[ubuntu-studio-users] What needs to be said.

[Alf Haakon Lund]

What problem? ;-)

I think it's a great gift that we have a special flavour of Ubuntu 
packed with all sorts of media tools. Heading towards free choice of DE 
and metas it will only get better.

While I don't know or understand or bother to find out how to use most 
of the programs available, I appreciate that they're there. When finding 
solutions on the internet, sometimes it turns out the program I need is 
already installed, while if not, it's likely to be found in the 
repositories.

Unless running rather ancient hardware space shouldn't be an issue, 
either. The only complaint I would agree with is that program 
descriptions are sometimes unhelpful, at least to us beginners. "LV2 
plugins host for JACK" can sound pretty cryptic...

Also a bit confusing is the libav / ffmpeg schism. I had some trouble 
creating dvd iso's. To solve the problem I tried to use ffmpeg instead 
of ffmpeg (a bit tongue-in-cheek, yes) and I'm still not sure if I 
succeeded.

But basically I think Ubuntu Studio is a great project and that folks 
like Kaj who spend countless hours on it... Well, I hope you hear as 
often as you deserve that your work is appreciated!

Al F




On 06. okt. 2013 20:10, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> The solution to this problem will be fixed for 14.04, namely, the
> user will have the choice which metas to install. Maybe it might even
> be worth thinking about per package selection, but this remains to be
> seen.
>
> In your case it sounds to me that what you want to do is not install
> any metas, and add individual packages afterwards, am I correct?
>
> The whole point of the metas is to provide all possible workflows,
> and at the same time work as a showcase for new users. It's a way to
> show what is available. There's no way we can make the metas suite
> every individuals particular needs. And if someone wants to see a
> wider range of metas, I'd like to see compelling reasons for doing
> so. Currently, the ISO is quite small, about 2.5 GB. The menu is not
> cluttered, thanks to our custom categorization. From my POV, it's
> pretty well organized in that sense.
>
> Ardour is not more advanced than it needs to be for what it is
> designed for. It's the only decent recording/mixing application for
> Linux, if you ask me. Audacity is not a recording tool at all. It's
> an audio wave editor. All though you can use it to both do multitrack
> recording and mixing, that is not what it was designed for, and it's
> quite poor at it as well.
>
> There's no getting around it. If you need to perform a task, you need
> to learn how to do it. Sometimes, what you need is to code stuff
> yourself, which is what I've found and which is why I use puredata.
> But, granted, not everyone will want to do that. Not everyone will
> want to use LMMS either. And some people will only want to use
> supercollider.
>
> Making applications easier to use is not something we can change in
> Ubuntu Studio, other than providing documentation and doing
> tutorials. If you need smarter applications, you need to either code
> them yourself, or help develop existing ones. We just provide them on
> our ISO.
>
> There's been talk about providing an abstraction, in the form of an
> application or by using existing tools for sessions management, to
> make it easier for new users to find how to use the existing
> applications in the system. But, someone will need to develop that..