REAPER 5.93 Brings New Linux-Native Builds

[starshipeleven]

It's too hard for them to understand the simple fact that some people don't mind it and that nobody forces them to use closed-source drivers, if they don't like it. Those people also never code a thing in their life, don't contribute to an open source driver, and then bitch and demand others to open source the drivers.

Please stop posting this polarizing bullshit, some are indeed freeloaders and mindless zelots, but most do have a valid point. The whole point of Linux/GNU (I mean the whole OS, not just the kernel) is being opensource, and following a different idea of software development.

Why the fuck should we turn Linux into a "lesser windows"? It's never going to be as good as the real deal because its very design concept was entirely different, so what's the point of even trying?

If you are rooting for closed drivers please fight for Windows to be less spyware, or hope Fuchsia becomes something serious or hope other OSes that were designed for that to take over. As that's where closed drivers aren't "bad" as the whole OS is designed for that.

I personally really hope that Fuchsia can be what Linux never will. But it is an example of OS designed for running blobs safely in an opensource system, Linux is not, running blobs in Linux makes it a massive pain in the ass for the user because they break ABI as they see fit (because for open drivers hosted in the kernel repo there is no need for a 100% stable ABI) so you will not be able to use newer kernels unless someone updates the driver or its opensource shim, may make it unstable (if driver crashes it will pull down the whole kernel) and will be a security problem as there is a blob running in kernel space.

[Weasel]

Please stop posting this polarizing bullshit, some are indeed freeloaders and mindless zelots, but most do have a valid point. The whole point of Linux/GNU (I mean the whole OS, not just the kernel) is being opensource, and following a different idea of software development.

Why the fuck should we turn Linux into a "lesser windows"? It's never going to be as good as the real deal because its very design concept was entirely different, so what's the point of even trying?

Thanks for the shining example of the kind of zealots I was talking about. Zero logic just emotions.

How do we "turn" Linux into a "lesser windows" if we simply have closed source stuff available without demanding it be open source? Nobody is taking your full open source away so yes, zero logic.

For example, you said "the whole OS, not just the kernel", but guess what? I can install whatever the fuck I want. A closed-source game? I can install it or run it on Linux. You use open source only, that's fine, it's your choice, but not others'.

Then, for example, zealots come and demand this game to be open source or kill it from Linux. Like who the fuck are they supposed to be to demand it? The owners of Linux? The ultimate authority? It's not the opinions (which are fine) so much as their demands or massive complaints that drive me nuts.

If you are rooting for closed drivers please fight for Windows to be less spyware, or hope Fuchsia becomes something serious or hope other OSes that were designed for that to take over. As that's where closed drivers aren't "bad" as the whole OS is designed for that.

I gave up on Windows and Microsoft a long time ago. It has way too many issues as an OS, not necessarily as a "platform" (the platform is pretty good actually, in fact it's so good that even such a shitty OS on top of it still keeps it popular on the desktop -- in other words, it's carried by the underlying platform).

I don't hope Fuchsia becomes successful at all. I like Linux. Maybe some of the "zealots" are in fact just shills for other OSes and want Linux to die or something by keeping it intentionally bad for some cases that require closed-source stuff (because the hardware dev wants it so).



EDIT: Btw, case in point, not even about drivers, but REAPER is closed source. The devs are fantastic (in my opinion/experience) and have their own reasons for doing so, so no, not every closed-source is the spawn of Satan.

Thankfully they're not swayed by zealots with their preaching bullshit, but there's actually no zealots at all over there in REAPER community as far as I'm aware, they're just thankful for a Linux version in the first place.

Zealots would probably say something like "fuck REAPER hope it burns in Hell like it deserves, Linux people just use Ardour please and avoid supporting this anti-freedom shit!" just like they do with Nvidia vs AMD.

[creative]

More is better but am completely fine with Ardour, if anything I will end up buying Harrison Mixbus if I get something commercial. More than likely going to build another station with some of my older hardware using lmms outputting to effects pedals manualy controlling them and recording the signals into this machine.

Been using linux for recording audio projects and music experimentation for close to two decades now. I feel linux has for a long time "since 2005 Ardour which I helped fund back then" had lots of powerful software for musicians. Hydrogen alone can do some amazing stuff. Found out this past year how powerfull lmms is, which is a huge compliment considering that I own hardware synths, one of which is a DSI Mopho a true analogue synth on some serious steroids. The c64 emulation in lmms is amazing.

I know what linux can do with audio creation. The thing is is that you can get started doing some amazing stuff with just lmms alone. if you buy something like a microkorg and sample it and load the samples into hydrogen or lmms you start coming up with stuff very few people have ever heard including yourself as you are doing your own thing with sound design and music.

I experiment and create music for myself though, its really all about the explorative journey. A cheap usb audio interface can open up a plethora of universes in linux as far as audio and music is concerned.

If people really spent the time using linux for recording and music production I would bet there would be a mass exodus from windows and mac. In all my time using linux for music and audio, I have never griped once, not once!

What works is splendid. I don't know for certain but I have a feeling that in the future linux will be the OS for audio and music production, I feel that it already is, but that is just me.

[creative]

There are some things in GNU Linux that are not quite there yet globally like midi triggering properly certain apps like hydrogen while ardour is connected, not a big thing to me though. I worked around this simply by rendering session files for things like hydrogen and lmms, I then import them to ardour and start recording. I have naturally always went to render to wav and import though. Thats my approach and most likely one big reason I don't gripe about midi stuff. I rarely use midi in software if ever. I am either programming grids, synthesizer modeling or recording.

It seems unless you are using a midi controller to play a synthesizer in linux, its best to leave all the rest of the midi stuff alone and just export then import. When playing guitar there are some great plugins. I can usually take something I have already modelled with pedals and recorded with an epiphone special 2 and then slam the track into a 2x2 stereo plate verb or caliverb reaching some very interesting stereo field saturation.

The ladspa C platex2 is a great effect for slamming signals into. If you take a sine wave tremeloed and create a sonic burr by using a pitch shifter you can slam it into that effect with very interesting results splitting the signal up into sound shot like from a shotgun cartridge except this shot bounces back in fourth at a rapid rate all over the place in that plate verb creating a full choir singing to your every whim.

I just shared a secret recipe now if someone can actually achieve cooking it up and using it is a totally different story.

[fuzz]

Are their drivers open source on Windows? No. So my assumption is based on statistical likelihood. So, why would you assume they'd want to make them open source on Linux and reveal their whatever secrets they keep on Windows?

There are other companies with closed source drivers on Windows and and open source drivers on Linux. Intel and AMD come to mind. The situation on Windows is in no way representative of the choices a company will make for Linux. There are many other factors to consider.

[creative]

There are other companies with closed source drivers on Windows and and open source drivers on Linux. Intel and AMD come to mind. The situation on Windows is in no way representative of the choices a company will make for Linux. There are many other factors to consider.

heheh. Yeap!

[starshipeleven]

Thanks for the shining example of the kind of zealots I was talking about. Zero logic just emotions.

How is "use the tools the way they were designed for" an emotion?

How do we "turn" Linux into a "lesser windows" if we simply have closed source stuff available without demanding it be open source?

Because Linux kernel is designed around the idea of open source development, which is why it has ABI instability towards drivers, and dedicated interfaces available only for GPL-compliant drivers (GPL or GPL-compatible drivers, which NVIDIA is using anyway with their blob) so it has significant drawbacks in using it with closed source blobs. To some extent also the Linux userspace (which is why things like flatpack and snap are becoming a thing).

Which makes it a "lesser windows", if you try to turn it into Windows (aka try to apply the same processes and development design you use on Windows).

For example, you said "the whole OS, not just the kernel", but guess what? I can install whatever the fuck I want. A closed-source game?

Is an user-installed application part of the OS now? I thought Operating System meant only the... operating system, you know, not all the applications you can install on it.

I don't hope Fuchsia becomes successful at all. I like Linux.

I choose on the base of user experience and features offered. Linux is better in some respects but worse in others, same for Windows.

Fuchsia does offer compelling features, on paper at least. It does have its share of risks too but I believe it is a fair "best of both worlds" middle point. So yes I hope it becomes successful. If Linux can't compete with it in a fair fight, then I'm fine with it dying, such is competition, such is life.

An OS is a means to an end, just a middleware tool to run payload applications. If there is a better tool, then it's fair to abandon the old one and use the better one.

Maybe some of the "zealots" are in fact just shills for other OSes and want Linux to die or something by keeping it intentionally bad for some cases that require closed-source stuff (because the hardware dev wants it so).

Yeah, like that bad troll Linus Torvalds. Linux kernel IS kept intentionally bad for closed source stuff because of his will.

Also, let me point out that technically speaking there is nothing requiring REAVER to be closed source, apart from its development history perhaps (they included third party licensed middleware that can't be opensourced, OR they stole some shit and they don't want to be caught).

For example, can I find cracked versions... yeah I can find them. So whoever does not really want to pay will not pay.

EDIT: Btw, case in point, not even about drivers, but REAPER is closed source.

REAVER is a payload application, not part of the OS by any stretch of the imagination. I never said anything about closed source payload applications being a bad thing. I just reacted to the whole driver side of things, which is an OS thing.

Zealots would probably say something like "fuck REAPER hope it burns in Hell like it deserves, Linux people just use Ardour please and avoid supporting this anti-freedom shit!" just like they do with Nvidia vs AMD.

I'm not one of them, I explained why you should not bundle all opensource advocates under the same flag.

[Weasel]

There are other companies with closed source drivers on Windows and and open source drivers on Linux. Intel and AMD come to mind. The situation on Windows is in no way representative of the choices a company will make for Linux. There are many other factors to consider.

But it is, statistically speaking, that's a rarity.

[Weasel]

Because Linux kernel is designed around the idea of open source development, which is why it has ABI instability towards drivers, and dedicated interfaces available only for GPL-compliant drivers (GPL or GPL-compatible drivers, which NVIDIA is using anyway with their blob) so it has significant drawbacks in using it with closed source blobs. To some extent also the Linux userspace (which is why things like flatpack and snap are becoming a thing).

Which makes it a "lesser windows", if you try to turn it into Windows (aka try to apply the same processes and development design you use on Windows).

Is an user-installed application part of the OS now? I thought Operating System meant only the... operating system, you know, not all the applications you can install on it.

I choose on the base of user experience and features offered. Linux is better in some respects but worse in others, same for Windows.

Fuchsia does offer compelling features, on paper at least. It does have its share of risks too but I believe it is a fair "best of both worlds" middle point. So yes I hope it becomes successful. If Linux can't compete with it in a fair fight, then I'm fine with it dying, such is competition, such is life.

An OS is a means to an end, just a middleware tool to run payload applications. If there is a better tool, then it's fair to abandon the old one and use the better one.

Did I say anything about changing the kernel? What's this trying to make it "lesser windows" at all? I never asked for any change at all so idk where you get that from?!? I just complained about zealots who bring their pitchforks at such companies which pushes them away from Linux. You see those idiots would rather have no driver at all than closed source, which pisses me off.

Nvidia is not the only one using closed source drivers, lol dude. Even non-hardware drivers like VMware are closed for the most part.

If you don't like it, then simply don't use it. And no, I'm not talking about the kernel, I'm talking about Nvidia and VMware drivers etc. If you don't like them being closed source... simply don't use them? There's people who DO use them, and such hardware, and DO need drivers. They do not want zealots' "alternative" hardware or drivers or w/e, so they need to stop pissing on them and stop alienating other Linux users who use it in different way.

Share your opinion on why you don't like them or use them, which I agree with (it would be nice to have them open source), but don't go on zealot rampage to ruin it for everyone else who does use them. You know in reality, you don't always get the best outcome possible and have to just use what you can. You talk as if I said that open source drivers are bad and they should all be closed source or something.

Also, let me point out that technically speaking there is nothing requiring REAVER to be closed source, apart from its development history perhaps (they included third party licensed middleware that can't be opensourced, OR they stole some shit and they don't want to be caught).

For example, can I find cracked versions... yeah I can find them. So whoever does not really want to pay will not pay.

REAVER is a payload application, not part of the OS by any stretch of the imagination. I never said anything about closed source payload applications being a bad thing. I just reacted to the whole driver side of things, which is an OS thing.

Nah, that's nonsense. Technically speaking, there's a lot of things that prevent it from being open source in the same quality, for example 3rd party modules like elastique time-stretching and VST/ARA2 support (well VST3 has GPL alternative license but who said open source has to mean GPL though? VST2 still doesn't, though, they'd have to rely on white-room reverse-engineered headers which are lacking and I'm not even sure if it's legal anymore since they "saw" the full VST2 spec already, they might get in legal trouble with shitty Steinberg).

It's REAPER btw.

I'm not one of them, I explained why you should not bundle all opensource advocates under the same flag.

I'm not bundling them all though? For example, I'm an open source advocate, but I'm not a zealot, so sometimes I deal with the fact that closed source is a fact of life I have to accept in some cases for my use cases. Some people are fine with AMD cards, some aren't, etc.

When I say zealot I literally mean that, not "open source advocate". People who choose AMD because it's open source and they don't care of the card's specifics itself are open source advocates, not zealots. Zealots are those which bring their pitchforks against Nvidia.

[creative]

Weasel It is much better to have closed source drivers than none at all, I totally agree. I am all for open sourced stuff but I respect the rights of others not wanting to expose their intellectual property for whatever reason they choose. I would like a lot more stuff to be open source but I feel that as part of my own personal open source advocacy it is best to respect someone elses right to choose to make their own stuff closed if they want. I feel it is actually anti open source to foist an ideology upon others by shaming them that if they don't make their intellectual property open source they are doing wrong and there for are bad people, which I feel ultimately makes the open source community look bad in my humble opinion.

On a side note I will mention that I do believe that making all stuff open source would prove to be ultimately more profitable for companies, I believe it would compel more people to buy more of given companies hardware/software due to it having a higher likelyhood of being sought after for being more portable to various platforms. But, just because I believe something does not always make it a fact though.