Thread: [Alsa-user] Audio CDs don't work on ALSA system.
Brought to you by:
perex
From: Ron P. <fef...@ya...> - 2005-02-27 20:50:31
|
Hi all, My system is a desktop P4 which dual boots, WinXP and FC3. After installing FC3, I had no sound at all, but thru a lot of reading and some serious help from the list, the audio portion of my system is now almost where I want it. I can rip audio cds to the hd and encode them as ogg or mp3. Alsaplayer and Music Player (Rhythmbox) will play these files nicely. I added the mp3 patch for XMMS, and it will recognize and "play" ogg and mp3, but the result is horrible. I'm interested in knowing what causes this, but since the other players work well, I don't really need XMMS. The only serious audio problem remaining is that inserted audio cds do not work. Gnome Player comes up, queries CDDB, shows the track info and begins to "play", but no sound. I thought this might be something still muted in Audio control, but couldn't find any combination to make it work. This is a dual-boot desktop machine and when I boot into the WinXP side, inserted audio cds play normally, so I think the hardware is OK. I have a feeling this must be something very simple, but I just can't find it. Any ideas on how to troubleshoot this? Thanks Ron __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com |
From: Clemens L. <cl...@la...> - 2005-02-28 09:16:14
|
Ron Pepper wrote: > The only serious audio problem remaining is that inserted audio cds > do not work. Gnome Player comes up, queries CDDB, shows the track > info and begins to "play", but no sound. The Gnome CD Player instructs the CD drive to play the sounds to its analog output. This won't work if there isn't a cable between this output and the sound card's CD input connector. > when I boot into the WinXP side, inserted audio cds play normally, Windows reads the audio data digitally over the IDE bus and plays it over the sound card like other audio files. There are many Linux CD players that can do this, too, but I guess the Gnome CD Player isn't one of those. Regards, Clemens |
From: Frans K. <ket...@wa...> - 2005-02-28 09:20:56
|
On Sunday 27 February 2005 21:50, Ron Pepper wrote: > Hi all, > > My system is a desktop P4 which dual boots, WinXP and FC3. After > installing FC3, I had no sound at all, but thru a lot of reading and > some serious help from the list, the audio portion of my system is > now almost where I want it. I can rip audio cds to the hd and encode > them as ogg or mp3. Alsaplayer and Music Player (Rhythmbox) will play > these files nicely. I added the mp3 patch for XMMS, and it will > recognize and "play" ogg and mp3, but the result is horrible. I'm > interested in knowing what causes this, but since the other players > work well, I don't really need XMMS. > > The only serious audio problem remaining is that inserted audio cds > do not work. Gnome Player comes up, queries CDDB, shows the track > info and begins to "play", but no sound. I thought this might be > something still muted in Audio control, but couldn't find any > combination to make it work. This is a dual-boot desktop machine and > when I boot into the WinXP side, inserted audio cds play normally, so > I think the hardware is OK. I have a feeling this must be something > very simple, but I just can't find it. Any ideas on how to > troubleshoot this? > > Thanks > Ron I think this is the problem: http://www.jennings.homelinux.net/audio_cd.html HTH, -Frans |
From: Jon S. <jon...@gm...> - 2005-02-28 22:10:30
|
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:20:49 +0100, Frans Ketelaars <ket...@wa...> wrote: > On Sunday 27 February 2005 21:50, Ron Pepper wrote: > > The only serious audio problem remaining is that inserted audio cds > > do not work. Gnome Player comes up, queries CDDB, shows the track > > info and begins to "play", but no sound. I thought this might be > > something still muted in Audio control, but couldn't find any > > combination to make it work. This is a dual-boot desktop machine and > > when I boot into the WinXP side, inserted audio cds play normally, so > > I think the hardware is OK. I have a feeling this must be something > > very simple, but I just can't find it. Any ideas on how to > > troubleshoot this? Where do I plug the analog output from the CD drive into my USB sound system? Apps can't rely on this wire being there. > > > > Thanks > > Ron > > I think this is the problem: > http://www.jennings.homelinux.net/audio_cd.html > > HTH, > > -Frans > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. > Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Alsa-user mailing list > Als...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-user > -- Jon Smirl jon...@gm... |
From: Hamish M. <ha...@cl...> - 2005-03-01 03:15:24
|
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 05:10:21PM -0500, Jon Smirl wrote: > Where do I plug the analog output from the CD drive into my USB sound > system? Apps can't rely on this wire being there. Not any more, but it worked for the first 10 years of PC CD-ROM drives. I think this is an enhancement request rather than a bug. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <ha...@de...> <ha...@cl...> |
From: Lee R. <rlr...@jo...> - 2005-02-28 21:43:00
|
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:20 +0100, Frans Ketelaars wrote: > On Sunday 27 February 2005 21:50, Ron Pepper wrote: > > The only serious audio problem remaining is that inserted audio cds > > do not work. Gnome Player comes up, queries CDDB, shows the track > > info and begins to "play", but no sound. I thought this might be > > something still muted in Audio control, but couldn't find any > > combination to make it work. This is a dual-boot desktop machine and > > when I boot into the WinXP side, inserted audio cds play normally, so > > I think the hardware is OK. I have a feeling this must be something > > very simple, but I just can't find it. Any ideas on how to > > troubleshoot this? > > > > Thanks > > Ron > > I think this is the problem: > http://www.jennings.homelinux.net/audio_cd.html > You know, these are all stupid application bugs. I am really shocked sometimes when I see how stupid little things like this all add up to a user experience that just feels shoddy compared to those other OS. It would be SO EASY to just make it work like Windows (aka THE WAY PEOPLE EXPECT IT TO) here. And no, the issue is not that the vendors cheaped out on a 2 cent cable. You get better audio from a CD using digital extraction (for example you can correct errors by re-reading sectors, etc) than by just trusting the DAC on the drive & soundcard. But it's more work to get that right. Didn't anyone ever head of "genius is in the details"? With all the fscking money Red Hat and IBM and Novell sink into Linux development, and all the stupid hype about "Linux on the desktop", you would think that by now there would be someone, somewhere, whose JOB it is to catch things like this before they get out the door. Depressing. Lee |
From: Marc <ma...@ha...> - 2005-02-28 21:56:05
|
Le 28 F=E9vrier 2005 15:55, Lee Revell a =E9crit=A0: > It would be SO EASY to just make it work like Windows=20 > (aka THE WAY PEOPLE EXPECT IT TO) here. =20 http://home.earthlink.net/~android606/commandline/ =2D- Marc |
From: Eric J. <al...@xm...> - 2005-02-28 22:43:13
|
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:55:15 -0500 Lee Revell <rlr...@jo...> wrote: > You know, these are all stupid application bugs. I am really shocked > sometimes when I see how stupid little things like this all add up to a > user experience that just feels shoddy compared to those other OS. It > would be SO EASY to just make it work like Windows (aka THE WAY PEOPLE > EXPECT IT TO) here. And no, the issue is not that the vendors cheaped > out on a 2 cent cable. You get better audio from a CD using digital > extraction (for example you can correct errors by re-reading sectors, > etc) than by just trusting the DAC on the drive & soundcard. But it's > more work to get that right. Linux applications are necessarily written for a different audience than windows applications. Your comments indicate that perhaps you are not part of the intended audience. > Didn't anyone ever head of "genius is in the details"? With all the > fscking money Red Hat and IBM and Novell sink into Linux development, > and all the stupid hype about "Linux on the desktop", you would think > that by now there would be someone, somewhere, whose JOB it is to catch > things like this before they get out the door. > > Depressing. How much money did you sink into Linux development? I agree that 'linux on the desktop' is stupid hype. My friends and family all trying to use linux is one of my recurring nightmares. I no more want the average person to use linux than i want blind people to drive. I'll give them driving lessons when they can see the road. Might be nice if average people were using OSX or something, though. Linux isn't for most people. Sounds like it's not for you. Please go away, we have things to do. |
From: Marc <ma...@ha...> - 2005-02-28 23:17:33
|
Le 28 F=E9vrier 2005 17:43, Eric Jorgensen a =E9crit=A0: > I agree that 'linux on the desktop' is stupid hype. My friends and > family all trying to use linux is one of my recurring nightmares. Having nightmares about Gnu/Linux is certainly a bad thing. You should have= =20 nightmares about buddies seeking your support for using Windows, you'd feel= =20 much better. ;-) > I no more want the average person to use linux than i want blind people > to drive. I'll give them driving lessons when they can see the road. Might > be nice if average people were using OSX or something, though. There's a Linux distribution for blinds, and a genteleman using this=20 distribution is on the linux-audio-user list. He seems to be more creative= =20 than most non-blind people... A general comment: those expecting computers to be like toasters should=20 definitely use toasters, not computers. :-) =2D- Marc |
From: Eric J. <al...@xm...> - 2005-03-01 00:53:29
|
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:17:21 -0500 Marc Lavall=E9e <ma...@ha...> wrote: > Le 28 F=E9vrier 2005 17:43, Eric Jorgensen a =E9crit=A0: > > I agree that 'linux on the desktop' is stupid hype. My friends and > > family all trying to use linux is one of my recurring nightmares. >=20 > Having nightmares about Gnu/Linux is certainly a bad thing. You should > have nightmares about buddies seeking your support for using Windows, > you'd feel much better. ;-) Most people have a hard enough time figuring out windows. Windows has problems but it's largely homogeneous and the vast majority of problems have a solution that fits into one of a few different categories. Since it is largely homogeneous the solutions are frequently well documented, with pictures. And since it is so ubiquitous, there are a lot of people around - who are not me - who know how to fix it.=20 I once advocated the use of OS/2 rather than Windows 3.1. Some of the people i briefly converted may never forgive me for their experience with it, and OS/2 3.0 was far easier to use than most linux distributions. My nightmare is of, for example, my cook-in-training brother installing some mystical distribution that claims to run everything but which really just has a year old snapshot of wine on it and some really ambitious perl scripts. And then getting a phone call every time some game doesn't run quite right.=20 Also, like i was saying, there is a matter of intended audiences. Windows started using cdda extraction for cd playing by default almost 7 years ago, and have it disabled when the device doesn't appear to support it.=20 This decision must have something to do with knowing that their intended audience can't be troubled to figure out on their own what to check when they can't hear their cd player.=20 A linux user is expected to have some sort of set of mental tools for this kind of problem solving.=20 > > I no more want the average person to use linux than i want blind > > people > > to drive. I'll give them driving lessons when they can see the road. > > Might be nice if average people were using OSX or something, though. >=20 > There's a Linux distribution for blinds, and a genteleman using this=20 > distribution is on the linux-audio-user list. He seems to be more > creative than most non-blind people... I'm sure, and blind people have been some of the most competent computer users I've known, but you don't see many of 'em at Nascar races. > A general comment: those expecting computers to be like toasters should=20 > definitely use toasters, not computers. :-) mmm, toast . . . . At any rate, if someone wants a computer on which everything ostensibly works out of the box, they should poney up the dough for a good macintosh, and give Steve Jobs hell if it doesn't live up to their expectations. They certainly should not install linux and come whining to me when they hit the first tiny little bump.=20 I spent some time in internet help desk gulag. A large, international ISP. Lets just call them The Soul Crusher.=20 So, one day, a woman calls and says "I just helped my friend buy her first computer. We are two women with no computer experience, and we just got back from CompUSA. Her son is paying for her internet access and already subscribed, how do we set this up?"=20 Like anyone in my shoes would have done, I muted the headset, muttered several obscenities, pondered switching over to delivering pizza to get the rent paid, sighed heavily, unmuted the headset, and said "OK, what screen are you at now?" "Screen?" "What do you see on the computer's screen" "It's still in the box"=20 "OK, you'll need to unpack it"=20 (whispering to friend: "he says to unpack it") "OK, hold on" (sounds of cardboard and styrofoam) "OK, it's all set up"=20 "Alright, what do you see on the screen?" "whaa?"=20 "Is it turned on yet?"=20 (whispering to friend: "He says to turn it on") "It's starting up" You can see where this is going. Anyone can. I'm looking at my watch and seeing that there are two hours until the end of my shift, I've got a break coming up, and I'm probably going to miss my break and go home late.=20 But, it turned out to be a brand new imac. And it launched directly into a wizard that asked all the right questions. And i was off the phone in about five minutes.=20 OSX saved a tiny piece of my sanity that day. It's also not windows, and undernieth all the gewgaws and gargoyles lives a mostly-unix-like system.=20 I vote for the masses using something like that, rather than something that i would use, or something from redmond.=20 =20 |
From: F. H. <hei...@am...> - 2005-03-01 12:27:19
|
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Eric Jorgensen wrote: > On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:17:21 -0500 > Marc Lavall=E9e <ma...@ha...> wrote: > >> Le 28 F=E9vrier 2005 17:43, Eric Jorgensen a =E9crit=A0: >>> I agree that 'linux on the desktop' is stupid hype. My friends and >>> family all trying to use linux is one of my recurring nightmares. >> >> Having nightmares about Gnu/Linux is certainly a bad thing. You should >> have nightmares about buddies seeking your support for using Windows, >> you'd feel much better. ;-) > Most people have a hard enough time figuring out windows. Windows has > problems but it's largely homogeneous and the vast majority of problems > have a solution that fits into one of a few different categories. Since i= t > is largely homogeneous the solutions are frequently well documented, with > pictures. And since it is so ubiquitous, there are a lot of people around= - > who are not me - who know how to fix it. I work with Windows every day, but I am not a full time admin. I've found= =20 its often hard to find the dialog box that will make everything right, as= =20 it is often are to find the right knowledge base article to solve the=20 problem. This way may be a bit better but we are talking "cubic money"=20 that has been put in to solve the problem. I don't know if you noticed,=20 but Windows only improves substantially when M$ has competition, like=20 OS/2, Linux and to a lesser extent Apple. > > I once advocated the use of OS/2 rather than Windows 3.1. Some of the > people i briefly converted may never forgive me for their experience with > it, and OS/2 3.0 was far easier to use than most Linux distributions. I am an OS/2 user/advocate from way back. I still have it installed but=20 don't use it much anymore. It certainly has its share of issues. I have to throw in "Amiga" here too. :) > A Linux user is expected to have some sort of set of mental tools for > this kind of problem solving. This brings me to the point finally, before people start in on the "off=20 topic" rant. It would be nice it someone wrote a general, "this is the=20 layout/topology/design of Unix and this is where you might start looking=20 in order to solve problems" document. It might start by explaining the=20 boot process, daemons, inittab, rc?.d/initd directory structure and=20 proceed to the layout and contents of the /dev, /etc, /lib, and /var=20 directories. I think a bit on *.la (libtool) files and *.omf (for Gnome),= =20 and the like, files would be worthy topics as well. It seems like a=20 chapter on PC hardware/multimedia would be necessary as well. Alsa, with=20 its on peculiarities, obviously fits well in a frame work as described=20 above. I have found all this information is available in various books and howtos= =20 somewhere, but collecting it in a nice document might help some newbies as= =20 well as keep traffic down on some lists. It's not going to help getting the M-Audio 2496 Audiophile working under=20 Linux on my G4 though. Fred |
From: Jack M. N. <jn...@ja...> - 2005-03-03 01:38:02
|
F. Heitkamp wrote: > > This brings me to the point finally, before people start in on the > "off topic" rant. It would be nice it someone wrote a general, "this > is the layout/topology/design of Unix and this is where you might > start looking in order to solve problems" document. It might start by > explaining the boot process, daemons, inittab, rc?.d/initd directory > structure and proceed to the layout and contents of the /dev, /etc, > /lib, and /var directories. I think a bit on *.la (libtool) files and > *.omf (for Gnome), and the like, files would be worthy topics as well. > It seems like a chapter on PC hardware/multimedia would be necessary > as well. Alsa, with its on peculiarities, obviously fits well in a > frame work as described above. > > I have found all this information is available in various books and > howtos somewhere, but collecting it in a nice document might help some > newbies as well as keep traffic down on some lists. > I'd like to second that, but with a more restricted goal: Develop a debugging decision tree and flow chart for those who are trying to get ALSA to work for them. For example, at the top/root one would have: "Do you get any sound at all?" A "yes" would lead to one branch, a "no" to another. In my case the answer would be "no". The first question in that branch might be: "Do you get sound under Windows?" in order to get to a possible hardware problem. And so on. This process could all be set up in an on-line database running MySQL and PHP, for example. Clearly this would take more thought, effort and testing to make it usable to a large number of those who frequent this list but it might have substantial payoffs for the furtherment of ALSA and Linux, desktop or otherwise (although our server, running RH9.0, doesn't have a sound card). Any volunteers? -- Jack M. Nilles |
From: Lee R. <rlr...@jo...> - 2005-03-03 04:04:59
|
On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 17:36 -0800, Jack M. Nilles wrote: > Develop a debugging decision tree and flow chart for those who are > trying to get ALSA to work for them. > For example, at the top/root one would have: "Do you get any sound at > all?" A "yes" would lead to one branch, a "no" to another. In my case > the answer would be "no". The first question in that branch might be: > "Do you get sound under Windows?" in order to get to a possible hardware > problem. And so on. This process could all be set up in an on-line > database running MySQL and PHP, for example. > > Clearly this would take more thought, effort and testing to make it > usable to a large number of those who frequent this list but it might > have substantial payoffs for the furtherment of ALSA and Linux, desktop > or otherwise (although our server, running RH9.0, doesn't have a sound > card). The problem with this is that if your sound doesn't Just Work it usually means there's a bug. And the real solution is to get that bug fixed. So any tool of this type would be instantly obsolete. Of course we could cover common processes. Often by the time a large number of users report an issue, the bug is fixed in ALSA CVS. Then users run into problems like not having the right kernel sources installed. This is an area that could be covered well by a decision tree process. Lee |
From: Jack M. N. <jn...@ja...> - 2005-03-03 19:11:09
|
Lee Revell wrote: >On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 17:36 -0800, Jack M. Nilles wrote: > > >>Develop a debugging decision tree and flow chart for those who are >>trying to get ALSA to work for them. >>For example, at the top/root one would have: "Do you get any sound at >>all?" A "yes" would lead to one branch, a "no" to another. In my case >>the answer would be "no". The first question in that branch might be: >>"Do you get sound under Windows?" in order to get to a possible hardware >>problem. And so on. This process could all be set up in an on-line >>database running MySQL and PHP, for example. >> >>Clearly this would take more thought, effort and testing to make it >>usable to a large number of those who frequent this list but it might >>have substantial payoffs for the furtherment of ALSA and Linux, desktop >>or otherwise (although our server, running RH9.0, doesn't have a sound >>card). >> >> > >The problem with this is that if your sound doesn't Just Work it usually >means there's a bug. And the real solution is to get that bug fixed. >So any tool of this type would be instantly obsolete. > >Of course we could cover common processes. Often by the time a large >number of users report an issue, the bug is fixed in ALSA CVS. Then >users run into problems like not having the right kernel sources >installed. This is an area that could be covered well by a decision >tree process. > > OK, I'll settle for that. Right now one must search through dozens of emails in hopes of getting some clues as the where the problem(s) exist. You, Ladisch Clemens, Takashi Iwai and others have provided valuable pieces of the search process but it would be a great help to get it better organized and consolidated. I know, like documenting a program, that's not where the fun is, but how about a prioritized "what-to-do/test-if" list? That is, first check this, then this, then that, etc., with clues as to how to perform the check (run alsaconf or aplay or?). For example, in my case I have a sound card (Turtle Beach Santa Cruz) that worked well under SuSE 9.0, works well now under Win XP, and works not at all under SuSE 9.2. I have vainly tried many things suggested on this list--and have not yet resorted to others, such as starting over with debian or RHF3 because of the hassle involved and the feeling that if I could only find and fix the bug all would be well. The problem is that I don't know the step-by-step procedure to do that and I don't have tons of spare time, economic forces being what they are. Since I do some international phoning via Skype I am currently restricted to using XP, where the sound card works. So far I have 102 ALSA-related emails that I have saved in the past few weeks in hopes that there's a clue hidden in there somewhere when I have time to assess them. So, what should be the first step in this search process? And the next? Thanks in advance |
From: Lee R. <rlr...@jo...> - 2005-03-03 19:14:42
|
On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 11:11 -0800, Jack M. Nilles wrote: > For example, in my case I have a sound card (Turtle Beach Santa Cruz) > that worked well under SuSE 9.0, works well now under Win XP, and works > not at all under SuSE 9.2. I have vainly tried many things suggested on > this list--and have not yet resorted to others, such as starting over > with debian or RHF3 because of the hassle involved and the feeling that > if I could only find and fix the bug all would be well. The problem is > that I don't know the step-by-step procedure to do that and I don't have > tons of spare time, economic forces being what they are. Since I do some > international phoning via Skype I am currently restricted to using XP, > where the sound card works. So far I have 102 ALSA-related emails that I > have saved in the past few weeks in hopes that there's a clue hidden in > there somewhere when I have time to assess them. > > So, what should be the first step in this search process? And the next? The first step in that process is definitely to file a SuSE bug report. Bug reports like that (serious regressions when upgrading to newer distro) normally get a lot of attention. I don't know what bug tracker SuSE uses so I can't be more specific. Lee |
From: Michael G. <mg...@te...> - 2005-03-01 06:16:02
|
> Linux applications are necessarily written for a different audience th= an > windows applications. Your comments indicate that perhaps you are not part > of the intended audience.=20 BS Michael =2D-=20 Vote against SPAM - see http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/ Michael Gerdau email: mg...@te... GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver |
From: Axel B. <axe...@gm...> - 2005-03-01 08:19:13
|
Hallo Eric, ** Reply to message from Eric Jorgensen <al...@xm...> on Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:43:08 -0700 > I agree that 'linux on the desktop' is stupid hype. My friends and > family all trying to use linux is one of my recurring nightmares. Disagree. It points out that people completely unexperienced in computers come around with a 'Linux on a desktop' very well (I'm talking about USING not SETTING UP or ADMINISTERING). Also persons who used long time ago a Mac have not so many problems. 'Experienced' windows-users are a different story: They expect it to work exactly the same way as windows, which of course cant work out. Ax -- Dr.-Ing. Axel K. Braun Mobile: +49.173.7003.154 VoIP/Skype: axxite |
From: Lee R. <rlr...@jo...> - 2005-03-01 19:21:00
|
On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 09:19 +0100, Axel Braun wrote: > Hallo Eric, > > ** Reply to message from Eric Jorgensen <al...@xm...> on Mon, 28 Feb > 2005 15:43:08 -0700 > > > I agree that 'linux on the desktop' is stupid hype. My friends and > > family all trying to use linux is one of my recurring nightmares. > > Disagree. > It points out that people completely unexperienced in computers come around > with a 'Linux on a desktop' very well (I'm talking about USING not SETTING UP > or ADMINISTERING). Also persons who used long time ago a Mac have not so many > problems. > 'Experienced' windows-users are a different story: They expect it to work > exactly the same way as windows, which of course cant work out. Not necessarily. They just expect Linux to copy the things Windows does right, and improve on the things it does wrong. I think this is a completely reasonable expectation. Lee |
From: Eric J. <al...@xm...> - 2005-03-01 20:45:06
|
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:20:32 -0500 Lee Revell <rlr...@jo...> wrote: > On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 09:19 +0100, Axel Braun wrote: > > Hallo Eric, > > > > ** Reply to message from Eric Jorgensen <al...@xm...> on Mon, 28 > > Feb 2005 15:43:08 -0700 > > > > > I agree that 'linux on the desktop' is stupid hype. My friends and > > > family all trying to use linux is one of my recurring nightmares. > > > > Disagree. > > It points out that people completely unexperienced in computers come > > around with a 'Linux on a desktop' very well (I'm talking about USING > > not SETTING UP or ADMINISTERING). Also persons who used long time ago a > > Mac have not so many problems. > > 'Experienced' windows-users are a different story: They expect it to > > work exactly the same way as windows, which of course cant work out. > > Not necessarily. They just expect Linux to copy the things Windows does > right, and improve on the things it does wrong. I think this is a > completely reasonable expectation. I disagree. Linux is a different operating system with a different history born out of different objectives. There is not, and should not be, one OS for every user and every task, be it free or proprietary. I don't believe it's appropriate, accurate, or laudable to promote linux as a windows replacement. I don't think it's a logical or laudable objective to propose that linux should be made able to take the place of windows for the majority of windows users. It is my considered opinion that the design objectives of a high quality linux run counter to the needs of the average desktop user. Among those needs is homogeneity. The herd mentality is a very strong force in the lives of the average end user. I don't think we can satisfy that need, and i don't think we should try. I don't see the value in pandering to users who will ultimately have no more use for linux than they will for a train set. |
From: Lee R. <rlr...@jo...> - 2005-03-01 22:08:26
|
On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 13:45 -0700, Eric Jorgensen wrote: > On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:20:32 -0500 > Lee Revell <rlr...@jo...> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 09:19 +0100, Axel Braun wrote: > > > Hallo Eric, > > > > > > ** Reply to message from Eric Jorgensen <al...@xm...> on Mon, 28 > > > Feb 2005 15:43:08 -0700 > > > > > > > I agree that 'linux on the desktop' is stupid hype. My friends and > > > > family all trying to use linux is one of my recurring nightmares. > > > > > > Disagree. > > > It points out that people completely unexperienced in computers come > > > around with a 'Linux on a desktop' very well (I'm talking about USING > > > not SETTING UP or ADMINISTERING). Also persons who used long time ago a > > > Mac have not so many problems. > > > 'Experienced' windows-users are a different story: They expect it to > > > work exactly the same way as windows, which of course cant work out. > > > > Not necessarily. They just expect Linux to copy the things Windows does > > right, and improve on the things it does wrong. I think this is a > > completely reasonable expectation. > > > I disagree. > > Linux is a different operating system with a different history born out > of different objectives. > > There is not, and should not be, one OS for every user and every task, > be it free or proprietary. > > I don't believe it's appropriate, accurate, or laudable to promote > linux as a windows replacement. > > I don't think it's a logical or laudable objective to propose that linux > should be made able to take the place of windows for the majority of > windows users. > > It is my considered opinion that the design objectives of a high quality > linux run counter to the needs of the average desktop user. > > Among those needs is homogeneity. The herd mentality is a very strong > force in the lives of the average end user. I don't think we can satisfy > that need, and i don't think we should try. > > I don't see the value in pandering to users who will ultimately have no > more use for linux than they will for a train set. I guess we agree to disagree then. As I see it, Linux can provide a superset of the functionality of any other OS. So a Windows replacement is just one of the many many applications for a GNU/Linux system. I don't see any inherent conflict. Maybe I should have said GNOME, instead of Linux. I think the GNOME developers would agree that one of the many intended uses for their system is a Windows/Mac replacement. Of course it can do much more, but this is something users want to do with Linux, so it's inevitable it will be possible at some point. Anyway my only real point was that the GNOME cd player should play cds in digital mode by default, the way Windows media player does. I never meant to imply that the ultimate goal of Linux should be to be a Windows clone. Lee |
From: Brian L S. <br...@ga...> - 2005-03-02 16:36:13
|
> I don't think it's a logical or laudable objective to propose that linux > should be made able to take the place of windows for the majority of > windows users. > I switched to UNIX 20 years ago because of superior standards-based, systems development and integration capabilities. That is even more true with Linux. That a general purpose OS with those properties is needed is obvious. Like it or not Linux is it. I don't own Windows and I can do whatever I need with Linux. Same for millions of others (albeit a relatively small percentage of the desktop market). SUN, SGI, DEC, IBM, Dell, etc., all promulgated a UNIX/Linux desktop at one time or another. It's not a dumb idea. It's here. brian |
From: Eric J. <al...@xm...> - 2005-03-02 16:52:38
|
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 11:36:03 -0500 Brian L Scipioni <br...@ga...> wrote: > > > I don't think it's a logical or laudable objective to propose that > > linux > > should be made able to take the place of windows for the majority of > > windows users. > > > I switched to UNIX 20 years ago because of superior standards-based, > systems development and integration capabilities. That is even more > true with Linux. That a general purpose OS with those properties is > needed is obvious. Like it or not Linux is it. > > I don't own Windows and I can do whatever I need with Linux. Same for > millions of others (albeit a relatively small percentage of the desktop > market). SUN, SGI, DEC, IBM, Dell, etc., all promulgated a UNIX/Linux > desktop at one time or another. It's not a dumb idea. It's here. Linux is my desktop system as well, but it will never be something i could load onto my mother's computer with a clear conscience, not without it becoming something i wouldn't be interested in using. |
From: <ro...@vo...> - 2005-03-03 06:48:41
|
Navajanje Eric Jorgensen <al...@xm...>: > Linux is my desktop system as well, but it will never be something i > could load onto my mother's computer with a clear conscience, not witho= ut > it becoming something i wouldn't be interested in using. Oh, so it is kept semi-useless on purpose ? There is a secret requirement of "it must have at least 150 bugs before i= t can be released" ? Like "I don't feel special (smarter then other peopler) if my mother can use it too" ? Even on small issues sometimes the response is "It does not work ? That is not a bug, it just show how smart I am, because I can workaround it, while you can't. You're stupid". (the latest is more about recent debian development, not alsa) Oh, and I asked on 3 mail list by now, how to queeze out 6 (or at least 4= ) channel sound on linux (ALSA or whatever works) and did not get a single useful reply. Not even an unuseful. The only thinsg I got were: - this is not the appripriate list ( it was LKML) - try ALSA, OSS is "old" ( even if the OSS driver clearly supports 6-cha= nnel output) So what ? Nobody in the world knows how to make multi-channel output on l= inux/alsa ? Regards, David Balazic ---------------------------------------------------------------- Varno. Enostavno. Vredno. Internet dodatne storitve. http://www.voljatel.si/storitve/ |
From: Mark C. <ma...@re...> - 2005-03-03 07:46:36
|
ro...@vo... wrote: > Navajanje Eric Jorgensen <al...@xm...>: >> Linux is my desktop system as well, but it will never be something i >>could load onto my mother's computer with a clear conscience, not without >>it becoming something i wouldn't be interested in using. My mother is 86yo and has been using linux for at least 5 years. It's the only system I can leave on all the time so she only has to bump the mouse and it's "alive". Win98 (5 years ago) would just die after 2 days. > Oh, so it is kept semi-useless on purpose ? > ... > (the latest is more about recent debian development, not alsa) Shh, we don't need to know about the latest debian flamefest :-) > Oh, and I asked on 3 mail list by now, how to queeze out 6 (or at least 4) > ... > So what ? Nobody in the world knows how to make multi-channel output on linux/alsa ? Might depend on how you ask the question. This could be a useful start... http://alsa.opensrc.org/index.php?page=SurroundSound --markc |
From: Axel B. <axe...@gm...> - 2005-03-01 21:32:30
|
Hallo Lee, ** Reply to message from Lee Revell <rlr...@jo...> on Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:20:32 -0500 > On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 09:19 +0100, Axel Braun wrote: > > Hallo Eric, > > > > ** Reply to message from Eric Jorgensen <al...@xm...> on Mon, 28 Feb > > 2005 15:43:08 -0700 > > > > > I agree that 'linux on the desktop' is stupid hype. My friends and > > > family all trying to use linux is one of my recurring nightmares. > > > > Disagree. > > It points out that people completely unexperienced in computers come around > > with a 'Linux on a desktop' very well (I'm talking about USING not SETTING UP > > or ADMINISTERING). Also persons who used long time ago a Mac have not so many > > problems. > > 'Experienced' windows-users are a different story: They expect it to work > > exactly the same way as windows, which of course cant work out. > > Not necessarily. They just expect Linux to copy the things Windows does > right, and improve on the things it does wrong. I think this is a > completely reasonable expectation. Exactly.....so it HAS to be different, otherwise it could not be better ;-)) -- Dr.-Ing. Axel K. Braun Mobile: +49.173.7003.154 VoIP/Skype: axxite Yo, wir schaffen das! (Bob, der Baumeister) |