Reasons to not use Linux

[steevc]

Interesting blog post from a guy I followed because he was writing about using Linux for music

http://www.linkedlistcorruption.com/?p=426

He's moving to the 'dark side' and gives his reasons. Are they valid? Personally I'd just doing basic audio work and getting by with standard Kubuntu at the moment. I have looked at KXStudio, but it's the family PC that I have to keep usable for everyone for normal usage. I've considered dual-booting to have a dedicated audio system, but with the limited time I have in the evenings this has issues. I want to get sit down and start recording. So I don't know if RT kernels are a problem.

The issue of getting the latest versions of apps is a problem. I'll consider using a PPA to get newer versions of things like Ardour and Guitarix, but I don't want to do much messing around with compiling stuff.

BTW Does Ubuntu 11.10 have any significant audio updates?

[Capoeira]

Problem 1, I can't see.
normal Kernel works very good (now)

Problem 2, I always had until going to a rolling realease distro. man want's newest packages, man needs rolling release distro
Problem 2b: I hated compiling, never figuered it out correctly, since I use Arch I NEVER compiled a software again (using AUR)

Problem 3, will arise....lol.....he'll come back

[atomkarinca]

Both of those points he raised are very valid. He starts off saying "I’m not bashing FOSS or leaving it behind in total", this is very nice of him. People usually tend to go for the extremes. He also says that those problems aren't unsolvable, but are just hard to solve. This is where I think he's wrong.

I guess we can all agree that RT-kernels are either old or if they're up-to-date then not properly tested. This is a built-in thing for RT-kernels, as he put it very correctly. But I don't think RT-kernels make that much difference. When I say "think" I don't mean it's just a hunch. I used RT-kernels, but after a while it's just not worth the hassle. I really mean it. If it's making a difference, I can't really see it. Maybe it's because I'm using a distro lighter on the resources (Arch Linux here, too).

The second problem I can relate to, but in a very strict sense. This is my experience: if a stable version of a software needs a newer library than your system has, then most probably your system isn't up-to-date. Usually, the 6-month release cycle distros have that. I have only seen this kind of behaviour for alpha/beta software, not even for RC ones. Again, if he were using Arch Linux, AUR would be handling his dependencies.

I'm not bashing him, I'm just trying to say that those problems are also easily fixable. But not on "newb-friendly" distros. And I guess it would be better if those distros were as easy as Arch Linux

[funkmuscle]

that's why I've been using Arch forever. It's been my main distro for years.. All great points guys... And for the dude's needs, if he needs the dark side, be it so..

[brummer]

... And for the dude's needs, if he needs the dark side, be it so..

Well spoken, funkmuscle.

To the package system problem, :
when I install a stable distro, then, I will have a stable one. That means on the other side, that I wouldn't update any app to a newer, and therewith untested, version. If I try that, well, then I end up in the dependency hell.
Solution is simpl: install a unstable distro, ride on front of the wave of the development. Then you never experience a dependency trouble, except you try outdated versions.

It's a pity that we have so much Linux distros, such a big choice, some people fail to find the right one for themselves and there needs, but most try it again after some time, when they have learn a bit more about it.

To the kernel issue: If this article was 6 years old, I could say, well, what a pity, but is is from yesterday, so I could only say : what do you mean, I didn't understand you ??

[GMaq]

Hi

@brummer
As you know I'm a big fan of your work and I understand and respect why developers (like you) like using unstable rolling releases like Sid. But personally as a user/distributor I think building your home or professional DAW setup on an unstable release for the average user is just not the way to go at all. In any other operating systems the amount of core library updates that happen on a daily basis in Linux would appear insane. People can complain about Windows updates but if you removed the updates from Windows that were not security/malware related especially on something as stable as XP there would hardly be any updates at all. Why on earth would a person who has everything installed and working in a reliable fashion want to update ANYTHING that wasn't needed (until they decide it is...)? I completely understand how the poster of the original blog article feels and I personally think that a certain percentage of advanced Linux users and developers should be on the cutting edge for the sake of breaking new ground but the fact that seemingly a significant percentage of Linux users seem to be running a development or rolling release Linux as their daily OS contributes to an unreasonably accelerated and unrealistic pace for Linux to be taken seriously as a production OS. It seems to me more and more that this obsession with daily updates is going to seriously undermine Linux as simply a hobby project for geeks. To me a LOT of application developers should take a vacation from adding features and concentrate on fixing bugs so when you get a 'stable' version of a program it actually can be used for six months or a year before the damned update manager yanks it on you. I realize I'm on a bit of a rant here but I'm sick and tired of the current 'lets-drive-1000-miles-an-hour-to-nowhere' approach. What is all the hurry about?? Improvement I understand, progress I understand, the frantic urgency - I don't. I think the whole daily-update and 'release early and release often' model is beginning to border on mental illness.

I'm not at the same point as the blog writer (yet) and of course people are free to do and use whatever they want. But I really fear that too many participants are not looking beyond the ends of their noses at what effect this is having on the 'big picture' for Linux. Quite often I see blogs and forums being critical of the so called LTS and 'Stable' releases when they are the ones that should be promoted and properly maintained for the average user. I applaud falkTX and some others for continuing to package the latest stuff for Lucid. The fact that a growing number of developers continue to package for Lucid gives me some hope that maybe just maybe some balance and common sense can be found in the current age of update-mania.

[funkmuscle]

don't know about Sid but Arch has always been stable.. as many bugs or less than the regular distros... I've tried most and for my DAW, rolling release is the only way for me... so frustrating waiting for a major release... that's also why I use the svn, git, etc., of most apps.. if app is buggy, I roll back.. again, to each his own I guess..

[Louigi Verona]

In December 2010 - January 2011 I was preparing to write a similar post myself. I also wanted to say that I love FLOSS and Linux Audio but that it is impossible to use it for various reasons. My reasons would be different though.
For me things changed when certain software became available. But the article raises valid points, in my opinion. And an app bundle sounds like a great idea.

[Thad E Ginathom]

People are saying that there is not a problem with modern kernels. Are they saying that real-time is not needed?

My movement to Linux (Ubuntu) for 99.9% day-to-day computing happened some time after I bought a Firewire audio interface. The interface had been in the cupboard for other reasons, and came out in hopes.

Firewire. Jack. Xruns. You cannot even listen to music without the rt kernel, let alone work with it. Everything to do with Firewire audio in Ubuntu is a horrible, horrendously complex mess. Everyone outside a development department wants, even needs, to plug in these devices and have them just work. Nobody needs to find themselves having to edit interrupt handling configuration files and write scripts that reassign BIOS/OS latency levels.

I'm not a pro. I'm not even using my equipment for anything more creative than digitising vinyl ... but, over the past few months, it has occurred to me that, if I had a band trying to record, they would all have just given up and gone away.

Ubuntu ... a Linux distro intended to be popular and accessible.
Firewire ... an interface which, among semi-pro and pro audio workers is popular

Do they work together? Hell no.

I didn't give up ... I discovered KXStudio. FalkTX makes it 'just work.' It is possible.



(It isn't all bad: Ubuntu supports a much-loved RME PCI card of mine that even RME have not supported since WinXP)

[slowpick]

don't know about Sid but Arch has always been stable.. as many bugs or less than the regular distros... I've tried most and for my DAW, rolling release is the only way for me... so frustrating waiting for a major release... that's also why I use the svn, git, etc., of most apps.. if app is buggy, I roll back.. again, to each his own I guess..

The few audio apps under significant development, usually get the bugfixes and new features,
in the authors timeframe, instead of a distro's arbitrary release schedule. So musicians can wind
up with a homebrew 'rolling receive' daw, using every trick in the book, to get what is needed to work with stability. For my limited needs, there are only a few windows apps/instruments good enough to warrant starting an XP session. If someone packages a .deb of qtractor or ardour etc with vestige/festige, LV2, native VST, and dssi plugin support ALL working, things will be much easier for
everyone.

[Havoc]

Bit of an excuse more than anything else.

1) who really needs lower latency than a standard preempt kernel can provide? And not just because you think you need it. Well, some live musicians that use a ton of effects etc. Anything that is postproduction can live with a bit more.

2) the problem is that he wants to live on the bleeding edge but not do the effort required for it. If you can afford to change versions of an essential application in the mid of a project you're not doing anything important. And if you really need that and don't care to learn how to build static or dynamic packages you shouldn't be running the bleeding edge cause you will bleed from time to time.

So I'm running Gentoo, I have to put up with some compilation. Not that I mind, it runs while I'm asleep. (don't you guys ever sleep?) and if I postpone important updates I know that I'll pay for it to get the system up to date later. You won't get everything without paying for it one way or another. You have to adjust your expectations.

[WRC]

I stopped running a realtime/low latency kernal several versions ago when it seemed to not make a difference anymore which one i was running. Of course i do not do professional level audio or video but i usually had a lot of things open which added load to the system and still the normal kernal seemed to work either as well or close enough to the realtime/low latency/whatever one that it was not worth the extra bother.

[slowpick]

When using multiple yoshimi/zynaddsubfx sounds, with rakarrack,
a high quality hydrogen drumkit, and a recording software, one can make good use of an
RT kernel. And lightweight linux distros that support them. No need for every distro to do it,
but it's sure nice that some do

[steevc]

There's an update on his progress now

http://www.linkedlistcorruption.com/?p=437

Seems Windows and Pro Tools is not working out for him and there's no friendly community to fall back on for help. He talks about trying Tango Studio, but then says he's going to get a Mac. I don't have the money to throw around on such things. I'll stick with Linux and consider upgrading the PC at some stage.

[Capoeira]

There's an update on his progress now


Seems Windows and Pro Tools is not working out for him and there's no friendly community to fall back on for help.

Problem 3, will arise....lol.....he'll come back