Re: [LAU] Mission Statement

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Monday, May 14, 2012 - 7:44 am

Am 13.05.2012 11:20, schrieb J. Liles:

Excellent Question indeed.

After the times of "y` need to have an experienced nerd beside you to
even make it bleep and this nerd needs to be a Linux *Audio* nerd, which
is a beast even harder to find than your average Linux nerd (who use to
know little of s.c. realtime...)." are gone, anybody *could* at least
try this Linux Audio kind of thing right?

But they dont.

Why is that? Simply put: even though Linux Audio deos work now, the
other thing works also and it offers more apps that use to be more
convenient and well known amongst musicians. Add some pictures and
statements by Josh Homme or Simon Phillips or any other well respected
musician and make them say: "I use this plugin, else I could not blow
your heads off." And the people believe. And the plugins do work and
offer a lot of fun and anybody can find a special priced "version" of
its Windows-installer on the internets.

Whenever people see me working with Ardour, Guitarix, Qtractor,
KDenlive, AMS or CALF, they say: "Not bad, I did not know that! Seems to
work nearly the same as good as my Samplitude/NI/Cubase/Reaper" you name it.

But of course they do not switch. Because they cannot easily *add* Linux
Audio to their arsenal but they have to indeed switch.

If you build a fine guitar, that sounds the same as good as any Fender
or Gibson and of course better than any PRS, and that even looks very
good and unique, people will like to have it.
But not, if you build them with special plugs that can only connect to
special amps none of the Gibsons and Fenders and Hagstroms can play with.

But we cannot do anything else because our amp is just great and it is
the only relevant one with built-in freedom. So I guess, we have to
support the devs as good as we can, use the software for our own good
and spread the word.
And hope, that the appreciation of the state of *not* being a mere
customer gains more importance for more people.

And by all means let us drop this "I love it cuz its free beer!" kind of
thing. If we want pro-software that is free as in freedom we should pay
people for writing it.

best regards


> but you're not helping by posting BS on the mailing

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] Mission Statement, Mike Mazarick, (Sat May 12, 3:55 pm)
[LAU] LAO SSL certificate -- was Mission Statement, Robin Gareus, (Sun May 13, 1:51 pm)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Robin Gareus, (Sun May 13, 1:51 pm)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, J. Liles, (Sun May 13, 9:21 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Hartmut Noack, (Mon May 14, 7:44 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, david, (Mon May 14, 6:21 pm)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Louigi Verona, (Mon May 14, 6:24 pm)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Alexandre Prokoudine, (Mon May 14, 7:59 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Folderol, (Sun May 13, 2:32 pm)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, J. Liles, (Mon May 14, 2:03 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Patrick Shirkey, (Mon May 14, 2:59 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Thorsten Wilms, (Mon May 14, 8:34 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Nils, (Sun May 13, 9:40 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Devin Anderson, (Sat May 12, 5:18 pm)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Mike Mazarick, (Sun May 13, 10:07 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, david, (Mon May 14, 6:07 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Louigi Verona, (Mon May 14, 6:32 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Paul Davis, (Sun May 13, 12:50 pm)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Harry van Haaren, (Sun May 13, 11:22 am)
Re: [LAU] Mission Statement, Burkhard W├Âlfel, (Mon May 14, 6:46 pm)