Vista, is just a phase

[ludwig]

I think that M$ has a sort of monopoly and we will be forced to change to Vista.
And Linux isn't an alternative for me (no Reason on Linux). I have a second (old) pc where i'm running Linux. This is my internet pc. But my main pc has to run Windows (i also use this pc for my work and some software i need to use is Windows only).

Maybe a bit off topic: if I buy a new pc with a core2duo, would it be better to get Vista 64 (if all drivers are there)? What would you do: Vista 32 or Vista 64 (if you had to get Vista)?

[hseiken]

If Linux had any sort of audio workstation capabilities at all that weren't at more than a "ooh, neat, they're sort of getting there" level, then maybe. Besides, Ubuntu Edgy Eft crashes like crazy on my hardware. Not so, Windows XP.

Linux, even according to Linus, is coming out with buggier versions. Too many cooks in the kitchen. Not enough of them who care about the end user experience. Software by geeks for geeks to prove their power with geekery. GIMP creators, as an example, seem to refuse working on a more friendly and innovative UI. Their powerful scripting just isn't something most of us are going to bother with. Inkscape looks like a version of CorelDraw from 1998. I use graphics software as example because there's no audio software even comparable to the mature Windows offerings.

Greg

There being no 'mature' audio apps on Linux is simply a false statement. I'd respect that statement if you had put it as, "There's no linux version of 'xxx' app that I prefer." Some of the immature apps (if you like calling them that) are fully functional and quite useful. I think EnergyXT is setting an example that I wouldn't be suprised other apps follow (i've already caught wind of a rumor about another program getting ready to put on a tux)...

You also must consider another big factor. LINUX IS FREE. Considering this, and that very little money is exchanging hands in many of the operations regarding kernals and distros, it's amazing that it simply outperforms Windows, an OS that has made Microsoft BILLIONS of dollars, who obviously can't be bothered with dumping some of that money into motivating programmers to decripple it. Honestly, I don't care if all the 'good' apps are on that system. Just because a piece of shit has peanuts in it, doesn't mean I want to eat those peanuts.

[UltraJv]

Its always amusing when this comes up. M$ forces you to use Vista. Ok, Linux forces you to use the latest or compatible kernel for your DAW software. OSX does the same. So what? Why do people get so defensive over all this? You can always use whatever OS you want to do the job. I dual boot Vista / XP and have an IDE drive for OSX. None of them are perfect but its fun playing with it all. The day an OS makes me more productive - Ill eat my hat.

[hseiken]

maybe this link will make you eat your hat...

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Forget-a ... 8752.shtml

I'd eat a hat just for you if the one I owned wasn't required by the military to be worn with my uniform.

[hseiken]

Also, if you like long winded speeches, you can read exactly WHY Windows is the worst OS on the market yet the most popular...

If the legalities don't interest you much, then move onto the sections that deal with the OS itself and how it's built on a house of cards, the items dealing with security (and not just online, but with the OS itself and it's ability to be destroyed by 'fellow' programs) and simple logic digressions. The actual legality items are left up to hearsay in the longrun, but the items regarding the OS itself are quite telling and backed up by many-a-programmer.

http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html

It's not a matter of whether you use linux over windows..the whole point is to move focus AWAY FROM WINDOWS. OSX, BeOS, doesn't matter...just do your part to remove power from this machine...you are NOT nor will you EVER be the focus of their OS. You are just a dollar sign.

Kind of a totalitarian way to look at it, but it's pretty much that simple.

[Lunch Money]

That's just one guy's rant on why he hates MS. And the closing line of that is just a reactionary opinion. You're very very mistaken if you think there aren't dollar signs for the actual motivating factors in the Linux community. Ubuntu is funded. Red Hat is big business with expensive support contracts. Linspire or whatever the commercial version is... sees $ to be had. The feel-good fuzziness of open-source quasi-hippie rhetoric amounts to little more than a hill of beans.

I like the way koolkeys once put it, and I'll try to rephrase: I just want to use what works. The day Linux "just works," with my hardware and offers a reasonable software, I'll switch. I am not at all against Linux. Not even in the least. It's just that realistically, it doesn't "just work." Going back to the original response to my earlier words (which bumped a 4-month dead post... ):

There being no 'mature' audio apps on Linux is simply a false statement. I'd respect that statement if you had put it as, "There's no linux version of 'xxx' app that I prefer." Some of the immature apps (if you like calling them that) are fully functional and quite useful. I think EnergyXT is setting an example that I wouldn't be suprised other apps follow (i've already caught wind of a rumor about another program getting ready to put on a tux)...

It's not a false statement, and I'm not particularly concerned with soliciting strangers' "respect" anyhow. It's an opinion you don't share, but it's not a "false statement." What is YOUR definition of mature? I'm willing to consider the possibility our not agreeing is just semantics. To me, a mature app is stable, supported, and complete. Ardour is not complete, Rosegarden is not complete, XT2 is certainly not complete. I'm not at all talking about "comparable" versions of "app X", I'm talking about completion of a robust product, period. Inkscape, for example, is sorely lacking in functionality and won't import even an EPS file correctly (never mind that you need Ghostscript also correctly installed... a separate issue...). And when's the last time it had a significant upgrade? Ditto for the GIMP, which has crippled functions. And the scripting, while extremely powerful, is used as an excuse to cover for lack of functions that really SHOULD be accessible and realtime previewable from dialogues and menus. And I never said that some of these programs "aren't functional" or "aren't useful," I simply said they're immature.

energyXT is a bad example. It's a good example of ambition, and it's a good example of a developer who's got a kick-ass attitude toward his customers and toward software development. It's a good example of "just going for it." But it's not a good example of a "mature" app. Not yet. It'll probably be the first to get there, though-- the others have run out of steam for the moment.

OpenOffice IS mature. Though, it started as a commercial enterprise by Sun, who aren't altruistic. In any case, I use OpenOffice on Windows, and I would have no problem using it as my complete Office solution in a Windows environment. Perhaps it's a little bit 'behind the times' in terms of interface, but it's mature.

Not so in the mainstream graphics, publishing, and audio worlds. It's tough to convince Linux evangalists otherwise, though. I mean, you might as well tell a devout Catholic that Jesus might have been "just this charismatic dude." There's no way that even the most logical of arguments will convince.

To the point, then: which audio app do you consider to be "mature"?

You also must consider another big factor. LINUX IS FREE. Considering this, and that very little money is exchanging hands in many of the operations regarding kernals and distros, it's amazing that it simply outperforms Windows, an OS that has made Microsoft BILLIONS of dollars, who obviously can't be bothered with dumping some of that money into motivating programmers to decripple it. Honestly, I don't care if all the 'good' apps are on that system. Just because a piece of shit has peanuts in it, doesn't mean I want to eat those peanuts.

It's not a good argument. If I was after "value for money," Linux wins. Linux is probably the finest example of "value for money" that the computing world has ever seen. But the argument isn't "how much can I get for free?" The argument is simply, "does it work properly and easily." And the answer is, "no... no it doesn't...".

I'm quite certain that Linux "simply outperforms" Windows in a number of ways. But audio (my only area of interest in this debate) wasn't one of them last time I checked. Last time I checked, the latency was actually fairly high, you had to access your soundcard drivers through a layer of abstraction (wineasio), and running VST was an experiment in which you felt great accomplishment and joy if you could get it working. "Look, I got it working!" is seen as some sort of victory in the Linux audio world. The basic functionality of "getting it working" should be a given. And even once you get it working, the current roster of applications are a disappointing list, if we're talking objectively. Subjectively, I think it's fan-frickin-tastic and I'd give big hugs and buy beer for all the devs working on projects like Ardour. But objectively speaking, their work ain't done yet.

But I digress-- you're obviously well-versed in the rhetoric of Linux and you've spent more time researching. You could probably "prove" to me that my above statements are out-of-date, and that currently--even for audio--Linux "simply outperforms." I wouldn't be able to effectively or intelligently disagree. But I also wouldn't care. Because audio on Linux is such a hacked-together slog right now that I wouldn't care about getting 5% more efficient CPU usage out of it. Linux' superior filesystem doesn't matter to me, because even with Windows junky out of date crap, I can still stream as many tracks of audio as my song requires.

I mean, it's all well and good to believe in something, but there comes a time where you have to step away from the rhetoric and acknowledge the truth-- Linux, for audio (incl. MIDI) is painful.

[VitaminD]

Perhaps WinXP SP2 = new Win98se and Win Vista = new WinME

[AndrewSimon]

I just tried XP.... didn't like it, so I went back to WIN2000... just use what ever works for you NOW!

This argument is useless, in a few years when Vista will be mainstream and you will buy your new quad processor ... or 8 core if you wish, you will have to use Vista and we will be complaining about the next new OS MS will come up with.

So far I used:

Win 3.1
Win95
Win2000

Note I skipped 98, ME and XP, I have a feeling I will be skipping Vista as well jumping right to the next what ever.

[VitaminD]

yeah.. I'm hoping to skip Vista if possible.. I skipped ME and 2K and went from 98se to XP

I think XP is good for another year and a half (as far as support and patches go) and supposedly there is an SP3 in the works..

unless Microsoft gets their act together with VISTA, I think I'm sticking with XP for awhile...

I do development in Linux but I don't think I could see myself ever doing anything but that in linux. Well.. I have yet to see anything that has convinced me otherwise at this point. It needs commercial support badly. The only commercial support I really see is in the development/IT sector..

[Paulie Phonick]

Vista is way worse than ME. It not only doesn't function properly and has constant driver problems, but realizes a totally consumer unfriendly product scheme. Just think that instead of the interesting features (like the DB file system for instance) that were promised to be included in this OS, all it brings is DRM, system embedded spyware and EULAs that treat the customers like shit. A product like that, designed by lawyers, is simply not worth any of the technological benefits. I hope the customers will vote with their wallets and keep on choosing XP.

[hseiken]

@Lunch Money: Of course you heard stories of 'hip hip hooray' over getting a VST working because it's a NATIVE WINDOWS APPLICATION EXTENTION. When was the last you heard that a windows program supported native linux extentions? I've not heard of it. So if you're going to use VST as a leverage point, then you just made *MY* case.

At any rate, the simple fact is that people like yourself (and there's no disrespect given at all on any level) simply WONT give it a try because their boxes come presupplied with a working windows. Have you installed windows recently? It's a pain in the ass compared to ubuntu, which works without even writing it to your hard drive (SERIOUSLY). Granted, digging deeper into the inner workings of the OS, you do have to get some kind of knowledge, but then again, it seems to be OSophobes unwilling to work with something they're not familiar with. I mean, to make an analogy...Americans kind of 'shun' chopsticks...however, when adept at them, the experience of eating is quite exquisite and more efficient. It's a loose analogy, but stick with it, you'll understand when you watch some guy scarf down rice with chopsticks faster than you can shovel the same bowl of rice in your mouth with a fork or even a spoon.

The point is it is CLEARLY superior and the only advantage that windows has IS the apps. You're RIGHT ON THE MONEY when you're spoke of needing commercial support. I see XT2 as a first step. Even XT2 for windows is being complained about, however, the XT2 for both systems is IDENTICAL and I'd garentee that the Linux version has better results AND is working 'out of the box' (just like Ubuntu and Mint...for which you have no argument for the 'general public' in regards to 'just working').

@Andrew: I completely agree...but at the same time, why perpetuate an inferior product with mindless abandon? Look at VHS vs BETAMAX...which one was the clear winner in terms of superiority and which one won due to marketing? Does that make the 'winner' of the debacle superior? I'd think not.

There's no BETTER marketing than word of mouth. If any of the 'major' microsoft clients were to silently pull out and support a linux distro, I'd be my left testicle than within 5 years, there'd be a 50/50 share of the market based on that single action alone.

Personally, though, I can see your pro-windows advocation. They do have the better supported programs but again, with a larger user base strictly because microsoft won a marketing strategy years ago does not mean that the entire package is superior. I dont know how many times I can reiterate that. BTW, it's more than a 5% increase in CPU usage...just so you know.. And I could give a f**k less about the file system as long as I can access things....


Next time you install a program and you have to restart windows, just think about that...while you're restarting and potentially rewriting portions of your registry held by other programs, I'm installing a similar program, upholding previous settings and not restarting at all...and getting a performance boost to boot...

Use what you want...but please, if you see an opening, don't ask the machine to feed you more utter shit that you've been force fed for 20 years. (yes, Vista is STILL BASED ON DOS).

[hseiken]

Also, just to note, ANY OPTION OTHER THAN WINDOWS SHOULD BE TAKEN...it's not a linux vs. windows thing here...it's a WINDOWS SUCKS ASS AND DOESNT GIVE A f**k ABOUT YOU OR YOUR PROBLEMS argument.

[hseiken]

To post again...sorry for the triple post...you vote with your dollar, correct? If enough people vote, then the dollar gets swayed your way...

[Lunch Money]

@Lunch Money: Of course you heard stories of 'hip hip hooray' over getting a VST working because it's a NATIVE WINDOWS APPLICATION EXTENTION. When was the last you heard that a windows program supported native linux extentions? I've not heard of it. So if you're going to use VST as a leverage point, then you just made *MY* case.

Well, no. That doesn't follow. I just want something that's going to work. The "hip hip hooray" of getting shit to work right isn't just the VST... that's YOUR assumption; I didn't state that. The above-quoted passage is called a "straw man," and you get no points for knocking it down.

At any rate, the simple fact is that people like yourself (and there's no disrespect given at all on any level) simply WONT give it a try because their boxes come presupplied with a working windows. Have you installed windows recently? It's a pain in the ass compared to ubuntu, which works without even writing it to your hard drive (SERIOUSLY).

My laptop is Ubuntu (Edgy Eft... Feisty Fawn kept crashing), and yes I have installed Windows recently. It's easy. Even easier if you've made a proper image, but that's a separate matter-- right out of the box, it's easy. So is Ubuntu. Ubuntu failed to install a few times (it would hang), but the actual installer is a breeze. That's irrelevant to the argument, though. Aren't we talking about audio here, not installers? You're just spouting generalized pro-Linux rhetoric, not addressing the issue.

Granted, digging deeper into the inner workings of the OS, you do have to get some kind of knowledge, but then again, it seems to be OSophobes unwilling to work with something they're not familiar with.

I'm not an "OSophobe" (cute word, btw. ) at all. I'm very adept with information technology, and I do not fear Linux in the least. I am annoyed at having to jump through hoops, not fearful of it. But either way, even the phobics have a right to expect their shit to work, no? Isn't that the crux of the argument?

I mean, to make an analogy...Americans kind of 'shun' chopsticks...however, when adept at them, the experience of eating is quite exquisite and more efficient. It's a loose analogy, but stick with it, you'll understand when you watch some guy scarf down rice with chopsticks faster than you can shovel the same bowl of rice in your mouth with a fork or even a spoon.

Well. A pretty bad analogy, because I'm not sure what it's illustrating. Since I'm not an OSophobe, I find both systems fairly compellingly easy to work with. I don't find I get "more" done on my Ubuntu laptop at all. Each of them require me to launch an app. <shrug> Linux definitely has the edge in terms of filesystem. NO argument here. But that's still not really about the audio apps, is it?

If you're going to make an analogy, you need to make sure the connections are being drawn. So, if Linux is the set of chopsticks, what are they allowing us to 'eat' more quickly and efficiently? Right now, it's more like being given only one stick from the pair and waiting for the rice to cool into a nice sticky ball so that you can spear it and finally eat it. Besides, I DO eat with chopsticks to the point of mocking (good-naturedly) my girlfriend for her ineptitude. They're just tools. Give me a bowl of sticky rice and either a fork or a set of chopsticks will suffice. I'll get the job done just as quickly either way. It'd certainly take the same amount of work to stab a hunk of sashimi with a fork, dip it in some soy (w/ generous amounts of wasabi in it, of course), and shove it into my mouth as it does to grab the sashimi with the chopsticks, dip it, and shove it into my mouth. Exactly the same amount of work.

Sorry, at this point in time I'm mainly picking on your analogy which you already admitted wasn't so good. But I also honestly don't see where Linux is the tool for helping you to "eat more" when it sometimes won't even let you eat at all.

The point is it is CLEARLY superior and the only advantage that windows has IS the apps. You're RIGHT ON THE MONEY when you're spoke of needing commercial support. I see XT2 as a first step. Even XT2 for windows is being complained about, however, the XT2 for both systems is IDENTICAL and I'd garentee that the Linux version has better results AND is working 'out of the box' (just like Ubuntu and Mint...for which you have no argument for the 'general public' in regards to 'just working').

You can make no such guarantees. I wouldn't become overly fond of stating zealous and untested opinion as fact. But yes, you hit on exactly why XT2 isn't a good example yet. And it's not working "out of the box" quite as easily as the Windows version, due to the commercial support. But you're making it seem like the commercial support is a side-issue, when in fact it's at the core of the issue. My argument isn't that Linux as an OS is inferior. I'm convinced that in most respects, it's superior. You're still stuck on "Linux evangalism" which is just preaching to the choir. Hallelujah, Linux is de best (sic). But it's not running mature audio apps without a hassle. I already said that I have no problem using OpenOffice, or Opera, or whatever.... but it's not running comparable audio with comparable ease.

Unrelated point, it's not allowing you to even run non-standard screen resolutions without a hassle, either. I mean, being able to have your application displayed properly is part of a "seamless experience," no? A Windows or Mac user doesn't even think twice that maybe their monitor won't be used by the OS properly. Not so with Linux.

Personally, though, I can see your pro-windows advocation. They do have the better supported programs but again, with a larger user base strictly because microsoft won a marketing strategy years ago does not mean that the entire package is superior. I dont know how many times I can reiterate that. BTW, it's more than a 5% increase in CPU usage...just so you know.. And I could give a f**k less about the file system as long as I can access things....

5% is just an arbitrary number I grabbed. You have no metrics about its improved efficiency, either. And again, you're still trying to preach to the choir. Not many people here think that Linux sucks. Those of us who aren't willing to switch just think it's just not a great experience for a recordist.

Next time you install a program and you have to restart windows, just think about that...while you're restarting and potentially rewriting portions of your registry held by other programs, I'm installing a similar program, upholding previous settings and not restarting at all...and getting a performance boost to boot...

You should read your own phrases sometime. I mean, you're really just evangelizing more. Also, Linux fans are fond of overstating the stability and seamlessness of the experience, but I've had failed package installations (even from the supported repositories) that have caused reboot... not reboot to complete an installation process (something that doesn't ALWAYS happen in Windows either, anyhow, as you know), but reboot because the shit crashed. Then I had to take another whack at it.

And you're not "boosting" the performance of your machine with each application you install. Come on now. The rhetoric gets silly.

Use what you want...but please, if you see an opening, don't ask the machine to feed you more utter shit that you've been force fed for 20 years. (yes, Vista is STILL BASED ON DOS).

lol. Well, I'm not asking for anything from "the machine." I just want my stuff to run. Since I don't use my laptop for music, and it's build with old enough hardware to have built-in support with Ubuntu, it gets to run Linux. So, thanks for the warning. <chuckle> In the meantime, I hope you'll take a step back and realize that you're acting more of a sheep than most on this thread. While most of us just want to use a tool, you've bought into a whole philosophy and seem to hold it up like a beacon of light. "Switch to Linux and ye shall be enlightened!" (insert angelic sound effects). I mean, come on. Most of your points are bog-standard "Linux rulez!" rhetoric, and you didn't address some fundamental points.

Can I just Install Linux right now and have it work with my sound cards? Nope. Were you able to name an audio app that handles both audio and MIDI in a robust way, with stability, support, and no farting around with layers of abstraction? Nope.

I mean, that's all it comes down to... so I don't know why you bothered to make half the points you did.

And to your last point:

"WINDOWS SUCKS ASS AND DOESN'T GIVE A f**k..." Well, neither does Linux. If Linux gave a f**k about our problems, it would have birthed the solutions already. They're just software packages. Neither of them give a f**k. Don't be fooled by the warm fuzzy hippie rhetoric, the backers of Ubuntu want to see revenue. The creator of Linspire wants to take MS out and put PAID copies of Linux on consumer boxes. Red Hat wants to use its server OS and pay for support. Don't be fooled. Don't be a sheep. Just choose the tools that are right for the job. And right now, those tools aren't found (for me and like-minded people at least) in Linux, and won't be for the foreseeable future.

Greg

[hseiken]

It's not that I say "SWITCH TO LINUX AND BE ENLIGHTEND" it's that most people won't give it a second look because of the so-called 'geek' factor. Hell, most have no CHOICE in the matter...the point is, if you want to see Linux evolve into a 'just works' OS, you have to sacrifice...convince a few people here and there, momentum gains, eventually, you'll have found a whole group of people seeing the potentional, which in turn makes commercial producers go, 'Hey, they're not using windows...' and thus shift their support...if you never support it to begin with, then where does this paradigm shift come from? You have to start somewhere...

If nothing else, if you use a OS other than Windows for other tasks, be vocal...if you're unsatisfied, BE f**king VOCAL...because being vocal means that you ARE interested and the more interest generated = more commercial notice of what the f**k is going on.

I mean, I'm not going to lie...I'm a ReNoise user. EnergyXT was just an example of a highly regarded piece of software moving over to linux on a whim. However, if ReNoise gets the linux treatment (that's been rumored by the developers), I honestly will have no reason whatsoever to have that windows xp partition on my hd and can erase it and reformat it to have more room for my linux exploratories...

Again, it's not a matter of what works...it's a matter of what's supported...what's support WILL WORK..if you don't show interest, there is no support...with no support, there will be no function...

It's the PEOPLE that must show the initiative, not the big companies in microsoft's wallet. Just sayin'.