Linux music as a major player...

[funkmuscle]

Why, isn't that what we linux users ask several audio developers from other platforms as well to do? So the best habit is to show that it work well.

Exactly tramp and I gave up a long time ago on that because then, many of then are too busy developing for the platform they're using. As in the early days of Guitarix, Hermann and I tried to get my friend who make VST amp-sims (acmebargig) and all he was able to do was give us something that brummer couldn't use. I then asked if his older code be made opened and he didn't want to.
That was the problems I've had with Windows and Mac devs. Hey, it's all good that the Linux devs do that but like I was asking, are they spreading themselves to thin by working on all 3 platforms?
Just trying to see why and where there time is spent. Mac and Windows devs are bold and stick with their platforms when it comes to supporting. Even the open source ones. They take the give it right here first then look at others approach.

Like I said, I don't know so I'm asking and hopefully we can all suggest a fix.

[mauser]

Hey, it's all good that the Linux devs do that but like I was asking, are they spreading themselves to thin by working on all 3 platforms?
Just trying to see why and where there time is spent.

You're implying somehow that there are dedicated "Linux Devs", "OS X Devs" and "Windows Devs" out there who are working well coordinated together on their open source project(s). From my experience i would say that at least some developers are working cross-platform, maybe not on all of those platforms, but maybe on two of them, if only at a given time.. And most of the open source audio projects which i know don't have enough developers to introduce such "hard" separations.And - which was said already before - people in unpaid open source projects tend often to do what they want, the stuff they are interested in. Suggesting people how they should behave could be counter-productive..
For myself, i'm trying to treat all users the same - i'm not giving someone more or less support depending on his OS. All of them are using the application, and all of them are helping by reporting bugs, providing reviews, tutorials, translations and whatever..

[funkmuscle]

Hey, it's all good that the Linux devs do that but like I was asking, are they spreading themselves to thin by working on all 3 platforms?
Just trying to see why and where there time is spent.

You're implying somehow that there are dedicated "Linux Devs", "OS X Devs" and "Windows Devs" out there who are working well coordinated together on their open source project(s). From my experience i would say that at least some developers are working cross-platform, maybe not on all of those platforms, but maybe on two of them, if only at a given time.. And most of the open source audio projects which i know don't have enough developers to introduce such "hard" separations.And - which was said already before - people in unpaid open source projects tend often to do what they want, the stuff they are interested in. Suggesting people how they should behave could be counter-productive..
For myself, i'm trying to treat all users the same - i'm not giving someone more or less support depending on his OS. All of them are using the application, and all of them are helping by reporting bugs, providing reviews, tutorials, translations and whatever..

yes mauser, you answered me.. not criticizing the work the devs are doing.. Kudos to you guys.. what I'm asking and saying, are you guys spreading yourselves too thin? Like Paul said, he only has time now to work on Linux. We've seen great projects stopped because devs have no time. So I was just wondering if that was the case.

I just would hate to see all the great apps stop. Remember I posted this here not to criticize but to see if we can come up with ways to help. more users means more help like you've said but more users and less devs equals???

Money is an issue with everyone these days. So where will the fix come from?
We need to figure a way to help you guys out!

[tatch]

gmaq, apologies that you took offense. I'm just trying to brainstorm ideas that could improve LAU while offloading pressure from devs (though I guess I'm out of ideas again). I'm sure I also underestimate the effort put into creating and maintaining a distro but it seemed to me like one of the big ways people have been promoting LAU is by making audio distros, and aside from AVL and KXStudio it seems unhelpful to the community.

yes mauser, you answered me.. not criticizing the work the devs are doing.. Kudos to you guys.. what I'm asking and saying, are you guys spreading yourselves too thin? Like Paul said, he only has time now to work on Linux. We've seen great projects stopped because devs have no time. So I was just wondering if that was the case.

here are two threads that may be informative.

[diizy]

Has anyone ever thought about how the modularity of Linux audio systems offers the possibility for commercial companies to come up with creative licensing schemes for their commercial products, and still leverage open-source development in most of their code?

An example: think of a commercial DAW that is entirely based on Jack, and uses separate applications for different tasks. Like, a separate mixer, separate sequencer and so on... Most of it could be developed as open-source, with anyone free to download and compile the binaries, and contribute patches etc. Then the company could just make one crucial part proprietary, and then also: the commercial package could be sold pre-configured so that all the parts are integrated together as a cohesive whole, so you wouldn't even notice you're using several applications unless you want to...

I think that would be a brilliant way to do business... the independent open-source modules would work as a "free demo" for the complete package, but you'd get a better and more integrated experience with the full commercial package, which would encourage buying... and meanwhile, the company could still enjoy all the benefits of open-source development.

[tramp]

Has anyone ever thought about how the modularity of Linux audio systems offers the possibility for commercial companies to come up with creative licensing schemes for their commercial products, and still leverage open-source development in most of their code?

We've had a request this year from a commercial (hardware) vendor who would buy a commercial license from us, for parts of our source. We refused that and try to interest him for exact the model you talk about. We can't get him to accept that.

[glowrak guy]

So, lets say, just for example, a deal is struck, and new versions of Guitarix and Hydrogen,
are created as bog standard Mac apps, and also as an integral part of a new AVLinux7,
so a buyer would purchase three downloads at one price,
regardless of whether all three were planned for immediate use. That way,
someone might think, I'll use the linux versions, and save up
a Large or two, or rob a bank, and buy a mac

And a mac user could purchase, based on the valued apps, while not immediately caring
about using them in a linux.

The sales proceeds would be divided between the parties of the deal, as agreed.
It might also mean creating a smaller less inclusive distros, to reduce licensing issues,
which might be an attractive side effect.

Such 'modularity' might need some clarifications made in advance. If long-time free projects,
suddenly had a sticker price, there might be some restless natives sharpening their spears.
Cheers

[glowrak guy]

Has anyone ever thought about how the modularity of Linux audio systems offers the possibility for commercial companies to come up with creative licensing schemes for their commercial products, and still leverage open-source development in most of their code?

We've had a request this year from a commercial (hardware) vendor who would buy a commercial license from us, for parts of our source. We refused that and try to interest him for exact the model you talk about. We can't get him to accept that.

The hardware guys have far greater developement costs, and product liabilities,
and need tight control of the source, to protect their guarantees,
and minimize costly consumer-returns, or a sales-crushing negative review in the media.
These typically are not major concerns of open-source coders. But now that you know
how to launch a competing product, the race is on

[tramp]

The hardware guys have far greater developement costs, and product liabilities,
and need tight control of the source, to protect their guarantees,
and minimize costly consumer-returns, or a sales-crushing negative review in the media.
These typically are not major concerns of open-source coders. But now that you know
how to launch a competing product, the race is on

Well, there is no race at all.
We working already together with a other commercial hardware vendor, which comes a lot closer to the OpenSource philosophy.
http://portalmod.com/home

It's still a commercial hardware project, which integrate itself perfect in the OpenSource community.
It may cover some of the ideas which come up previous in this thread, including commercial founding of OpenSource projects.

[sysrqer]

Well, there is no race at all.
We working already together with a other commercial hardware vendor, which comes a lot closer to the OpenSource philosophy.
http://portalmod.com/home

It's still a commercial hardware project, which integrate itself perfect in the OpenSource community.
It may cover some of the ideas which come up previous in this thread, including commercial founding of OpenSource projects.

That looks absolutely incredible, the list of fx alone is very impressive. It's exciting to see some of those plugins with nice guis like that.

[briandc]

I think (as mentioned by others here) that the advantage of linux is that it is free and open source. Making a for-profit distro or audio package might "seem" like the best way to go, but it really isn't necessary.

To me, the issue is about pooling resources together. Take, for example, the number of distributions available in linux. Literally hundreds! And while a few might be "project specific," many are nothing more than re-inventing the wheel. If people would come together and collaborate, without an attitude of mine-is-better-than-yours, but rather, mine-is-different-and-both-are-just-as-valuable, then we would see fewer distros, but more rock-solid environments. There's no need for so many distros.

The same is true, imo, with a lot of the free/open source software. We don't need "more" software; we need more quality added to the software that already exists! Let's take, for example, arpeggiators. Linux has a couple. But none of them is excellent (yet). So rather than making a "new" arpeggiator, why not "stand on the shoulders" of those who have already started the path, and make them better??

As for starting a company, I don't know if that's necessary; but making something where people can "go" to ask for help, give time to improve apps, etc. This might be a good way to get people focused and united.

FWIW..

brian

[diizy]

Well, there is no race at all.
We working already together with a other commercial hardware vendor, which comes a lot closer to the OpenSource philosophy.
http://portalmod.com/home

It's still a commercial hardware project, which integrate itself perfect in the OpenSource community.
It may cover some of the ideas which come up previous in this thread, including commercial founding of OpenSource projects.

That looks seriously like a really cool device.

[Drumfix]

think of a commercial DAW that is entirely based on Jack, and uses separate applications for different tasks. Like, a separate mixer, separate sequencer and so on...

Not commercial, but this pretty much what i'm working on. And this is why i propose to let people just install an Xserver on their OSX or
Win machine and simply export the windows of the linux or wine apps, that are actually running on the server, which may be in the same room or anywhere on the internet.
Provided those people have a fast enough network connection they can hook up to the server, exchange audio/midi via netjack export the application window of their favorite plugins and use it as if they were running on their local machines.
This btw destroys any business model of commercial closed source developers, since a single installation of their software can be used
concurrently by as many users as the machine and network connection can handle.

Thats the reason behind why i call any port of a linux app to another OS a waste of time.

[sysrqer]

Provided those people have a fast enough network connection...

Thats the reason behind why i call any port of a linux app to another OS a waste of time.

What if they don't have a fast enough network connection or don't want to be connected to a network?

[diizy]

Provided those people have a fast enough network connection they can hook up to the server, exchange audio/midi via netjack export the application window of their favorite plugins and use it as if they were running on their local machines.

Interesting. How do you plan on handling network latency? And how many people are there in the world who have fast enough network connections that streaming several uncompressed audio streams in duplex would be feasible?

Don't get me wrong, it seems like a really neat and interesting idea, but I don't see this being feasible enough for majority of people in the near future that it would compete with existing local applications.

This btw destroys any business model of commercial closed source developers, since a single installation of their software can be used
concurrently by as many users as the machine and network connection can handle.

Until they forbid doing so in their EULA. And once you're already breaking the law, you might as well just torrent the software and run it locally...

Torrents and piracy haven't yet "destroyed the business model" of any closed source developers, so it's IMO fairly unrealistic to expect this kind of cloud computing to do so either.