On Tuesday 17 February 2009 22:21:44 Anders Dahnielson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 21:41, Arnold Krille <arnold@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tuesday 17 February 2009 21:06:29 Anders Dahnielson wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 20:39, Arnold Krille <arnold@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:30:53 Ken Restivo wrote: > > > > > OK well that throws a monkey wrench into my plan to convert the > > studio > > > > from > > > > > Mac/ProTools to Linux/Ardour. Damn. > > > > Maybe you can start by convincing them about Mac/Ardour? > > > > I don't really understand why mac-users (especially if they paid > > premium > > > > money > > > > for hardware) should switch to Linux where half their hardware isn't > > > > supported... Shouldn't ardour (through jackd/portaudio) play > > > > perfectly one the > > > > digi-stuff? > > > Yes. but I think you answered the question yourself in the last > > > sentence. > > I did? I didn't say "Make them buy overpriced proprietary stuff to use it > > with > > free software", I said "If they already happen to have the bad > > proprietary stuff, why try to convince them off the full free ensemble > > where they have to > > spend more money on new hardware if they could just do a smooth > > transition by > > switching one component at a time?" Applies both for Mac/ProTool and > > Mac/Motu... > > Or is the digi-stuff not usable with apples' portaudio? > Oh, I think I missread. Sorry. I probably mixed up portaudio and coreaudio to confuse you further... Why are they all named *audio??? :-) Have fun, Arnold
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
