Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

State of Sound Development On Linux Not So Sorry After All

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the sounds-like-improvement dept.

An anonymous reader writes "There have been past claims by Adobe and others that development on Linux is a jungle, particularly with regards to audio. However today, the author of the popular 'The Sorry State of Sound in Linux' has posted a follow up showing Adobe's claims to be FUD, as well as being a good update on where OSS and ALSA are holding today, and why PulseAudio isn't a good idea."

7 of 427 comments (clear)

  1. Main blocker by sgbett · · Score: 0, Troll

    modprobe

    --
    Invaders must die
    1. Re:Main blocker by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: -1, Troll

      Both Stallman and Linuxs get sucked off by their own fanboys, but Stallman's fanboys are more obvious because they have pustulating red blisters around their lips.

  2. State Of Linux Pretty Fucking Sorry After All by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    An anonymous moron writes:

    "There have been past claims by CmdrTaco and others that development on Linux is a clusterfuck, particularly with regards to conformance to published specifications and actually producing a finished product rather than the typical half-finished, cobbled together with duct tape, untested piece of slag typically found on SourgeForge. However today, the author of the popular 'The Sorry State of Linux' has posted a follow up showing CmdrTaco's claims to be dead on, as well as being a good update on where OSS and AC are holding today, and why sending your boss a photo of goatse isn't a good idea."

  3. Pulseaudio sucks by mrmeval · · Score: 1, Troll

    Pulseaudio sucks so bad I can't use it with the player of MY choice to watch movies.

    --
    I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
  4. Linux sound may seem complex but... by billsf · · Score: -1, Troll

    Any MSWindows sound is an "audiophile torture device". In a bar after a business meeting, we were constantly telling the bartender to "Turn it down". It is almost certain he recognized us as being part of the music business and simply wanted us to hear his music. MS Windows -- No thanks.

    ALSA isn't that bad and I thought OSS was open-source, at least it is to me. To emulate ALSA just requires a few symlinks in /dev. In BSD if, say, pulse fails, no problem: There is another system to take over. I take my music very seriously and own a pair of Genelec 1030's as my "PC sound system" to prove it. A EUR 5,-- C-Media USB sound chip in a circuit of my own design blows away any commercial sound card. Gamers may like "Realtek" but they are simply good at what they are designed to do: Make noises!

    Linux sound is OK, but I stick to BSD because it offers the best "multimedia" performance available today. Of course I use a hand-compiled MPlayer for the video stuff. Doesn't everybody use libmad.so for mpeg sound? Madplayer is a simple demo for the library and nothing beats it for mp3. Today FLAC is the smart choice and you can encode with virtually just the libs. I like flac123, but pulse sure doesn't. ;) I've ported flac123 to Linux and it works fine.

    BillSF
               

  5. It is still a sorry state. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    While you Linux and BSD nerds are fucking around with PulseAudio, ALSA, OSS and shit like that, I'm actually listening to sound on Windows just fine.

  6. Open Source FAIL episode 24398724389732 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Yet ANOTHER example of how open source is an absolutely TERRIBLE software development model.

    Open Office? Not even close.
    The GIMP? Total and complete crap.
    The Linux kernel? Laughably inept.
    KDE/GNOME? The only people who use these systems are people who are too dumb or too cheap to use OS X.

    Can anyone name a single piece of open source software that is better than its closed source counterpart?

    Down mod me all you want but you know it is true.