On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 20:09 +1000, Patrick Shirkey wrote: > > But you need a backend > > that can play any pattern any time, with a sync-to-beat trigger feature. > > And live time stretching. > This is a useful comparison. IMO we don't need to implement the second > and third features but they would be nice additions and are definitely > useful. Sure. Just leave one essential feature out. > Several apps are closer than you are suggesting. What we need is > momentum being built not the complete opposite. Explain which apps are closer than I would be suggesting. List which of the features I mentioned are present or lacking for each one. Or let it become clear your statement has no basis. Momentum? How about a direction, first? > > A set of separate tools can never be a replacement (except with a > > not-seen-before sophisticated level of optional integration, perhaps). > I believe this is where the thread is going already. Outline how a set of specialized applications would offer an experience similar to that of AL. A few issues I see: - Window management hassle - Need for global save/restore - Friction do to differences in interface/interaction design > > People can talk about the real or perceived shortcomings of linux audio > > tools all day. Doesn't change a thing. > Often progress only happens in very small increments. Adding zero is no increment. Supporting development (by own effort or financially) of: - Qtractor to reach its goal (I guess Rui is very content with how things go, though, and why shouldn't he?) - Addition of per-pattern play and a track/scene matrix to Ardour (if Paul agrees generally and on specifics) - Development of a backend that offers a set of features containing those outlined earlier, to then continue with adjusting one or the other existing app or writing a new frontend. would be somewhat realistic courses of action, IMO. Breaking out of the conceptual limitations of Hydrogen, LMMS, Sooperlooper much less so. In all those cases I think what's lacking weights much more than what is present. I mean this solely in the context of AL-likeness. > > The vague and sometimes silly > > comparisons and the very foggy ideas what some commercial apps actually > > offer are damn frustrating. Would surprise me to read something *new*. > Charming. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth? Oh, excuse me for calling out on the obvious fact that some here don't even know the applications they are comparing (and thus can't actually gain any insight from the comparisons). Is Foo more like Bar or like Lorem? It has this Ipsum-ness about it, so it's more like Lorem. Suddenly we are all wiser! But yes, I do. She generally likes a based-on-reality, goal-driven, no-frills approach and acts acordingly ;p -- Thorsten Wilms thorwil's design for free software: http://thorwil.wordpress.com/ _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
