Forging a new path.

[Luis de Bethencourt]

On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Hakan Koseoglu
<hakan.koseoglu at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ah, a long discussion. Just to cut it short:
>

Thanks to everybody for being part of this thread. It is being very
useful for everybody and for Ubuntu Studio as a whole.

I reply to this email because it divided the topics nicely. Then I
will reply to specific interesting things that have been said.

> - Skype : some people just need it. I use it extensively with my
> Ubuntu Studio for my podcasts.
>
> - Other apps: I'm not making any money out of music, I use Ubuntu
> Studio because it's the best of the multi-purpose distributions
> designed with audio/graphics in mind. I can compile C code, write Java
> and do recording in the evenings w/o a single reboot and I really like
> it that way.

Other apps
Free/Open Software has the power of choice. Ubuntu Studio doesn't
force you to have Skype, or any other desktop apps. Even in the case
of the stuff that gets pulled in by the desktop task meta, this
software can be removed with apt or synaptic. In the case of Skype you
have to install it yourself (from the site since its closed source).

So if you don't want something, don't have it. But somebody else may
want it, so it is nice to have it available.

In a personal note: I run 3 different operating systems in a daily
basis, and I do this in different machines just to avoid having to
reboot to switch. I understand people wont be happy with having to
lose total functionality of  machien (meanwhile it reboots), to then
switch to an other functionality. Time is limited for all of us.

Also, my personal experience is: having to switch/reboot to continue
your creative project, will eventually affect your motivation and
sometimes procrastinate.

>
> - Geared for audio only: I hope not. There are plenty of distributions
> for that. I installed Musix 2.0 alpha today and it worked out of the
> box. Kudos to them. I would prefer my experience with Jaunty Studio
> will be the same (so far so good with the betas minus KDE 4(VIA
> chipset bug already open and confirmed but not fixed yet - (un)
> fortunately it works with Jaunty + Gnome (yikes!).

Audio specific
I've followed from the distance a few audio-only linux distros and you
can feel how a big amount of users miss having other sort of apps. As
Gustin commented video syncing is common in audio projects, graphics
for posters, flyers, covers.

This is a mindset and community goal. Multimedia production means
creative community. I see artists as creative talents and usually
multidisciplinar, who play around with any medium at hand and
learn/enjoy any/multiple art forms. So creating a community of
artistic people is superior of a very specific audio oriented.

I think about how Kandinsky used music to create his paintings.

>
> - Pulseaudio vs. Jack : I'd prefer jack to be the default but hey,
> that's life. What I'd prefer is more stuff compiled with Jack support
> out of the box. I really got used to having loads of stuff compiled
> with Jack support on PlanetCCRMA, switching to bog-standard 7.04 was a
> bit of a rude suprise. It's getting better since then but I still
> compile most of my own stuff to catch up or have more libraries
> compiled in. /usr/local here is getting a bit crowded on my main audio
> lappie.
>

Pulseaudio vs Jack
As it has been commented several times, Ubuntu Studio's core team is
very-very small and there is a proportional relation between going
farther away from main Ubuntu and the amount of work/manpower
required.

I understand every singleone of your comments in the topic (and some
of you are very vocal against pulseaudio :P). Luke Yelavich has
commented the proper and easier way to get pulseaudio out of the
system. I'm sorry than in Ubuntu Studio freedom (both as in speach as
in beer) means a little time from the user tweaking. We have limited
time for the project ourselves, but we always offer a workaround.

Pulseaudio's position in Ubuntu Studio for Karmic will be discussed. A
separate mail thread will be created for this :)

> - Longer release cycles following LTS : It's good on paper but not
> really, sorry. I compiled Rackarrak on my 8.04 studio laptop today
> because it's too new to exist on that one. It's brilliant and works
> wonderfully but I am definitely not a newbie and not a regular user
> either (having used Linux for too long helps). Especially Linux Audio
> software is advancing at a very rapid pace, I wouldn't like to
> reinstall/upgrade my laptops every 3 months but years between
> dedicated audio/video software would be a bit too much to bear (I
> don't have the same with my LTS web server, Apache + PHP don't advance
> as they used to).

LTS
Every user has the choice to go from Long Term Support release to the
next LTS release (skipping the intermediary 6 month cycle releases).
So this option is totally avaliable to those who don't need to update
their systems every 6 months.

The Ubuntu Studio team recommended all the users to skip 8.10, and go
from 8.04 to 9.04. But we are aware of the vast amount of users that
are running 8.10 right now, so this proves the fact that there is
enough critical mass that needs/wants up-to-date systems.

Once again, I rely on the power of choice here. If your system works,
is stable as a rock and you have all the features you need: don't
update. If you fancy some of the new toys... go ahead :) Making a 6
month cycle (with 18 months LTS matching main Ubuntu) offers both
options.

>
> - Special Distribution: Well, lately I prefer installing Kubuntu and
> then pulling all of the ubuntustudio metapackages to get the studio
> stuff. If I was installing this lot in a dedicated studio environment
> I'd probably do it from the DVD. I hope creating the dedicated
> environment doesn't take that much of the efforts. Thinking about the
> average Ubuntu studio users (I'd guess it's not the majority of this
> mailing list) I would guess most of the Ubuntu Studio users are people
> who do audio or graphics on the side therefore won't really want just
> the audio stuff. On the other hand, having the special distributions
> work like marketing. I installed it on a couple of friends and they're
> quite happy (I have to admit I tend not to enable the realtime kernels
> on their Grubs).
>
> - Help: well, I run the Ubuntu Studio packages from alpha releases, I
> hope that counts. :)

Help help help help and help
This is what Ubuntu Studio _needs_, and the main reason the future isn't clear.

The core team is drastically small. We need more interaction and
collaboration from users, which I'm not saying isn't happening, what
I'm saying is that there isnt proper communication between different
layers and people. Hakan tests the alphas, but I haven't seen anybody
report success or fail of alpha's in the iso testing pages. Anybody
can go to the Ubuntu Studio wiki (read Gustin's great email about how
to help) and contribute there in a very simple way (writing plain
text), no need for technical expertise.

Please send us a private email to me or Gustin, and let's get that wiki moving!



Once again, thanks for chiming in, showing your love and your
constructive opinions :)
This thread is being very productive.

Luis

>
> All I wanted to say is what you do is not necessarily what everyone
> else does. If we can't find what we need as users, we can just switch
> distributions, move on to something more suitable for us. There are
> plenty of choices, PlanetCCRMA used to be my previous choice of DAW,
> since then there are plenty more arriving to the scene.
>
> IMHO, what puts Ubuntu Studio aside is its resiliency, multi-purpose
> attitude: with minimal amount of work, it becomes an excellent
> distribution to be used for everything. Not perfect but still I think
> it's the best out there for what it can do. I would like to prefer to
> have it that way.
>
> Hmm, what else.. Ah yes...
> Good work! Keep on doing the good stuff.
>
> (Written on a Jaunty i386 laptop with Studio stuff loaded up and it
> works, (apart from KDE, pls, don't get me started... :) ))
>