Making Music with FOSS

[Hartmut Noack]

Am 25.04.2011 12:16, schrieb Ralf:
> On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 10:43 +0100, mark wrote:
>> I'd like to watch the webcast too.
>>
>> But hang on a second folks, we're free software advocates, aren't we? So
>> why are we trying to find work-arounds, when the problem is that a
>> webcast about free software should have been published in a free format?

*Every* given website should use formats available to eveybody on any 
computer for stuff as simple as audio/video.
It is extra-crude of course, if somebody talks about free software and 
tries to do so using formats that are not natively available on a Linux-PC.

> And this not for the first time! I'm pissed about websites that open
> pop-ups, to abuse people with the philosophy of libre computing etc. and
> I never ever will be friend of people who do use Google Analytics, force
> us to use Windows stuff, allow scripts to run on our machines etc..

There is a significant difference between using a format, that is not 
officially available for any modern PC-OS or using technology like 
JavaScript that is as free as HTML or CSS.
I agree, whatsoever, that the AJAX-Stuff should be non-obstrusive (as it 
is in most cases when implemented by pros).

> Btw. I still didn't find a replacement for the evil Google :(, but
> excepted of Google I guess I don't need to visit websites I don't like.
>
>> Surely it would make more sense for us, as a group, to say to the
>> publisher something like, "This is no good, please can you find a way of
>> publishing that meets the needs of your target audience, as this clearly
>> doesn't."
>>
>> Would anyone care to join me in this?
>
> Mark, what's about this Ardour issue? Isn't Ardour without being an Apple plugin host on Linux,

Please Ralf, could you elborate on that? You cannot use Ardour as an 
"Apple plugin host on Linux" and there is no such thing. Ardour 
*compiled for MacOSX* can host Audio Unit plugins - as it runs under MacOSX.

> not a full version of Ardour for Linux?

Everybody who wants to know, knows, that Ardour for Linux is free as in 
beer also as it is available as a native package for most distros.

There is a special offering from ardour.org for users of MacOSX, that do 
not want to take the complicated task of compiling Ardour on the Mac 
from source. It is a ready-to-run binary for MacOSX. If you want this, 
you need to make a donation (that is 1:1 in compliance with the GPL, we 
talk about a fee for a special comfort/service in the distribution of a 
software, not about any proprietary licensing).
Whoever wants ardour without payment for MacOSX, can still download a 
binary. This one will deliberately fail to save settings for AU-plugins.

And everybody on the Mac who wants everything whithout spending any 
money is still welcome to download and compile the source-codes, that 
are of course available for everybody without any registration, pop-ups 
or anything:

svn co http://subversion.ardour.org/svn/ardour2/branches/2.0-ongoing


>
> Perhaps it's not about Linux, FLOSS is for Windows and Mac too and if
> this kind of open source community is using MacOs and Windows, beside
> e.g. RedHat Linux and .arf should be a common format there, why
> shouldn't they use it?

Because, if I want to distribute something, accessability for as many 
users as possible is priority No1.

> Regarding to this, I'm just pissed about the
> 'everything is better using FLOSS, but proprietary stuff' attitude, by
> people who don't use FLOSS stuff only. Private I do use FLOSS only,
> excepted of the graphics driver and similar, but for making music FLOSS
> is far away of being just nearly as good as proprietary software,
> regarding to technical issues

It depends on what you want to do with it. Everything, that works the 
way you want for the things you want to do, is perfect. ProTools can do 
many things, you cannot do in Ardour but if you do not need these 
things, this is irrelevant.

> , of course, ethics etc. are other issues.
>
> No, I won't join you in this. Btw. we're already using FLOSS. The target
> group might be people who don't use FLOSS, but who do have all kind of
> consumer apps on their fucking Apple and Microsoft operating systems.
>
> IMO the problem is much bigger, it's about the difference of a consumer
> computer and a producer computer, not only about the differences between
> FLOSS and proprietary software.
>
>
>