SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Discuss anything new and newsworthy! See http://planet.linuxaudio.org for more Linux Audio News!

Announcements of proprietary software may fit better in the Marketplace.

Moderators: raboof, MattKingUSA, khz

asbak
Established Member
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by asbak »

I don't have an issue with nor care what people choose to install on their systems. You want to i-Whatever?? Whatever .....
If the owner wants to sell his wares from his website and make a little promotion for it here that's fine too.

However, when a vendor jumps in from out of nowhere and first post informs us that he's planning to push his closed source proprietary non audio-production app (which... oh... also just happens to suck your data off your computer) developed for the i-Crowd into the few viable audio release / distribution systems we have going for us (KXStudio in particular) which have a long and known opensource development cycle involving people we know and trust and who created the code which forms the basis of why many of us switched to Linux in the first place, there is a problem.

If some of you choose not to understand such a glaringly obvious concept nor care that's fine, that's your business. It does beggar the question as to why you even bothered with Open Source and Linux in the first place if all you really wanted was to import proprietary code and payware doing who-knows-what into your systems...... I mean, why couldn't you just have stuck with your Macs and iTunes to your heart's content and said the usual 5 daily prayers at the Apple Temple like the rest?

For the ones amongst us who like having our systems relatively clean it's not realistic to start from scratch to develop our own OS and application suites such as KX. The last thing I want to have to do is to start wondering what non-audio trash, malware, adware, spyware and commercial proprietary code may or may not have slipped in from one day to the next. With a number of well-known Linux distros I already know that they're for the most part Open Source and non-proprietary with a few exceptions such as certain hardware drivers. With most audio-production related apps on KX or ones I compile myself I can get access to the source or at the very least find views on the code by others who have reviewed it so I have some kind of idea as to what I'm getting.

The arguments about "you don't need to use it" or "you can uninstall it" don't cut it. Why should I have to uninstall something that should never have been on the system in the first place? If some of you really need iTunes and related cloud fluff so badly why couldn't you just go buy it direct from the vendor instead of forcing it on the rest of us?

asbak
Established Member
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by asbak »

ssj71 wrote:However even though I have no interest in the product or service should we tell them to take their things and go home and NOT SUPPORT LINUX? I think the more effective thing is to state that, this is a closed source package that connects to a closed source cloud with closed source management system, and most of us won't have a lot of interest and let them get on with their day, rather than jumping straight to calling it spam and malware and not getting to some understandable arguments till post #12 in the thread.
It's not about telling vendors not to support Linux. It's about telling them not to push their wares on us, forcing us to take it through the only viable distro/s we have going for us. Frankly it hardly matters if it's inserted into AVLinux because there are alternatives to it out there.

But there aren't alternatives to KX and therefore I don't take kindly to attempts to basically turn me into a hostage for his i-Wares.

ssj71
Established Member
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:36 pm

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by ssj71 »

well, luckily the vendor has no power to force anything on anybody. Why do you feel so threatened? As a user of FLOSS you should know you will always have alternatives, you surely won't be the only one who feels the way you do and if its so bad somebody will fork. Isn't that what we claim is so great about openness? Do we not really believe that?
If the distro manager thinks its worth adding, thats his call. And any good distro manager will keep in touch with the community and have a good notion of what is wanted. There may not be a consensus and then its his or her call. A vendor can't do anything if the distro doesn't want to play and KXstudio has made their stance clear. So thank you for the warnings, I don't think you need to worry too much.
Also thank you for that last post. It was more helpful and clear. I understand your point and do agree with you for the most part, but I don't think we need to chastise the vendor this much, lets just make it clear to our distro leaders that we don't want this installed by default on our distros (as you just did).
I probably differ from you in that I'm fine with them making it available as a package to be installed by interested users (especially if supersync can financially compensate our distros for their support).
_ssj71

music: https://soundcloud.com/ssj71
My plugins are Infamous! http://ssj71.github.io/infamousPlugins
I just want to get back to making music!

asbak
Established Member
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by asbak »

GraysonPeddie wrote:People who do not care for iTunes are part of the minority. Deal with it.
Go deal with your Mac.
People use MP3s and AACs to play music. They don't care about open source codecs such as FLAC and OGG. They have never heard of these codecs before.
So you never heard of Lame encoder. Or that mp3's can be played on a typical Linux box and (get this) without making use of iTunes.
Yes, it's true. Some of us actually manage to do this. And the sky didn't fall.
Give SuperSync a d**m chance.
What chance is he giving me when he wants to force his product on me via KXStudio? Why does he get all the "rights"?
Besides, you're free to give him your chances on your own system. Why must your chancing become the default option for all of us?
You hate iTunes?
Is there some kind of point you're trying to make?
Why don't you hate yourself?
I respect myself and can only feel sorrow and mild bemuse and bewilderment at your attempts to grapple with Nietzschean existentialism and in how it relates to my person.
ZERO PEOPLE will force you to use it!
Un! True! (Feels! Like! Yahoo! )
If supersync were shoved into KX I would have been forced by the iTunes fanboys and the vendor to use it, even if that usage were limited to try and eradicate the thing.

And! Guess! What!

It's a slippery slope because once this app got in then it would have been the next and the next and the next similar one that got in as well. And the cycle would be repeating itself over and over. An endless game of cat and mouse with the now unavoidable torrent of proprietary apps of questionable value which I have to keep track of and attempt to sanitise.

asbak
Established Member
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by asbak »

ssj71 wrote:well, luckily the vendor has no power to force anything on anybody.
True, he doesn't have the power to force it into KX but his intent to get it into KX is clear and obvious. And once it gets into KX (not saying that's going to happen) it would have been forced on me.
Why do you feel so threatened?
For the reasons I outlined in earlier posts and in the line above. Harmful intent = a threat.
As a user of FLOSS you should know you will always have alternatives, you surely won't be the only one who feels the way you do and if its so bad somebody will fork. Isn't that what we claim is so great about openness? Do we not really believe that?
/
There are no alternatives to KX other than to spend a huge amount of time keeping track of and compiling packages myself and trying to get it all to work. Can it be done? Sure. Can I do it as well or fast as falkTX can? No way.

So whilst I agree with the general gist of your statement the audio scene is too small to offer up clear cut and practical alternatives for much of the material in the sense that we could easily switch from one system to another. At the least, not without a lot of pain.

If the distro manager thinks its worth adding, thats his call.
That's right. It's also my call to weigh in with my 2c, for what it's worth. (Not much, I grant you).
And any good distro manager will keep in touch with the community and have a good notion of what is wanted.
And as part of the community I'm providing feedback on what I want. And don't want. If some of the others here disagree with my views that's their call too and fine by me. But if they think that we must all come together to sing the praises of Mac and unknown entities pushing to shove their wares into distribution systems we're tied into and cannot easily avoid and substitute they're naive and dazzled by bling.
There may not be a consensus and then its his or her call. A vendor can't do anything if the distro doesn't want to play and KXstudio has made their stance clear.
Of course
So thank you for the warnings, I don't think you need to worry too much.
Maybe, maybe not. Complacency luls too many people into believing this. Unless one really sinks their teeth in to make a point and reiterates that point and drives it home via any and all possible means things don't always work out as expected.

I know. I deal with such situations every day in a professional setting.
Also thank you for that last post. It was more helpful and clear. I understand your point and do agree with you for the most part, but I don't think we need to chastise the vendor this much,
Apologies for coming across as too aggressive but one cannot be too careful. The problem isn't with the vendor advertising. The problem is with the vendor wanting to force his product on us using distros as a Trojan horse through which to accomplish this.

As you say, it's the distro owners choice as to what happens next. But we're not spoilt for choice and options to switch should these kinds of applications become de facto parts of the distro.
Lets just make it clear to our distro leaders that we don't want this installed by default on our distros (as you just did).
Presumably word is out by now :D
I probably differ from you in that I'm fine with them making it available as a package to be installed by interested users (especially if supersync can financially compensate our distros for their support).
If it were a .deb or similar in a "included demo software" folder then sure, it probably doesn't matter all that much. But I'd be skeptical as to whether such an arrangement would really suit the vendor. After all, their interest is in ensuring people use and buy their software and if it didn't install by default on the end users's system it's not highly likely that the end user would pay attention to it anyway. So in practice, most likely it will be installed as part of the distro.

A lot of us set up the KX repo to install over the Internet. In such a scenario the package would have to form part of some meta-package, otherwise it would never get installed and used thus there'd be no benefit to the vendor. And that's exactly what I'd have a problem with.

User avatar
GMaq
Established Member
Posts: 1641
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:42 pm

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by GMaq »

If I may briefly interrupt the paranoia and hysteria..

To be absolutely clear I did NOT say that SuperSync would be included in AVLinux, I indicated I would like to talk to the developer in detail about the program and discuss whether it would be feasible (or not)...

Secondly... asbak, (and others...) This is a Linux Musicians forum... it is not exclusively the FLOSS musicians forum although their contributions and opinions are greatly valued. The last time I checked applications discussed in various sections here included all our valued FLOSS favorites and also some of the other great commercial offerings like Mixbus, BitWig, linuxDSP, U-he etc..

My experience as a member here, as a Linux user and as a distributor are with a combination of FLOSS and Commercial and free and non-free binaries. As I recall nobody has been elected to be the proxy for the whole membership of this forum..

In fact if your exclusive area of interest is FLOSS only, perhaps if someone innocently asks about interest in their non-free closed-source application perhaps the polite thing to do would be to let the membership that IS interested in such things actually get a chance to speak...

tramp
Established Member
Posts: 1641
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 8:13 am

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by tramp »

GMaq wrote:If I may briefly interrupt the paranoia and hysteria..
Such a stance, for sure didn't help to claim down and come to a discussion.
different opinions about the topic exist, and best will be, to take them "all" into account, instead ramp them down to "hysteria".
GMaq wrote:In fact if your exclusive area of interest is FLOSS only, perhaps if someone innocently asks about interest in their non-free closed-source application perhaps the polite thing to do would be to let the membership that IS interested in such things actually get a chance to speak...
Polite will be as well to accept that there are other meanings. :wink:
On the road again.

asbak
Established Member
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by asbak »

GMaq wrote:If I may briefly interrupt the paranoia and hysteria..
Save your witticisms for somebody who cares
To be absolutely clear I did NOT say that SuperSync would be included in AVLinux, I indicated I would like to talk to the developer in detail about the program and discuss whether it would be feasible (or not)...
I don't care what you do with AVLinux beyond expressing a personal wish that this particular app didn't end up in it. My view is that it would have been better for interests of the end user if this kind of product didn't get into AV and whether you plan or don't plan to add it my choice to avoid AV is available and practical.

My choice to avoid KX under such a scenario would have been much harder and therefore I have a right to speak up for my (and in my sincere belief, also those of others') interests.
Secondly... asbak, (and others...) This is a Linux Musicians forum... it is not exclusively the FLOSS musicians forum although their contributions and opinions are greatly valued. The last time I checked applications discussed in various sections here included all our valued FLOSS favorites and also some of the other great commercial offerings like Mixbus, BitWig, linuxDSP, U-he etc..
And your point is? That we're not allowed to air views which may or may not coincide with yours?
My experience as a member here, as a Linux user and as a distributor are with a combination of FLOSS and Commercial and free and non-free binaries. As I recall nobody has been elected to be the proxy for the whole membership of this forum..
Why are you accusing me of acting as a proxy for the whole forum? I CLEARLY STATED WHAT I WANTED and outlined the reasoning behind those very logical (and PS, shove your cheap "paranoia" slur) conclusions and why this particular example is considered to be a threat. I have as much a right to present my case as anybody else here. You don't get to tell me what view I may or may not express.

If you're comfortable with installing data sharing and mining closed source applications on your system and distro doing who-knows-what from unknown entities that's your business. Take the money and carry on.

In fact if your exclusive area of interest is FLOSS only, perhaps if someone innocently asks about interest in their non-free closed-source application perhaps the polite thing to do would be to let the membership that IS interested in such things actually get a chance to speak...
Come again? Are you now being so ridiculous as to claim that others are "unable to speak" because of me? So apparently others cannot post and speak for themselves, I'm somehow preventing them?

I explicitly and clearly stated that I have no issue with his advertising and promotional efforts but that it is contrary to my interests (and frankly, also the interests of other non i-Zombies) to HAVE HIS APP MADE A PART OF A DISTRO SYSTEM I AM TIED INTO USING and which would be very difficult to replace.

The vendor was very clear in his intentions to use AV & KX as a trojan delivery vehicle to our systems.

What's so difficult to understand about that?

User avatar
GMaq
Established Member
Posts: 1641
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:42 pm

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by GMaq »

Admittedly I let sarcasm get the better of me...

Of course everyone here has a right to speak.. but since we haven'the heard any significant detail from the original poster as to what their intentions ACTUALLY were other than to have INTERESTED parties contact them about testing a Linux version.. then I think this thread demonstrates a hugely unbalanced amount of discussion and criticism from people who are extrapolating the OP's intention based on very little evidence. It's not unfair you've had your say... it's unfair you've said it SO many times with so little to go on that it has functionally derailed the topic for others...

This has not only put the thread grossly off-topic but most likely has made the developers think twice about ever reaching out to OUR community ever again..
Last edited by GMaq on Wed Apr 22, 2015 11:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

RockHopper
Established Member
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:19 pm
Contact:

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by RockHopper »

asbak, you're making some good points but they're getting lost in these long posts.
falkTX wrote:If this post was made on the kxstudio section I'd already have deleted it.
I reported it as spam to the admins as soon as I saw it.
I believe there's absolutely zero chance of SuperSync being included in the KX repos.
asbak wrote:If it were a .deb or similar in a "included demo software" folder then sure
That sounds like a good compromise. I wouldn't have any issues with AVLinux shipping with a .deb of SuperSync so long as it wasn't pre-installed and came with a clear EULA/privacy statement.

GraysonPeddie
Established Member
Posts: 612
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 11:12 pm
Location: Altha, FL
Contact:

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by GraysonPeddie »

GMaq wrote:Admittedly I let sarcasm get the better of me...

Of course everyone here has a right to speak.. but since we haven'the heard any significant detail from the original poster as to what their intentions ACTUALLY were other than to have INTERESTED parties contact them about testing a Linux version.. then I think this thread demonstrates a hugely unbalanced amount of discussion and criticism from people who are extrapolating the OP's intention based on very little evidence. It's not unfair you've had your say... it's unfair you've said it SO many times with so little to go on that it has functionally derailed the topic for others...

This has not only put the thread grossly off-topic but most likely has made the developers think twice about ever reaching out to OUR community ever again..
If only I could +1 your post.

And due to the attitude from the Linux community (perhaps not as a whole but in general), I don't have that much love for open-source software. Sure, I love open source software and I can do what I can to show support for developers in a form of contribution and donation, I don't mind proprietary software. If a DAW I'm using is proprietary and is available for free, I'm happy to use it.

I don't care if tools are open source or proprietary. They are tools to get my work done. And aside from modifying and compiling software from source, open source software does not have any advantage over proprietary softwre.

Anyway, we are way off-topic.
--Grayson Peddie

Music Interest: New Age w/ a mix of modern smooth jazz, light techno/trance & downtempo -- something Epcot Future World/Tomorrowland-flavored.

GraysonPeddie
Established Member
Posts: 612
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 11:12 pm
Location: Altha, FL
Contact:

Re: SuperSync Music Manager for Linux

Post by GraysonPeddie »

falkTX wrote:
GraysonPeddie wrote:I don't care if tools are open source or proprietary. They are tools to get my work done. And aside from modifying and compiling software from source, open source software does not have any advantage over proprietary softwre.
With all due respect, that's just probably because you're not a coder.
For developers, being able to fix simple bugs is very important.
It's very annoying when a closed app has a bug that we know the fix for, but can't do anything about it.
Or when closed apps don't support a minor feature that would take < 5 mins to implement...

I think this is getting more important with ARM chips, as you often need to compile software in a very specific way to get full performance benefits.
Most closed software only release for 32 and 64bit intel systems, and sometimes 64bit only.
Yeah, that's true. I'm not all that much of a fully-fledged coder, as I'm not a computer programmer and I've had a hard time understanding source code when looking through muse-sequencer's files, such as removing the ability to enumerate JACK-MIDI devices upon startup. But I'm thinking of open-source versus proprietary software as being more of a philosophy or religion -- perhaps more of a FLOSS advocate. I can agree with the flexibility when it comes to improving open-source software and fixing bugs.

It would've been nice if open-source software could follow more of a .NET-like coding conventions regardless of any programming language, making it easier to modify the code as I see fit, although many C/C++ devs would hate me for that.
--Grayson Peddie

Music Interest: New Age w/ a mix of modern smooth jazz, light techno/trance & downtempo -- something Epcot Future World/Tomorrowland-flavored.

Post Reply