LinuxMusicians

The amount of hassle getting linux music software working has gotten out of hand.

We need to reign in this monster. It needs to be more like MacOs and Windows in its ease of use.

To this end, I propose all music developers should adopt AV Linux as the base standard for deploying music software. Developers should have a test partition of AV Linux upon which their project is compiled (64-bit) and tested. Then that binary should be made available to endusers for download. It will be guaranteed to install, run, and work on this base music standard.

The advantages are:

1) By using AV Linux, setting up a music system will be as easy for endusers as any other OS.
2) People having problems with other distros will be able to quickly identify whether a problem is software or hardware related just by running their system under an AV linux live boot distro.
3) Endusers will be spared the horrible, unnecessary experience of compiling software.
4) Conflicts between apps can be better resolved when developers are testing all apps using a standardized music base.
5) Less time will be wasted on trouble-shooting and enduser technical support.
6) By having developers create the AV linux binaries of their software, this frees up Glen to concentrate on documentation and advancement of the base system. In fact, perhaps he can work on a "music app-store" type of program in which devs send him download links to their binaries, and he adds those to the "app-store".

If there was to be such, an operating system maintained by a single person would be a terrible choice. Why doesn't Gmaq add to a different project like Ubuntu Studio rather than start from scratch? There's your answer to fragmentation, people aren't going to change on this.

Simultaneously a very good most excellent idea and a new chapter in the never ending manual "How To Launch a Flamewar - Boss Level - Inferno mode"

Largos wrote: Why doesn't Gmaq add to a different project like Ubuntu Studio

When you answer the question "Why doesn't Mark Shuttleworth add to Debian instead of a different project?", you'll have answered your own question.

Anyway, your misguided complaint does nothing to negate my points.

j_e_f_f_g wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:39 am

Largos wrote: Why doesn't Gmaq add to a different project like Ubuntu Studio

When you answer the question "Why doesn't Mark Shuttleworth add to Debian instead of a different project?", you'll have answered your own question.

Anyway, your misguided complaint does nothing to negate my points.

I am not trying to negate your points, I am saying your idea of having a single operating system everyone works on is contrary to human nature.

Largos wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 8:54 am If there was to be such, an operating system maintained by a single person would be a terrible choice. Why doesn't Gmaq add to a different project like Ubuntu Studio rather than start from scratch? There's your answer to fragmentation, people aren't going to change on this.

Ubuntu would be the worst choice for a base. They want all software to be installed using snap which is a travesty. Better would be GeekOS or LibraZik but AVL would be the best choice being based on Debian and having ~15 years of history behind it, similar to US. The US devs should contribute to AVL!
I've never had much luck getting any Ubuntu to work how I want; AVL has always been quite user-friendly.
Jeff's suggestion is admirable (and logical) but it just ain't gonna happen. Logic loses out regularly to hype which will be the case here. Ubuntu thrives on hype and marketing, same as Windows.

Largos wrote: not trying to negate your points

I noticed.

having a single operating system everyone works on is contrary to human nature.

Like Windows, MacOS, and Linux? Yeah. That.

j_e_f_f_g wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 12:29 pm

Largos wrote: not trying to negate your points

I noticed.

having a single operating system everyone works on is contrary to human nature.

Like Windows, MacOS, and Linux? Yeah. That.

You listing two operating systems and a kernel used in hundreds of operating systems means what?

sunrat wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:53 am Ubuntu would be the worst choice for a base. They want all software to be installed using snap which is a travesty. Better would be GeekOS or LibraZik but AVL would be the best choice being based on Debian and having ~15 years of history behind it, similar to US. The US devs should contribute to AVL!
I've never had much luck getting any Ubuntu to work how I want; AVL has always been quite user-friendly.
Jeff's suggestion is admirable (and logical) but it just ain't gonna happen. Logic loses out regularly to hype which will be the case here. Ubuntu thrives on hype and marketing, same as Windows.

Ubuntu is indeed mixed bag. I agree 100% on problems ubuntu has, and just for that reason I jumped finally from Ubuntu to something else. And then other side, it is commonly used, and when some 3rd party company/developer provides packages for some linux, they are for ubuntu.

Largos wrote: You listing two operating systems and a kernel used in hundreds of operating systems means what?

That "human nature" has no bearing upon the utility of a supported standard. The only applicable influence of human nature here is that people tend to like things that are easy and effective.

If that's made possible by linux music developers simply having a copy of AV Linux for testing and creation of downloadable binaries, then that passes the test.

There's nothing to argue here. You're just trying to be contradictory for the mere sake of being contradictory.

Largos wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 8:54 am If there was to be such, an operating system maintained by a single person would be a terrible choice. Why doesn't Gmaq add to a different project like Ubuntu Studio rather than start from scratch? There's your answer to fragmentation, people aren't going to change on this.

First of all, this is the first I've heard of any of this... lol

To answer the question Ubuntu will not allow and Package commercial applications and demos in their Repos, I want that freedom to bundle what I want (with the developers permission) for the benefit of choice for the User, end of story..

Actually, you only need BackupBand in the cloud, not even a GNU or even the Linux.

I'm glad to see positive suggestions rather than JACK bashing. However, you know, I'll put another side.

j_e_f_f_g wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 2:35 am The amount of hassle getting linux music software working has gotten out of hand.

I hadn't noticed.

We need to reign in this monster.

Who is 'we'? It's working for me.

It needs to be more like MacOs and Windows in its ease of use.

Why does it? What problem would that solve? If it's more users that is the goal, then this is not a solution. As has been discussed at length elsewhere the reason that Linux doesn't have more users is that people stick to the OS that was installed on their machine when they bought it. To get more users Linux needs to come pre-installed on mainstream hardware.

Making Linux more like Windows or MacOS will simply annoy those people who already use Linux. It would certainly annoy me.

Other than that I appreciate you proposing a solution.

The whole point of Linux is that you can choose the OS with the features that you like. I used AVlinux for awhile and I probably will again. I got away from it when I got a new computer with hardware that wasn't supported in the older kernel of AVL. I've enjoyed having a more bleeding edge system since then. The whole Avlinux OS is designed like a long term stable one which is great for a lot of people but not for everyone. Software needs to work with newer hardware and kernels as well though so the idea it's a non-starter in my opinion.