On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 4:59 AM, S. Massy wrote: > Yeah, well, too many people have already responded with very valid > points for me to add much. However, I'd like to bring up a certain > analogy. About ten years ago, I remember a lot of similar discussion > going on around The Linux Desktop: "How can we make it better?", "How > can we make it better known?", "Why are people and businesses sticking > to MS Office?" It was a bit of an obsession in the early 21st century. > Now, The Linux Desktop isn't exactly used by an overwhelming majority, > but it has made its way on many common wo/man's computer and is even in > some schools and small businesses, and a lot of people in the street > have at least heard of "that Ubuntu thing" and are intrigued. Well, what _actually_ happened is that Windows ports of various open source applications matured and stabilized, and since people were scared re moving to a new OS, we are now in a situation where vast majority of users of crossplatform free software such as Audacity and GIMP are on Windows. I don't have stats for OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice, but I bet the situation is the same. With MIDI/audio software we don't have that much of a problem *cough* ALSA* cough* JACK *cough*, so it's a stalemate: without Windows we never get as many users as we want, yet _with_ Windows ports we never get people to use Linux. I don't think there is a simple solution to this. But I think that this point of yours: > So, based on that experience, I'd venture to think that making/improving > software for our own benefit and creating quality content produced with the > aforementioned software is really what counts in the end. makes a hell of a sense. Just one minor addition, if you don't mind. We have to finish with the, IMNSHO, nonsensical notion of our users being geeks who are into protocols and whatnot. I work for a Linux vendor who is right now into another bidding process re Linux at schools in my country. Part of the specification of requirements is on multimedia production software, and while on details level a lot of that is ridiculous stuff that boils down to give-us-something-like-garageband/imovie, in general the requirements make a lot of sense. It's the second bidding process like that (i.e. with similar spec of reqs) we've been through, and one thing I can tell you is that while some people still say "oh, but I love my complicated routing and I don't really mind both JS and ladish co-existing, and I hate you ardour developers for adding MIDI tracks, and don't you even start talking about video tracks", the kids get macs with propietary software that is easier to get started with. What they will grow to like -- you can easily guess. I'm talking about some 2K workstations, btw. Oh, and it's one of the reasons why I still keep an eye on MusE, hoping that one day they will revamp UI. Because it's, once again, the second bidding process where the spec says "It should be possible to select virtual instruments from a library that is part of the software". So in the future it's either MusE with revamped UI that doesn't scare kids away, or Qtractor that finally gets a developer to merge changes from QArranger (I'm referring to native LS client mostly). But right now it looks more like Rosegarden with modified default studio and hooks to FluidSynth/QSynth that would load something like FluidR3_GM.SF2. Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
