RE: [Alsa-user] Recent Complaints Threads

[Don Levey]

Comments in-line...

-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart Felenstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 12:48 PM
To: Don Levey
Subject: RE: [Alsa-user] Recent Complaints Threads

My 2cents! are we close to a dolloar yet (see below)

 

Don Levey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Or is this something which strives for widespread acceptance in the broader business world, to be (if not on the desktops) on the approved list of every manager out there?

It has gained large acceptance in the business world.  Large "Fortune 100" companies have been using it and continue to increase it's applicability to their business needs.  Many boxes, devices, etc are being sold for whatever reason run on linux, embedded or otherwise.  Hollywood movies have been edited , processed on Linux systems. 

That I understand - these are the people with whom I work on a day-to-day basis.  But this is server world, not desktop world.  The movie industry is specialised.  Sure, it's desktop work, but we're also talking about a large support staff.  I'm talking about the desktops of people who use Windows and Office.

 

If the latter, then we're not there yet. In many ways, we're not even
close. For all we say about proprietary software, OS, etc, they have
created an expectation that things *work*. While I'm happy to answer
questions for my mother, I'm not there all the time to be her on-site IT
department. I can't take a week or two off of work to dedicate my time to
making sure that her computer functions properly with all (or even most) of
the parts. Until I can feel comfortable putting a linux machine in my
mother's hands, I can't recommend it as a solution for perhaps 75% of the
people I talk to. It's those people who maintain the MS "monopoly".

MS is not a monopoly.  MS has issues as well, and many users experiece a whole mess of problems over things like device drivers for one example.  Run a search or look into Microsoft forums. 

I don't really claim that they are (hence the quotes), but they are ubiquitous in the business world.  Not for servers, but for desktops.  I know about MS driver problems, as I have had them.  But it seems that my problems are fewer and farther between with them than with anything I try to do in linux.  God forbid I should try to get anything other than the stock vesa driver for my video card, or get sound synth. 

 

 
When I see a 1.0.x version number, I expect there to be bugs and problems.
But I expect things to work properly most of the time. It's in the 2.6
kernel? That tells me, perhaps falsely, that this is ready for broad-based
use across a wide variety of hardware. This doesn't appear to be the case.
Am I asking for the ALSA developers to obtain and test every sound boadr on
the market, every chipset? Not at all. I wouldn't mind some sort of clear
chart, as has been suggested, specifying just WHAT is *fully*
supported/tested. Another section, "should work", would be nice, as well as
a "don't hold your breath" section. This should be a reasonable request -
the developers should know against which hardware they test, what passes and
what fails. The middle section, the best-guess list, would probably be the
hardest. Oh, and as long as I'm dreaming, it would be nice to see a clear
and simple explanation of how to tell what chipset is on your card, so that
we can refer to that instead of the manufacturer's model number.

If your using the 2.6 kernel you've accepted the bleeding edge regardless of it's release status it hasn't been out very long in the general population.  If you don't like Alsa, use OSS.  

I agree with you here - I'm not using the 2.6 kernel, for this and other reasons.  What I'm referring to is the fact that the released version of ALSA is the version which seems to be included in an official kernel.  That speaks to a certain confidence in the ALSA software, even if the kernel itself is not as stable as we'd like.

 
I'm sure some people will tell me to stop whining, what do I want for free.
That's OK - but I'd ask in return what they're doing this for. I'm trying
to learn, and trying to be an advocate, but it is often difficult when the
responses I see to concerns such as mine take the tone of STFU.

Just one more opinion, FWIW.

If one wants handholding and the type of support to walk through traces , debugs, etc, then you can still use Linux, just up your ante and pay for support and / or use commercial Linux software.  Other options would be hire a developer or learn to develop on your own.

 

Stuart 

 

...And this brings us back to the MS world.  One of the main features "hyped" for linux is that one is NOT tied to this sort of cost structure.  And sure, you're not - if you're a ceveloper with those sorts of skills, or have a large IT staff at your disposal.  If you're a small business, or a home user, or anyone else who doesn't fit into the above categories, you lose.  And yet there have been pushes to get just these people onto the bandwagon.

 

We shouldn't be positioning this as a competitor to Windows, or people will expect things to work the Windows works (and in the vast majority of cases I've seen, it does work.  I've got a machine I think I needed to reboot once in the past year, due to a power failure).  It's more like (pick your development tool here) - can be customised to be infinitely powerful - but you've got to put in the work.

 -Don