"Rough Edges"

[Cory K.]

Gustin Johnson wrote:
> Cory K. wrote:
> | Gustin Johnson wrote:
> |> For production I am still using 64studio.  You have to start qjackctl
> |> from the menu, but by default everything (that I use anyway) is jack
> |> aware. They also ship with an RT kernel by default.  There are 32 and
> |> 64 bit variants.
> |
> | How is any of this different from Studio?
> |
> | -Cory \m/
> The project has been around a lot longer, and as a result has IMO fewer
> rough edges. 

What rough edges? :) Without specifics, it's just a feeling. Just
confidence.

> The team behind it was the team involved in Agnula/DeMudi.
> ~ What this means is that they have been doing this for a long time,
> predating the existence of Ubuntu.

Only 1 from Agnula does 64Studio.

> Currently they are based around
> Debian Etch.

Many of their packages are not from Etch but its the base yes.

> Why I bring it up is that I have them in production and it has been rock
> solid.  On the very same hardware (I have two workstations, both 939
> based dual core machines) it was much more stable, particularly Ardour
> and jack.

Last I looked, they were using the same versions. U. Studio syncs from
Debian for these packages.

> This is not a knock on Ubuntu Studio, they have just been
> doing it longer.  For me it has been a far better experience out of the
> box.

Still, without specifics, Ubuntu Studio can't improve.

> I am still hesitant to recommend Ubuntu Studio to inexperienced
> (with respect to Linux) users.

Any use-specific distro like this I wouldn't.

> You are correct, the projects are ridiculously similar, and there a lot
> of room for collaboration.

And we do. Much more than you know. ;)

> Having said that, I follow this project because the rest of my machines
> are Ubuntu based.   I do some work on my Ubuntu laptop, and this project
> has meant that I spend less time on my environment and more time doing
> what I love.
>
> Cheers,