PulseAudio 9.0 Released With Many Audio Improvements

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

Is there any other software that you would like to be forced (more or less) on every user or distribution?

The Linux kernel itself. Which also is governed by a benevolent dictator for life, a guy named Torvalds (you might've heard of him). Are you absolutely certain you're judging PulseAudio on its own merits and not on the person (Poettering)?

Think about it like this -- If PulseAudio were really such a dreadful piece of software, would it ever have made it to the point of being almost inevitable? I don't think so, to be honest with you. It's not like Poettering is going about knocking on people's doors, putting a gun to their heads and forcing them to use PulseAudio (or systemd) in their distributions. The distro and package maintainers are judging the software on the software's merits, not on the person's merits or flaws. If we did that, we would have to switch to BSD; since, honestly, Torvalds is a total jackass really. The more I read of what comes out of his fingers, the less I like the guy. Really just needs a punch to the face at times. But, the Linux kernel is an awesome kernel so, I'm using that.

Users might have to start doing the same, judging the software, not the people involved. Jumping on a bandwagon is easy and seems like the cool thing to do but, honestly, it's not cool at all. Don't hate just because everyone else is hating. Form your own opinion.

[bug77]

Bluetooth audio takes your cpu time and its not a pro solution. Bluetooth headsets and speakers are toys compared to real audio hardware.

Sometimes you just want a business call or smth... (Though I wasn't aware Linux is supposed to support only "pro solution" and "real audio hardware".)
BT headsets wouldn't be on the market if no one was using them.

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

Sometimes you just want a business call or smth... (Though I wasn't aware Linux is supposed to support only "pro solution" and "real audio hardware".)
BT headsets wouldn't be on the market if no one was using them.

Well, I understand the sarcasm but it's not entirely warranted. Even for casual use, you will get better results when not using BT hardware. At least, that's been my experience. Personally, I just avoid BT altogether by now. Insecure, CPU hungry.

Particularly in your example, I'd just as soon rather stick with something that is connected physically. Business calls are not something you want to risk someone eavesdropping on by means of picking up on your BT signal or using it, at the very least, to discover your device(s).

Read the top answer here -- https://security.stackexchange.com/q...t-be-mitigated

Some valid points made there that illustrate the folly of using BT in general.

[bug77]

Well, I understand the sarcasm but it's not entirely warranted. Even for casual use, you will get better results when not using BT hardware. At least, that's been my experience. Personally, I just avoid BT altogether by now. Insecure, CPU hungry.

Particularly in your example, I'd just as soon rather stick with something that is connected physically. Business calls are not something you want to risk someone eavesdropping on by means of picking up on your BT signal or using it, at the very least, to discover your device(s).

Read the top answer here -- https://security.stackexchange.com/q...t-be-mitigated

Some valid points made there that illustrate the folly of using BT in general.

WEP is also crappy and insecure. Yet it's still supported all over the place. That wasn't my point.
BT support in PulseAudio means just one more supported source type. It's not like it eats additional resources (unless you're actually using BT audio).

Also, totally unrelated, but for the life of me I can't remember what was the name of the technology that competed with BT for wireless communications. It was something that was directional (i.e. you had to point devices at each other for it to work) so it would have mitigated some (most?) security risks.

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

WEP is also crappy and insecure. Yet it's still supported all over the place. That wasn't my point.

Well, if 1000 people jump off a bridge, do you follow? I wouldn't. Point being -- The fact WEP is still being used or at the very least supported does not invalidate the folly of actually making use of it. BT, likewise, just is the wrong choice to make in certain scenarios.

Regarding that competing technology -- It does ring a bell but I can't quite place the name either. But it certainly rings a bell.

[starshipeleven]

Yeah, bluetooth is old crappy technology designed in funnier times, not saying that it should be a backbone of your life.
Point here is that normal people expect it to work the same it works on Windows and Mac, period.
So either your favourite solution supports that too or it will fall by the wayside.

Also, totally unrelated, but for the life of me I can't remember what was the name of the technology that competed with BT for wireless communications. It was something that was directional (i.e. you had to point devices at each other for it to work) so it would have mitigated some (most?) security risks.

Google "bluetooth competitor directional"

You find https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_Data_Association
An ir-based communication system.

I remember the first crappy versions embedded in mobile phones and in Game Boy Advance and later things, with something like 5 cm range in optimal conditions. It seems irDA has also longer ranges.

The issue with the directional is that if your device loses LOS with the receiver the connection is lost. To make an example, common TV remotes are annoying as fuck for this reason.

Bluetooth audio takes your cpu time and its not a pro solution. Bluetooth headsets and speakers are toys compared to real audio hardware.

Ah, it's the "debianxfce does not use X so X is useless FOR EVERYONE" time of the week again.

[bug77]

starshipeleven IrDA it is (was). I tried to google it many times, but never using the right terms combo.

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

Point here is that normal people expect it to work the same it works on Windows and Mac, period.

No, not period. Normal people do need to be instructed in what the responsible use of IT technology means. Normal people still rely on Flash or at least expect it to work but, well, too bad for normal people but more and more major players are dropping that insecure brick like... well... a ton of bricks.

BT simply has no added value. There is essentially nothing it offers that warrants its downsides, period.

[bug77]

BT simply has no added value. There is essentially nothing it offers that warrants its downsides, period.

*looks at BT hands-free kits*

What can you do, people rarely choose a solution based on its technical merits alone and engineers like to build contraptions, whether they're useful or not.

[unixfan2001]

No, not period. Normal people do need to be instructed in what the responsible use of IT technology means. Normal people still rely on Flash or at least expect it to work but, well, too bad for normal people but more and more major players are dropping that insecure brick like... well... a ton of bricks.

BT simply has no added value. There is essentially nothing it offers that warrants its downsides, period.

Are you suggesting I hook a wired keyboard and mouse to my work tablet (which I recently bought a Logitech K480 bluetooth keyboard for, so I can work outside and not dwell in my office like a freaking coder monkey)?

Feck off!