Linux music - a geek attempt to enter a world made for cooperation...?

[kurt008]

When searching around for solutions existing in the Linux world to make music on PC basis I have to conclude:
To me it looks more and more like many Linux programmers didn't learn the essential insight to cooperate. Many projects I found did never catch interest by more than only few people at all and... a few of even these few interested people are developers... making most projects die very quickly.

A new attempt I see around is the one which tries to circumvent 'classical Linux packaging systems in order to make projects able to run on many different distributions... allegedly at least. But the disappointing truth I found i: There have already been very powerful and versatile ways to make this possible (like "AppImage" - statically linked software, hence containing all the dependencies otherwise needed to be installed as "dependencies" in a modular organized system like Linus simply is), so I have to state, that these attempts (I speak of flatpak and snap) are nothing but new attempts to undergo the (open available!) packaged systems and making users depend on very few corporate solutions instead of a big community (in this case: Flathub and Canonical) making use of the "laziness" of a majority of users.

In other words: For me Flathub and Canonical (and a few others, of course, but these two) seem to be made to 'disassemble' mostly Debian and its (packaging) system (look, which packaging systems are 'bypassed' mostly by snap and flatpak...) and ... together with other companies they try to establish a Windows-like relationship of users vs. software suppliers.

But that's not my actual 'problem'... this is more the simple fact, that Linux still is a geek project in many aspects. A lot of projects never become real community-driven projects, because (at least almost) no effort is taken to care for broad development and even more a healthy user-development communication, which is essential, because almost all the programmers are no users - at least no average users - and so this feedback of users is essential to get a program usable for an average community.
But both - cooperation in development and keeping a healthy and versatile feedback - still don't work in a lot of Linux projects. Because of the anyway 'small' community of music producers such project work made in Linux even more become purely randomly successful, because all these weakening factors add up to ... the visible mess.
Currently I'm faced with software companies making use of a (at least according to my recherche) quite unreliable concept (which - what a surprise - even itself "recommends" to make use of flatpak installations, what has turned out to be nonsense, because drivers not available aren't available in flatpak either... )... I talk of VULKAN (used by Studio One and Bitwig Studio), a graphical driver concept, which (also according to my investigations) seems to "make things possible" the "dirty way" of circumventing standardized solutions... becoming an obscure pseudo-solution in a very Windows-like manner and - again - becoming a very single-source-dependency and another kind of monopoly "solution".

On the other hand technology concepts like Ardour or JACK also seem to move only marginally towards current technological trend and seem to be far behind the technological state of the art... but the same time seem to "feel comfortable" at this "ancient technological state".
So I really can't avoid to reflect... "how long will it need to really see a fully competitive music production environment not depending on one or a very small number of companies in Linux?".
I am gradually beginning to doubt that I will even live to see this point in time..... (btw... I'm almost 60 yrs)

[harryupbabble]

linux is like communism
but capitalism is like the greatest driver for making/selling stuff?

[funky lime]

But that's not my actual 'problem'... this is more the simple fact, that Linux still is a geek project in many aspects. A lot of projects never become real community-driven projects, because (at least almost) no effort is taken to care for broad development and even more a healthy user-development communication, which is essential, because almost all the programmers are no users - at least no average users - and so this feedback of users is essential to get a program usable for an average community.
But both - cooperation in development and keeping a healthy and versatile feedback - still don't work in a lot of Linux projects. Because of the anyway 'small' community of music producers such project work made in Linux even more become purely randomly successful, because all these weakening factors add up to ... the visible mess.

Consumers are extremely important in determining the shape and life of a product. And Linux-based artists seem to lean more toward an anti-consumerism mindset. So naturally, many of the "products" are going to be lacking the most immediate and arguably important type of feedback there is for a product: the customer's dollar (or lack thereof).

Hence why Linux is more of an enterprise thing than an average home PC user thing. The customer is always right, or something.

[FranklyFlawless]

how long will it need to really see a fully competitive music production environment not depending on one or a very small number of companies in Linux?"

For me, it is already here. All I need is Ardour and Surge XT to use with the LinnStrument.

[Tiles]

"how long will it need to really see a fully competitive music production environment not depending on one or a very small number of companies in Linux?"

Never. There is not "the" Linux. But over 600 different distributions. And the range goes from one man hobby teams up to professionals like Red Hat or Ubuntu's Canonical. (I have some problems to call the amateurs from Ubuntu professionals though. One does simply not deprecate important dependencies with a point upgrade. And that's ways not the only pranks they played with me over the years) Linux distros cannot compete with Windows or Mac, they are busy to compete with itself already. And this will never change, since this is the spirit of open source. You are unhappy? Change it! No compromises needed, we do it our way. In good and in bad.

Which then leads to dozens of package managers, dozens of desktop solutions, a in big parts cruel usability, the everlasting dependency problems, lack of manpower, and so on. And this all, the lack of standards, usability and reliability, makes the life too hard for (not only) commercial developers. Which is the reason why there is so few software for desktop linux available. Which is then the reason why musicians usually avoid Linux. No NI Kontakt means already cutting off half of the available sample based instruments.

When your goal is to make music in the first place, when your job is the music, then windows or mac is the way to go. That's what the majority of musicians uses, that's where the daws and the instruments and the community lives in case you need help.

When your goal is to live the ideal, when your job is Linux, and not so much to get out the most of the available equipment and software, then you could use Reaper for example. Which is also available for Linux. And there are in fact quite a few happy users to find. That way at least the daw is somehow state of the art.

It's all about what limits you want to accept. In the end is allowed what works.

[WackyZoundz]

"how long will it need to really see a fully competitive music production environment not depending on one or a very small number of companies in Linux?"

Never going to happen. Forget Linux for professional multimedia production.

[whyterabbyt]

To me it looks more and more like many Linux programmers didn't learn the essential insight to cooperate.

To me, it looks more like many Linux users didnt learn the essential insight to be thankful for what they get for nothing from volunteers who share what they made for themselves.

[Tiles]

While true to some degree, Open Source is also a business. And the market is the users, not the programmers.

[whyterabbyt]

While true to some degree, Open Source is also a business.

Nonsense. Open Source is a license model. Some businesses leverage that, but it doesnt make the whole thing 'a business'.

And the market is the users, not the programmers.

There's no single 'the market'.

[Tiles]

Tell that the Blender foundation, the Linux foundation or the Mozilla foundation etc

The one does not exclude the other. Open Source is not only a license model, but also a business model. And most of the Linux distros works as a business model. They have an income, they have paid developers, they have customers.

And unfortunately quite a few open source developers forgets about their customers. And develops for the programmers needs instead.

[whyterabbyt]

Tell that the Blender foundation, the Linux foundation or the Mozilla foundation etc

Yes, they're all companies who use that license model. Which is a different thing from what you said.

I think you're conflating the term 'business' as in 'a company' and 'business' as in 'the whole industry'

The one does not exclude the other.

Of course not. But a company developing with a particular license model is not 'open source is a singular and unified industry'

Open Source is not only a license model, but also a business model.

Well, not quite. There's a business model based on developing open source software, but that business model isnt open source itself.

And a business model is not 'the business'.

And the fact that there are businesses using a business model that leverages a license model does not mean that every developer using the license model is using that business model, is a business, or is invested in the cares of businesses.

And unfortunately quite a few open source developers forgets about their customers.

I'll refer you back to my original statement.