OT: PulseAudio On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 14:02 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote: > Am Fri, 27 Jan 2012 21:21:01 -0600 > schrieb C Anthony Risinger <anthony@xxxxxxx>: > > IMO, > > systemd/pulseaudio work fantastic, and are orders of magnitude better > > than their predecessors, and only move the ecosystem forward. > No, PulseAudio doesn't work fantastic, it's pure crap as long as it > can't handle every sound and audio card, which ALSA, btw., does > perfectly out-of-the-box. > > And, no, artificially crippling a (semi-)professional audio card down > to stereo with a strange ALSA configuration is not a solution for this. The majority of Linux users on non-audio Linux mailing lists praise PA, OTOH as soon as they run into trouble regarding to PA, the Linux "pro-"audio users will help them to fix it, usually it's not that majority of users who praise PA, giving the needed hints. I always had issues with PA and I never had an issue when I replaced PA by dummy packages, but seemingly there's a work flow by a majority of Linux users, where having PA installed is an advantage. You might take a look at Debian users mailing list. On KDE4 PA is using 2% CPU already when doing nothing. For some people using 2% for nothing isn't a bug, it's ok for them. > And why should I trust other software by [someone] if he isn't able to > get this one software working perfectly. Why should I trust that a musician is a good drummer, when she's a bad guitarist? Perhaps because she's a drummer ;). - Ralf
