *sigh*"
transom Member since:
2009-03-02

Gawd what an arrogant gasbag.

As an actual musician, I find posturing asshats like you vastly amusing.

Cut'n'pasting loops in one of your Fisher Price "wave editors" does not make you either an engineer or a musician.

Can you tune a piano? How about a drum kit? Know anything about microphones? How about arranging? Can you read music?

If the "heart" of your "professional" studio is a Windows box with Pro Tools or whatever other glorified video games you're so thrilled with on it, then it isn't a professional studio.

Is your precious "DAW" the only computer in your studio?

Here is a 6 year old article wherein an actual studio switches many of their machines to Linux
http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT5847717353.html

And here is another actual studio who switched to Linux 6 years ago
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb04/articles/mirrorimage.htm

What is the name of your "professional" studio? What artists have you recorded? What? You're talking out of your ass?

I suppose *price* isn't a concern for a wildly successful "professional" like yourself. Otherwise, you might be trying to figure out how to reduce costs such as software licenses, etc. Then again, with a major talent like you must be, I am sure that your clients don't mind paying top dollar.

*whistle*

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[9]: *sigh*
by DavidSan on Wed 20th May 2009 15:06 in reply to "RE[8]: *sigh*"
DavidSan Member since:
2008-11-18

Gawd what an arrogant gasbag.

As an actual musician, I find posturing asshats like you vastly amusing.

Cut'n'pasting loops in one of your Fisher Price "wave editors" does not make you either an engineer or a musician.

Can you tune a piano? How about a drum kit? Know anything about microphones? How about arranging? Can you read music?

If the "heart" of your "professional" studio is a Windows box with Pro Tools or whatever other glorified video games you're so thrilled with on it, then it isn't a professional studio.

Is your precious "DAW" the only computer in your studio?

Here is a 6 year old article wherein an actual studio switches many of their machines to Linux
http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT5847717353.html

And here is another actual studio who switched to Linux 6 years ago
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb04/articles/mirrorimage.htm

What is the name of your "professional" studio? What artists have you recorded? What? You're talking out of your ass?

I suppose *price* isn't a concern for a wildly successful "professional" like yourself. Otherwise, you might be trying to figure out how to reduce costs such as software licenses, etc. Then again, with a major talent like you must be, I am sure that your clients don't mind paying top dollar.

*whistle*


I don't know if you are referring to me. But this argument, does not help the discussion.

Of course, if you fine tune something or if you have a special team to do it for you, who know about what to tweak, what to install, what not to install, what to do or not... You can get away with Linux. I got paid for doing so.

But it does not help the platform to become mainstream, and that's what is discussed here: Desktop Linux.

Because Linux is a heavily fragmented platform... I keep telling that in all my posts. Linux needs a united front, and then if it is necessary some especial distribution... But not the mess we live in today.

Everytime I said something, there is someone that says, a distro xyz has that feature... That's not the point. Linux is never getting mainstream until it simplifies its approach to end user.

And good apps are influenced my market share also, because many developers need to eat too and money talks. Market share is not the only thing important, but it helps a lot.

To what it seems to me, you got a custom made recording studio and they use Linux as a platform, which is fine, which is good... But it is not mainstream... Your studio does not classify as desktop Linux. As well as a Fortune 500 company does not classify as desktop linux, or a Maya rendering farm, or a super computing cluster does not either.

And no, I am not a musician.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[9]: *sigh*
by El_Exigente on Wed 20th May 2009 16:28 in reply to "RE[8]: *sigh*"
El_Exigente Member since:
2007-01-08

Cut'n'pasting loops in one of your Fisher Price "wave editors" does not make you either an engineer or a musician.

I agree with that. Although the point of your statement is not clear.

Can you tune a piano? How about a drum kit? Know anything about microphones? How about arranging? Can you read music?

Firstly, I no longer have to run a studio. However, when I did have to, I had someone to tune my piano when needed. I know drummers who tuned my drums. I know quite a bit about microphones. Not only do I know about arranging, I actually know how to arrange. And of course I also read music.

If the "heart" of your "professional" studio is a Windows box with Pro Tools or whatever other glorified video games you're so thrilled with on it, then it isn't a professional studio.

In that case, there are very few professional studios in the world, and "real" engineers and musicians such as yourself must be raking in a fortune. Or would be, if if weren't for the inconvenient fact that very few "paying clients" agree with your bizarre point of view. (And in a moment, we will see that your primary example of a Linux-based studio also uses these "glorified video games!)

Is your precious "DAW" the only computer in your studio?

In my case, yes, it is the only standalone computer completely dedicated to for music and audio production. I am sure that you will be able to divine some meaning in that fact, although that "meaning" will be apparent to no one but yourself.

Here is a 6 year old article wherein an actual studio switches many of their machines to Linux
http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT5847717353.html
And here is another actual studio who switched to Linux 6 years ago
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb04/articles/mirrorimage.htm

Let's look at your examples a bit more closely.

Your first example is an internal studio of an unidentified radio station in an unnamed city, where Linux was deployed to replace... Win98! Since the radio station is not mentioned, we have no idea if they are still running Linux, or if the radio station is still in business, or if the person responsible for the Linux deployment there is still working there. If your intent is to say that studios should switch from Win98 to Linux, then perhaps you have a point. But what most other people would find far more relevant, is an example and some reasons why they should switch from rather more modern OS's and their apps, such as OSX and XP.

Now, let us look at the studio cited in your second article, by visiting the studio's webpage, shall we? It is right here: http://multitrack.us/ . Not a word about Linux there. Okay, let's look at the "Equipment" page. Ah, here is what we want: It says "The Tascam DM-24 is our primary digital console, which interfaces to our computers with TDIF and ADAT. We also have a 32-channel SoundTrac Solo analogue desk and a pair of Yamaha AW4416 DAWs.
The Mac in the studio is a G4 machine running OS 9.2, Digital Performer, Logic and BIAS Peak. Our main Linux machine is a dual AMD Athlon 2600+ with 1GB of RAM, plus an RME Hammerfall 9652 card with twenty four ADAT and two SPDIF ports. Linux software includes the JACK low-latency audio server, the Ardour DAW and the Rosegarden MIDI/audio sequencer."

Look, look! Your posterboy Linux studio also runs those "glorified video games" - the very same that you claim automatically preclude a studio from being truly "professional".

Because I did not say that no professional musicians, engineers, or studios use Linux, you have not disproved my point. You have only managed to disprove a statement that I did not make.

What is the name of your "professional" studio? What artists have you recorded? What? You're talking out of your ass?

I am sure that you will forgive me for withholding my personal details. I am sure that you can imagine that I would not want to be seen in public talking to someone like you. (Of course most people would know that asking someone "who they are" on the net is not just a complete waste of time, but pretty damn foolish as well. It is a pastime for the gullible.)

I suppose *price* isn't a concern for a wildly successful "professional" like yourself. Otherwise, you might be trying to figure out how to reduce costs such as software licenses, etc.

A professional-grade DAW can be bought for hundreds, not necessarily for thousands or tens of thousands. And the truth is, that in the total cost of equipping a real studio (or even a decent home studio, really), taking into account the costs of monitors (both the "loudspeaker" and "video" kind), perhaps those drums and the piano you mentioned, microphones, acoustic treatment, outboard consoles if needed, along with other audio hardware such as DI boxes, acquisition of and cost of maintaining the actual physical premises where the studio is located, salaries for and expenses attendant on having employees, insurance, and many many other expenses either one-time or recurring, the cost of the software licenses is a very very small item. A single room in a post-production house, for example, can generate enough income to pay for a new license for Sequoia, Pro Tools, or Nuendo, in a single day. Even for a home studio, the cost of a good DAW and a machine on which to run it, is in many cases less than the price of a decent instrument.

Then again, with a major talent like you must be, I am sure that your clients don't mind paying top dollar.

Eventually you might find that clients are indeed willing to pay top dollar for talent.

*whistle*

Judging by your knowledge of the studio business and its economics, it is abundantly clear that you are an amateur.
Take comfort in the fact that "possession of musical talent" and "being intelligent" are quite independent; so it is possible that you do have some musical ability

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: *sigh*
by levi on Wed 20th May 2009 23:51 in reply to "RE[7]: *sigh*"
levi Member since:
2006-09-07


You are completely out of the discussion. The main reason and the main problem with Linux is that it is its heavily fragmented user base. Everyone is pulling its own way.


Why it is a problem ? Because you have to do some work yourself ? Either you do (in this case search and learn) or you pay as simple as that. Final result may be comparable.


Do you honestly believe that a normal user who just want to edit audio is gonna start asking: Which distro has preemptive kernel? Where is my C ompiler to make the stuff work? There are no good audio apps I am gonna make my own!


Who is a normal user, really ? Is he real or you just imagined him, or worse, calculated him on averages ?

There are just people around; each one with different goals in mind and different pocket depth.


Get real. You were telling Linux is wonderful for audio, I told you what the problem with audio was. You said it is fixed. No it is not fixed. Other people in the thread have told you distros by name that do not come with preemptive kernel by default. And then you start telling me I am spreading FUD... I am not spreading FUD, I am telling you the problem with Linux on Audio.


How about the right tool for the right job (within price limit you can afford) ? Linux is not wonderful - it's just another OS - another tool.


Now you expect a normal user to be hunting a distro, or compiling the code themselves. If you really believe that's the strategy for taking control of the desktop... Keep dreaming. Linux is not cool if you can do your work with it or if you have to become a computer geek to make it work, because there are other computers that just work.

What most audio people use? Mac OS X, and some Windows.


You mean normal user as a hobbyst, a rich-professional, not-so-rich-pro, a rich-hobbyst, and maybe a hobbyst-thief ?

Just think for a second who will be reaching for open source. Doesn't he deserve to be called normal user too ?

Bottom line is that (believe it or not) people are different and there is no spoon eee... normal user.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[9]: *sigh*
by DavidSan on Thu 21st May 2009 15:25 in reply to "RE[8]: *sigh*"
DavidSan Member since:
2008-11-18


You are completely out of the discussion. The main reason and the main problem with Linux is that it is its heavily fragmented user base. Everyone is pulling its own way.


Why it is a problem ? Because you have to do some work yourself ? Either you do (in this case search and learn) or you pay as simple as that. Final result may be comparable.


Because we are talking desktop Linux.


Do you honestly believe that a normal user who just want to edit audio is gonna start asking: Which distro has preemptive kernel? Where is my C ompiler to make the stuff work? There are no good audio apps I am gonna make my own!


Who is a normal user, really ? Is he real or you just imagined him, or worse, calculated him on averages ?

There are just people around; each one with different goals in mind and different pocket depth.


Do not get philosophical. It is so easy to know what a casual/normal user is that if you are asking that, you must be in trouble. If you believe that a normal user compiles kernels by fun, or hunt distros, you must be out of your mind.

That's like saying normal chemistry users are tactical bomb specialist, when most chemistry uses are personal care related. And no, I am not upraising you.


Get real. You were telling Linux is wonderful for audio, I told you what the problem with audio was. You said it is fixed. No it is not fixed. Other people in the thread have told you distros by name that do not come with preemptive kernel by default. And then you start telling me I am spreading FUD... I am not spreading FUD, I am telling you the problem with Linux on Audio.


How about the right tool for the right job (within price limit you can afford) ? Linux is not wonderful - it's just another OS - another tool.


Do you realize we are discussing Desktop Linux?



Now you expect a normal user to be hunting a distro, or compiling the code themselves. If you really believe that's the strategy for taking control of the desktop... Keep dreaming. Linux is not cool if you can do your work with it or if you have to become a computer geek to make it work, because there are other computers that just work.

What most audio people use? Mac OS X, and some Windows.


You mean normal user as a hobbyst, a rich-professional, not-so-rich-pro, a rich-hobbyst, and maybe a hobbyst-thief ?

Just think for a second who will be reaching for open source. Doesn't he deserve to be called normal user too ?

Bottom line is that (believe it or not) people are different and there is no spoon eee... normal user.


First, open source and Linux are TWO different things. Mac OS X in open source underneath, if you care to know. Not all, but a lot of it.

Second Windows and Mac while are pricier than Linux, are not impossible to buy. Stop the price thing, because there are other OSes which are also free and people are getting to them... Search and see, even Linux people are leaving Linux and going to OpenSolaris, BSD and many others. Open source is not a Linux invention.

And most of the Apps for Linux are available to other platforms. So stop the Linux is better because is free and opensource. Let me tell you: Casual and normal users, prefer to pay 100 bucks and get the computer fixed by a technician than doing themselves, even if it is just adding a RAM module.

And no, many of them are not rich, and no, they do not like to be ripped off, they are not morons either. They just don't care about how a computer works.

The thing is, casual users are 99% of desktop computer users.

Reply Parent Score: 1