Re: Mighty Putty vs "Mighty" Linux
RonB
> Maybe you Linux goofballs should hire Billy Mays to hawk your decrepit
> operating system?
> He seems to sell a boatload of Mighty Putty and LeakEnder 2000. And let's
> not forget the Big City Slider!
> https://www.bigcityslider.com/flare/next
> I can see this guy shilling Linux.
You've really got nothing to say, but it doesn't stop you writing it down
anyhow, does it?
--
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
RonB
> Groups:
> comp.os.linux.advocacy
Nope. I'm a Linux Desktop user, not a developer. Dropped Windows because I
got fed up with updating the malware and antivirus software... not to
mention the constant rebooting.
BTW, isn't it time for your hourly reboot?
RonB
> Nope.
> I'm running DreamWeaver right now.
> Does Linux run DreamWeaver?
> Latest version?
Do I give a shit? Never ran on Dreamweaver on Windows, don't need it on
Linux. Nice that you found something that almost actually works. Keeping
your BSODs down to two or three a day, I hope.
Mark S Bilk
> Hamilcar Barca wrote:
> > [garbage]
>
> You've really got nothing to say, but it doesn't stop you writing it down
> anyhow, does it?
Presumably they get paid for each post by Microsoft.
Also, by filling the newsgroup with garbage, Microsoft
hopes to turn away people who come here looking
for information about Linux.
TomB
> I'm running DreamWeaver right now.
> Does Linux run DreamWeaver?
It doesn't, natively. It would though, *if* Adobe was nice enough to
release a GNU/Linux version. What's your point?
~ Tommy
--
It's the dwarves that go swimmin' with big hairy women.
~ Gimli, son of Gloin
Peter Köhlmann
> On 2008-11-16, Hamilcar Barca was urged to write the following:
>> I'm running DreamWeaver right now.
>> Does Linux run DreamWeaver?
>
> It doesn't, natively.
It does, though, in Wine
> It would though, *if* Adobe was nice enough to
> release a GNU/Linux version. What's your point?
>
Actually, I don't think that it is good enough to warrant a port.
And for those few who still want to run it, it runs well enough in Wine
Wine has gone a long way, BTW.
Until version 9.6.x one of the larger windows apps I did (larger as in 25
DLLs, plus more than 20 for the different language versions) balked at some
point, and I already thought it interesting to take a look what the app
didn't like.
With the last Wine releases (I run actually 1.1.5) the app runs flawlessly,
even the Sybase DB connection is established without any problems. And it
even runs faster than under native windows!
Still the app will be rewritten under QT. It badly needs some cleaning up
after nearly 10 years of continuous enhancemants
--
Eternity is a very long time, especially towards the end
Clogwog
news:491fe7e7$0$30226$9b4e...@newsspool1.arcor-online.net...
> TomB wrote:
>
>> On 2008-11-16, Hamilcar Barca was urged to write the following:
>>> I'm running DreamWeaver right now.
>>> Does Linux run DreamWeaver?
>>
>> It doesn't, natively.
>
> It does, though, in Wine
>
Adobe Dreamweaver CS4 does *not* run in wine!
Topnotch software like AutoCAD LT 2009, Photoshop CS4, Indesighn Cs3 & 4,
QuarkXpress 7 & 8 does *not* run in wine!
Linux only runs software nobody ever heard of with idiotic names like!
Hadoop, GCompris, GooseEgg, KPovModeler, libmousetrap, mg^2, Z88, @1 Know
Your Events, hp215, the crapware list is endless!
--
<quote>
"Linux is perfect at everything"; Peter Köhlmann: "It is"
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f31c2035e5494b57?dmode=source&output=gplain
TomB
> With the last Wine releases (I run actually 1.1.5) the app runs flawlessly,
> even the Sybase DB connection is established without any problems. And it
> even runs faster than under native windows!
I experienced this with GuitarPro. On my friend's laptop, running XP,
the timing is a bit loose, but on my machine the timing is rock solid.
That's quite amazing. Of course I'm running a realtime kernel, and
route all audio through the jack sound server :-)
~ Tommy
--
That seems to point up a significant difference between Europeans
and Americans. A European says: "I can't understand this, what's
wrong with me?" An American says: "I can't understand this, what's
wrong with him?"
~ Terry Pratchett
Kelsey Bjarnason
> Maybe you Linux goofballs should hire Billy Mays to hawk your decrepit
> operating system?
> He seems to sell a boatload of Mighty Putty and LeakEnder 2000. And
> let's not forget the Big City Slider!
> https://www.bigcityslider.com/flare/next I can see this guy shilling
> Linux.
LeakEnder 2000? Sounds more like something Windows could use - or have
those million or so bits of malware suddenly stopped affecting Windows
systems?
Kelsey Bjarnason
> RonB <ronb02...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:gfo5t6$uj7$1...@reader.motzarella.org:
>
>> Hamilcar Barca wrote:
>>
>>> Groups:
>>> comp.os.linux.advocacy
>>
>> Nope. I'm a Linux Desktop user, not a developer. Dropped Windows
>> because I got fed up with updating the malware and antivirus
>> software... not to mention the constant rebooting.
>
> Sounds like you are incompetent.
>
>> BTW, isn't it time for your hourly reboot?
>
> Nope.
> I'm running DreamWeaver right now.
> Does Linux run DreamWeaver?
> Latest version?
> Oh yea, you guys like to use Vi to generate html. What a complete waste
> of time.
Job requirement: Produce HTML code.
Possible solutions: DreamWeaver, vi, emacs, kate (etc, etc, etc)
DreamWeaver: US $399
vi, emacs, kate, etc: US $0
Yes, well, makes perfect sense now.
DFS
> Hamilcar Barca wrote:
>
>> Groups:
>> comp.os.linux.advocacy
>
> Nope. I'm a Linux Desktop user, not a developer. Dropped Windows
> because I got fed up with updating the malware and antivirus
> software... not to mention the constant rebooting.
>
> BTW, isn't it time for your hourly reboot?
Left side of WRonG's piehole: "I'm not a liar"
Right side of WRonG's piehole: "Windows has to be rebooted constantly"
Hadron
> Hamilcar Barca wrote:
>
>> Groups:
>> comp.os.linux.advocacy
>
> Nope. I'm a Linux Desktop user, not a developer. Dropped Windows because I
> got fed up with updating the malware and antivirus software... not to
> mention the constant rebooting.
You updated your stuff manually? You MUST be High Plains Hypocrite. Only
he is so stupid. Oh sorry. Or Terry Porter.
>
> BTW, isn't it time for your hourly reboot?
What are you talking about? You dont really think all the Windows
systems out their running the world's businesses need rebooting every
hour do you? Or do you?!??!?!?
Hadron
> On 2008-11-16, Hamilcar Barca was urged to write the following:
>> I'm running DreamWeaver right now.
>> Does Linux run DreamWeaver?
>
> It doesn't, natively. It would though, *if* Adobe was nice enough to
> release a GNU/Linux version. What's your point?
>
> ~ Tommy
And if I had a car it would be an Aston Martin.
I think his point was that he uses the OS which supports the
applications that support his job the best.
Seems quite clear.
High Plains Thumper
> TomB wrote:
>> Hamilcar Barca was urged to write:
>>>
>>> I'm running DreamWeaver right now. Does Linux run
>>> DreamWeaver?
>>
>> It doesn't, natively.
>
> It does, though, in Wine
>
>> It would though, *if* Adobe was nice enough to release a
>> GNU/Linux version. What's your point?
>
> Actually, I don't think that it is good enough to warrant a
> port. And for those few who still want to run it, it runs well
> enough in Wine
>
> Wine has gone a long way, BTW. Until version 9.6.x one of the
> larger windows apps I did (larger as in 25 DLLs, plus more
> than 20 for the different language versions) balked at some
> point, and I already thought it interesting to take a look
> what the app didn't like. With the last Wine releases (I run
> actually 1.1.5) the app runs flawlessly, even the Sybase DB
> connection is established without any problems. And it even
> runs faster than under native windows!
>
> Still the app will be rewritten under QT. It badly needs some
> cleaning up after nearly 10 years of continuous enhancemants
True, Wine has come a long way. A few days ago through synaptic,
I installed wine (1.0.0-1ubuntu4~hardy1) then a favourite game.
Game play of Command and Conquer Red Alert was enjoyable in
Ubuntu. Disk I/O is snappier than in the Windows version.
(Opening the Save Game dialogue box and saving the game is faster
than in Windows XP, save is instantaneous.) Videos in the game
are smooth flowing. They did a nice job.
I can understand Vista's unpopularity. Who wants to dispose of
legacy software one has amassed, so they can throw money at
reobtaining same functionality in software?
Dreamweaver retail is $400 US (newegg.com). Of course, it is a
nice package, but how many amateur or occasional users are
interested in spending $400 for building web pages, when their PC
cost them under twice that? Yahoo services like Geocities have
their own web building screens for basic pages. It is not
difficult to modify HTML to have a respectable looking web site.
Elena of http://www.kiddofspeed.com/ of Chernobyl documentary
fame showed us how a simple layout can be effective and captivating.
This is similar to the argument presented by Singer (flatfish)
regarding software investments. This opportunity for reply to
the flatfish's moronic anti-Linux replies on $5,000 US for
software to do home recording studio work was priceless:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/466f9bcf6460c663
[quote]
Pricey proprietary applications will always have nice features in
them. This is expected, the provider does this to meet needs and
is warranted to be compensated for them.
However, pricey products does not a professional make.
Linux available tools mentioned above along with other Linux
applications meet niches, have professional developers and
sponsors. Some of it is provided as a labour of love.
In some ways it may miss some "spit and polish". However, they
can be made to work, require a little more work, but IMHO, once
one has gotten them up and running, can accomplish significant work.
Example, to create professional results, a photographer on a
budget can make do with a Yashica FX3 manual SLR, selectively
purchased cost effective lenses, high powered budget minded
flashes (Vivitar 285), home made PVC flash stands, aluminised
home builder's foam board for reflectors, etc. (BTDT). He
doesn't need 5K quid worth of equipment.
Another example, a musician does not need a professional model
Yamaha saxophone costing $5K US to produce professional results.
Yes, that sax will have slightly smoother action, perhaps a
little better intonation (in tune) through its range and a
slightly better tone (indistinquishable to the average listener).
I've played Buffet pro clarinets from the '70s that did not
play in tune. I had to play them in tune. First clarinet that
played in tune was a Selmer Bundy beginner model plastic clarinet
of the '80s. Expensive equipment does not a professional make.
Not all of us have the financial resources to purchase high end
hardware and software applications. That will not stop us from
producing high quality results.
If you do not have the patience to select the appropriate
operating system or patches for real time work, spending a little
time in setting up the environment, making use of the different
available tools to accomplish same result and imagination, by all
means, invest $5,000 US into your home studio.
For the rest of us who work and do this as a hobby, or even
professional who have a niche to meet and budget to manage, we
will make these cost effective tools and applications work. We
don't need an investment portfolio to fund our projects.
[/quote]
--
HPT
Quando omni flunkus moritati
(If all else fails, play dead)
- "Red" Green
Gregory Shearman
I don't think people come here looking for information about Linux. That
doesn't mean that there isn't information here. I think people come here
for a fight.
--
Regards,
Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power
Mark S Bilk
> On 2008-11-16, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 15, 7:48 pm, RonB <ronb02NOS...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hamilcar Barca wrote:
> >> > [garbage]
>
> >> You've really got nothing to say, but it doesn't stop you writing it down
> >> anyhow, does it?
>
> > Presumably they get paid for each post by Microsoft.
>
> > Also, by filling the newsgroup with garbage, Microsoft
> > hopes to turn away people who come here looking
> > for information about Linux.
>
> I don't think people come here looking for information about Linux. That
> doesn't mean that there isn't information here. I think people come here
> for a fight.
I think there are four types of people who come to COLA:
1. We who advocate and defend GNU/Linux and OSS.
2. MS-Windows and Mac users who seek information about Linux.
They read, but very few post.
3. Sociopaths (bullies, haters of good, etc.) who attack Linux
for emotional reasons.
4. Microsoft sociopathic agents who are paid to attack Linux.
For emotional reasons.they enjoy harming people, otherwise
they wouldn't do it for money.
It's only the sociopaths who come here for a fight.
chrisv
>You've really got nothing to say, but it doesn't stop you writing it down
>anyhow, does it?
Why bother reading the fsckwit's idiotic ravings?
seani
wrote:
> Maybe you Linux goofballs should hire Billy Mays to hawk your decrepit
> operating system?
> He seems to sell a boatload of Mighty Putty and LeakEnder 2000. And let's
> I can see this guy shilling Linux.
Don't you mean this "mighty" putty:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/faq.html
A lovely bit of open source.
chrisv
Perfect! 8)
TomB
> I think his point was that he uses the OS which supports the
> applications that support his job the best.
Actually it is the other way around. My point is that GNU/Linux
wouldn't have any trouble running such applications natively.
Why aren't there free alternatives to applications such as
DreamWeaver? Well, free software users generally want to have full
control over the code they produce. So they'd rather use vim or
bluefish or similar. It works. No need to create a WYSIWYMG tool for
web development.
Really, what is DreamWeaver but a (x)html code generator?
~ Tommy
--
Attempted murder, now honestly, what is that? Do they give a
Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?
~ Sideshow Bob
TomB
> TomB <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote in news:M%HUk.149485$yK5.126327
> @newsfe24.ams2:
>
>> On 2008-11-16, Hadron was urged to write the following:
>>> I think his point was that he uses the OS which supports the
>>> applications that support his job the best.
>>
>> Actually it is the other way around. My point is that GNU/Linux
>> wouldn't have any trouble running such applications natively.
>>
>> Why aren't there free alternatives to applications such as
>> DreamWeaver? Well, free software users generally want to have full
>> control over the code they produce. So they'd rather use vim or
>> bluefish or similar. It works. No need to create a WYSIWYMG tool for
>> web development.
>>
>> Really, what is DreamWeaver but a (x)html code generator?
>>
>> ~ Tommy
>
> interface and the add on tools available for the program.
> In another thread you mention Ardour.
This is true.
> Compared to Nuendo or Protools, Ardour is a piece of garbage.
No, it isn't.
> Why you ask?
No, I don't.
> After all they both stream audio to hdisk so what's the big deal?
That's only one task a DAW has to peform.
> You can pipe audio to a Wave file if you wish for that matter.
You could. Are you trying to make an analogy here? If so, it sucks.
The output of any web authoring tool is plain text files. Without
exception. The output of a DAW is much more diverse. You cannot
type an multichannel audio mix...
> You can code web pages with VI as well.
Yes you can.
> The question is why?
To create a nice website of course!
> What's your time worth?
You are suggesting that building a website with an editor takes longer
than with a WYSIWYMG tool? That may be true. An experienced vim user
however can create a website as fast as an experienced DreamWeaver
user.
> Well the big deal is the interface and the plugins.
Vim has an interface. And plugins. For all kinds of things.
> The LDSPA plugins suck donkey dick compared to things like Sonnex, Sony,
> Waves, Garritan, UAD, URS and the other various plugins that very
> accuractely model the channel strips found on very expensive consoles,
> some classic.
I don't care for that. Really. I've always disliked how computer
software wants to mimic real life equipment. An alpha dial may work
great in real life, but an a computer screen it's a drag. Just give me
a "+", a "-" and a field to directly input a value. No knobs please.
Very counterproductive.
> Also if you worked professionally, which obviously you don't, you would
> not want to sit in front of Ardour all day compared to Nuendo or
> Protools.
No, I wouldn't.
> Why?
> The interface stinks.
No, it doesn't. For me, Ardour has one of the cleanest interfaces ever
created in the history of music production apps on the PC. Their
channel sliders alone are a work of beauty (they don't mimic real-life
channel sliders).
> So you can take your freeware crap and blab all you wish about how great
> it is but the truth remains that in the professional realm, Dreamweaver,
> Nuendo, Protools, AutoCad etc are light years ahead of the FOSS
> garbage-ware that you Linux users are interested in using for some odd
> reason.
That's your opinion. You're entitled to it. I differ.
> If Linux applications were even worth the time the closed source
> applications I mention above, plus 10's of thousands of others would
> have no market.
> The truth is that the market has never been better for them.
> Why?
> Because 10 minutes with some crap like Ardour is all it takes to send a
> professional running back to Protools or Nuendo.
No. Because those proprietary applications are marketed, and you - the
consumer - are brainwashed to believe that you need those expensive
programs. That's how all products are marketed. Protools doesn't want
you to make music. They want you to spend money, and they will go
through great lenghts to make you do so.
~ Tommy
--
If The Flintstones has taught us anything, it's that pelicans
can be used to mix cement.
~ Homer J. Simpson
High Plains Thumper
> TomB wrote:
>> Hadron was urged to write:
>>
>>> I think his point was that he uses the OS which supports
>>> the applications that support his job the best.
>>
>> Actually it is the other way around. My point is that
>> GNU/Linux wouldn't have any trouble running such
>> applications natively.
>>
>> Why aren't there free alternatives to applications such as
>> DreamWeaver? Well, free software users generally want to
>> have full control over the code they produce. So they'd
>> rather use vim or bluefish or similar. It works. No need to
>> create a WYSIWYMG tool for web development.
>>
>> Really, what is DreamWeaver but a (x)html code generator?
>
> the interface and the add on tools available for the program.
> In another thread you mention Ardour.
> After all they both stream audio to hdisk so what's the big
> deal?
> What's your time worth?
> Sonnex, Sony, Waves, Garritan, UAD, URS and the other various
> plugins that very accuractely model the channel strips found
> on very expensive consoles, some classic.
> you would not want to sit in front of Ardour all day compared
> to Nuendo or Protools.
> The interface stinks.
> So you can take your freeware crap and blab all you wish about
> how great it is but the truth remains that in the
> professional realm, Dreamweaver, Nuendo, Protools, AutoCad etc
> are light years ahead of the FOSS garbage-ware that you Linux
> users are interested in using for some odd reason.
> source applications I mention above, plus 10's of thousands of
> others would have no market.
> The truth is that the market has never been better for them.
> Why?
> Because 10 minutes with some crap like Ardour is all it takes
> to send a professional running back to Protools or Nuendo.
This appears to be a continuation of the following similar
argument presented by Singer (flatfish).
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/466f9bcf6460c663
[quote]
> Then I was getting sample mismatch and "device already in use"
> messages which is where I discovered that there is a
> difference between "Default" and Hw0:0, despite Hw0:0 BEING
> default or something like that.
> Then of course I learned that arts is not really the same as
> artsd or whatever the server version is called.
> I don't remember, but I had to kill some sound process to get
> Jack to even run.
>
> Linux has way too many sound drivers, just like Linux has way
> to many versions.
Oh, really?
> All it does is confuse things for the user.
> I never did get it to run in realtime mode.
>
> And like I said the interface with Ardour is terrible.
> Rosegarden isn't too bad but it's no Cubase. And what about
> the list of plugins I listed, like Ivory or control surfaces
> and firewire interfaces?
Current version of Cubase full is $1,000 US.
> I gave up on Linux and audio after screwing with it for about
> 5 days.
> Why bother?
> Like the typical Linux application you'll spend all your time
> screwing around trying to make it work instead of actually
> using it.
>
> I installed Nuendo in 10 minutes and was up and running.
> Linux is at least 10 years behind the other platforms when it
> comes to music and audio and until the powers that control
> Linux's destiny decide to settle on one sound system, it will
> remain that way.
Nuendo 3 is $2,500 US.
I have a couple comments.
TomB
> TomB <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> Compared to Nuendo or Protools, Ardour is a piece of garbage.
>>
>> No, it isn't.
>
> It takes a degree in comp sci to get working, jack while powerful is
> user unfriendly and convoluted, you are for the most part required to
> run an audio specific version of Linux in order to get low latency which
> means if you are really a Linux fan you need to in effect run 2 versions
> of Linux. IOW dual booting, one for audio and one for general use.
On e.g. Debian Ardour is just an apt-get away. No different than
installing any other application. As is a realtime kernel. Which can
be used to do your everyday computer work too.
Jack too is a very simple application when used with the qjackctl
front-end.
By the way, I'd think that any professional audio engineer would use
his DAW workstation for audio production, and nothing else. With that
in mind, why is it wrong to set up a machine exactly for that?
>>> Why you ask?
>>
>> No, I don't.
>
> But yet you know I am correct.
I know you're wrong. And prejudiced.
>
>>> After all they both stream audio to hdisk so what's the big deal?
>>
>> That's only one task a DAW has to peform.
>
> That's my point. IOW it was sarcastic.
>
>>> You can pipe audio to a Wave file if you wish for that matter.
>>
>> You could. Are you trying to make an analogy here? If so, it sucks.
>> The output of any web authoring tool is plain text files. Without
>> exception. The output of a DAW is much more diverse. You cannot
>> type an multichannel audio mix...
>
> My point, which you missed, is the interface.
> Who the heck want's to deal with archaic tools to do audio recording
> when far better alternatives exist, some for free, like Reaper for
> example.
Once again: ardour has an amazing interface.
> IOW i see all kinds of cryptic pipe and output redirect commands to say
> burn CD's etc which are laughable when better tools exist.
Nothing wrong or laughable with that. I can type
wodim -v -eject /path/to/image.iso
faster than you could move your mouse to the Nero icon on your
desktop.
>>> You can code web pages with VI as well.
>>
>> Yes you can.
>>
>>> The question is why?
>>
>> To create a nice website of course!
>
> Much easier with a professional tool.
In the hands of a professional, vim *is* a professional tool. Just
like any other tool, and not only in computing.
> A complex web page can be easily coded and quickly using Dreamweaver.
> Can it be done totally in VI?
> Sure.
> A house can be built with a hammer, hand saw and nails.
> It can also be built with a nail gun, chop saw etc.
> Guess which house will be built faster.
Another silly analogy.
>>> What's your time worth?
>>
>> You are suggesting that building a website with an editor takes longer
>> than with a WYSIWYMG tool? That may be true. An experienced vim user
>> however can create a website as fast as an experienced DreamWeaver
>> user.
>
> 1. Find one.
> 2. Not if it is a complex site.
Complexity doesn't matter. A good web authorer gets the job done.
>
>>> Well the big deal is the interface and the plugins.
>>
>> Vim has an interface. And plugins. For all kinds of things.
>
> Ardour does not.
Yes it does.
> LDSPA plugins suck.
No they don't. They are actually quite good.
> Try one of their reverbs and compare it to a Lexicon or Sonnex.
> Not even close.
> While your sounds are swimming in distortion mine sound like they were
> recorded at Carnegie Hall due to being able to import impulses from the
> actual hall.
>
> It's not even close when it comes to plugins as far as say Protools and
> Nuendo are concerned.
>
>>> The LDSPA plugins suck donkey dick compared to things like Sonnex,
>>> Sony, Waves, Garritan, UAD, URS and the other various plugins that
>>> very accuractely model the channel strips found on very expensive
>>> consoles, some classic.
>>
>> I don't care for that. Really. I've always disliked how computer
>> software wants to mimic real life equipment. An alpha dial may work
>> great in real life, but an a computer screen it's a drag. Just give me
>> a "+", a "-" and a field to directly input a value. No knobs please.
>> Very counterproductive.
>
> Ahh so now I get it.
> You are one of what we in the industry call the "beep and squeek crowd".
> IOW you prefer listening to experimental sounds like fractals set to
> sound, generating pi to the 200000th decimal place via sound etc.
No I don't. I make music.
> That's fine, but I prefer a fine cello recording made in a small studio
> but yet sounds like it was done in Albert Hall because of modeling and
> impulses.
> Linux need not apply.
Yes it does.
>
>
>>> Also if you worked professionally, which obviously you don't, you
>>> would not want to sit in front of Ardour all day compared to Nuendo
>>> or Protools.
>>
>> No, I wouldn't.
>>
>>> Why?
>>> The interface stinks.
>>
>> No, it doesn't. For me, Ardour has one of the cleanest interfaces ever
>> created in the history of music production apps on the PC. Their
>> channel sliders alone are a work of beauty (they don't mimic real-life
>> channel sliders).
>
> It they were a work of beauty the professional industry would be all
> over them.
The professional industry barely knaws about those applications.
> You seem to think that we are ignorant of Linux, Ardour etc.
> We are not.
> Most of us are waiting with baited breath for the day we can unleash
> ourselves from programs that cost 1000's of dollars and yes we know all
> about Linux.
> Search any professional audio group and you will confirm this.
I read e.g. rec.audio.pro. Not much on Ardour there...
> The problem is we need to make money and Linux isn't even close in this
> field.
> In fact the included programs with the typical Soundcrapper prgram blow
> away what Linux has to offer.
> Why?
> At least they can use the VST plugins.
It can be troublesome, but you can use VST with ardour as well.
>>> So you can take your freeware crap and blab all you wish about how
>>> great it is but the truth remains that in the professional realm,
>>> Dreamweaver, Nuendo, Protools, AutoCad etc are light years ahead of
>>> the FOSS garbage-ware that you Linux users are interested in using
>>> for some odd reason.
>>
>> That's your opinion. You're entitled to it. I differ.
>
> That's ok.
> You have been civil about it so I shall do likewise.
Much appreciated :-)
>>> If Linux applications were even worth the time the closed source
>>> applications I mention above, plus 10's of thousands of others would
>>> have no market.
>>> The truth is that the market has never been better for them.
>>> Why?
>>> Because 10 minutes with some crap like Ardour is all it takes to send
>>> a professional running back to Protools or Nuendo.
>>
>> No. Because those proprietary applications are marketed, and you - the
>> consumer - are brainwashed to believe that you need those expensive
>> programs. That's how all products are marketed. Protools doesn't want
>> you to make music. They want you to spend money, and they will go
>> through great lenghts to make you do so.
>
> Yes in the consumer world I will agree with you, but the professional
> world really does know all about Linux.
> In reality, that's really the problem.
> IOW Linux just can't compete in this realm. It just can't.
Not yet.
~ Tommy
--
I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna really
really really wanna zigazig ha.
~ The Spice Girls
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
> On 2008-11-18, Hamilcar Barca was urged to write the following:
>
>> Compared to Nuendo or Protools, Ardour is a piece of garbage.
>
> No, it isn't.
<rest of flatfish's silly dismissing of Ardour snipped>
> No. Because those proprietary applications are marketed, and you - the
> consumer - are brainwashed to believe that you need those expensive
> programs. That's how all products are marketed. Protools doesn't want
> you to make music. They want you to spend money, and they will go
> through great lenghts to make you do so.
http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000086
For most Linux-based musicians the hard-disk recorder of choice is
Ardour. It's an obvious choice, and totally justified. Ardour is one of
the finest works of libre software, representing the combined vision and
talents of an exceptionally well-managed team of developers, and their
efforts have given Linux (and now OSX) users an incredible gift: a free
and open-source digital audio workstation aimed at and beyond the
standards set by industry mainstays such as Cubase and ProTools.
Other apps mentioned in the above:
Traverso
ProTux
QJackCtl
QTractor
RoseGarden
MusE
Qsynth
Fluidsynth
LADSPA plugins
XO Wave
Jokosher
Wired
Mentioned only to note the variety of quality and function.
Also noted (by me):
It looks like the free version is demoware, and that you need the commercial
version for 32bit/96kHz support.
For a warts-and-all survey of the whole gamut of Linux audio:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/10162
http://m.linuxjournal.com/article/10162
--
Two battleships assigned to the training squadron had been at sea on maneuvers
in heavy weather for several days. I was serving on the lead battleship and
was on watch on the bridge as night fell. The visibility was poor with patchy
fog, so the Captain remained on the bridge keeping an eye on all activities.
Shortly after dark, the lookout on the wing of the bridge reported,
"Light, bearing on the starboard bow."
"Is it steady or moving astern?" the Captain called out.
Lookout replied, "Steady, Captain," which meant we were on a dangerous
collision course with that ship.
The Captain then called to the signalman, "Signal that ship: We are on
a collision course, advise you change course 20 degrees."
Back came a signal "Advisable for you to change course 20 degrees."
In reply, the Captain said, "Send: I'm a Captain, change course 20
degrees!"
"I'm a seaman second class," came the reply, "You had better change
course 20 degrees."
By that time, the Captain was furious. He spit out, "Send: I'm a
battleship, change course 20 degrees."
Back came the flashing light: "I'm a lighthouse!"
We changed course.
-- The Naval Institute's "Proceedings"
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
> On 2008-11-19, Hamilcar Barca was urged to write the following:
>> TomB <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>> Compared to Nuendo or Protools, Ardour is a piece of garbage.
>>>
>>> No, it isn't.
>>
>> Yes it is.
>> It takes a degree in comp sci to get working, jack while powerful is
>> user unfriendly and convoluted, you are for the most part required to
>> run an audio specific version of Linux in order to get low latency which
>> means if you are really a Linux fan you need to in effect run 2 versions
>> of Linux. IOW dual booting, one for audio and one for general use.
>
> On e.g. Debian Ardour is just an apt-get away. No different than
> installing any other application. As is a realtime kernel. Which can
> be used to do your everyday computer work too.
>
> Jack too is a very simple application when used with the qjackctl
> front-end.
I found it pretty easy to set up rosegarden and jack, as an example (and it
works on 64-bits, too).
>> Yes in the consumer world I will agree with you, but the professional
>> world really does know all about Linux.
>> In reality, that's really the problem.
>> IOW Linux just can't compete in this realm. It just can't.
>
> Not yet.
That's the ticket. Obviously, there are currently many more developers
working on DAW for Windows, given it's dominance in desktops, so it is a
richer field.
But, as I've noted elsewhere, even commercial outfits are beginning to write
Linux software.
Of course, Hamilcar Flatfish is here simply to throw cold water on any
attempt to migrate DAW towards Linux. He'd rather we throw our hands up and
give up, apparently.
--
Several years ago, some smart businessmen had an idea: Why not build a big
store where a do-it-yourselfer could get everything he needed at reasonable
prices? Then they decided, nah, the hell with that, let's build a home
center. And before long home centers were springing up like crabgrass all
over the United States.
-- Dave Barry, "The Taming of the Screw"
High Plains Thumper
> Hamilcar Barca (flatfish) wrote:
>> RonB wrote:
>>
>>> Nope. I'm a Linux Desktop user, not a developer. Dropped
>>> Windows because I got fed up with updating the malware and
>>> antivirus software... not to mention the constant
>>> rebooting.
>>
>> Sounds like you are incompetent.
This is an example of an ad hominem attack.
>>> BTW, isn't it time for your hourly reboot?
>>
>> Nope.
>> I'm running DreamWeaver right now.
>> Does Linux run DreamWeaver?
>> Latest version?
>> Oh yea, you guys like to use Vi to generate html. What a
>> complete waste of time.
>
> Job requirement: Produce HTML code.
> Possible solutions: DreamWeaver, vi, emacs, kate (etc, etc,
> etc)
>
> DreamWeaver: US $399
> vi, emacs, kate, etc: US $0
>
> Yes, well, makes perfect sense now.
As much sense as:
Nuendo: US $1,800 (musiciansfriend.com)
Ardour: US $0
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/466f9bcf6460c663
High Plains Thumper
> RonB writes:
>
>> Nope. I'm a Linux Desktop user, not a developer. Dropped
>> Windows because I got fed up with updating the malware and
>> antivirus software... not to mention the constant rebooting.
>
> You updated your stuff manually? You MUST be High Plains
> Hypocrite. Only he is so stupid. Oh sorry. Or Terry Porter.
Not only an ad hominem attack, is an example of:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/
[quote]
7.6 Trespasser Disinformation Tactics
11. Never apologize for your misbehavior. Never ever
apologize no matter how out of line you have been behaving. If
you should ever find it to your advantage to apologize, phrase it
as a slap in the face of the person who you have already wronged.
[/quote]
also:
http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/01/hadron-quark-troll.html
[quote]
Name: Hadron Quark (aka: Hadron, Damian O'Leary, Hans Schneider
[, Steve Townsend])
Traits:
* [...]
* Microsoft apologist
* Habitual liar [...]
* Exhibits serious reading comprehension difficulties
[/quote]
>> BTW, isn't it time for your hourly reboot?
>
> What are you talking about? You dont really think all the
> Windows systems out their running the world's businesses need
> rebooting every hour do you? Or do you?!??!?!?
and
[quote]
20. Narrow the scope of threads so that you can handle it.
Narrow the scope of the issues that are being addressed in a
thread to details you feel that you can refute, ridicule, or
dismiss leaving the main issues unaddressed.
[/quote]
chrisv
>Hamilcar Barca (flatfish) wrote:
I see by the responses that, apparently, "Hamilcar Barca" is not
filtered, by most. After the Roy "balls cut off for Linux" thing,
even.
Amazing.
I wonder how idiotic a troll has to be before they are
filtered/ignored?
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
Pretty goddamned idiotic, for weeks on end, apparently.
--
"You would do well not to imagine profundity," he said. "Anything that seems
of momentous occasion should be dwelt upon as though it were of slight note.
Conversely, trivialities must be attended to with the greatest of care.
Because death is momentous, give it no thought; because victory is important,
give it no thought; because the method of achievement and discovery is less
momentous than the effect, dwell always upon the method. You will strengthen
yourself in this way."
-- Jessica Salmonson, "The Swordswoman"