Linux Faster?

[kac77]

Amarok is currently available but not supported on Windows. Pulse Audio is available on Windows and supported.

Yes Windows support has been added. But it's not anywhere near the stability of the Linux versions since they've been native to Linux a lot longer. Becareful trying them out on Windows.

I've actually worked with MythTV and IIRC something called LinuxTV which was an Ubuntu distro that included MythTV in it. Never could get it working really and I admit I just gave up. The thing is that I have two Windows Media Centers that work great and spending a lot of time on it just wasn't going to buy me much. Hey, you guys are the Linux gurus!

I'm familiar with Linux TV. There are mythtv distros out there (not that you need them now) setting up myth for the past two or three years is all point and click. I can get one setup in about 10 minutes at this point.

We'll there might not be such a thing as a Linux server but there's definitely such a thing as a desktop environment that has different needs and demands than a server. Things like battery power consumption, human machine interfaces, and bluetooth devices don't really apply to traditional servers. Not saying that they can't but why on earth would someone be worried about their web or print server running Call Of Duty (not the server, the actuall game). Not every solution is a hammer nor every problem a nail.

I understand what you are saying here. It's really about the choice of being able to do such a thing. If you want every solution to be a hammer if you are an avid computer user why not try it out? Plus you learn something along the way I'm sure.

As far the $100k, where I work hardware and software costs don't even begin to touch development and support costs. Plus where I work we get a super sweet deal with Microsoft so the acquisition costs are MUCH lower than retail. Microsoft's licensing sucks because they do confuse the hell out of people about pricing. But if you know what you are doing the costs are far lower than most Linux people will state in debates like this.

Never said support wasn't more expensive. There's no way that I would say such a thing. However, depending on location that's anywhere from 2 to 3 people which if they are good could support about 100 people each. That's a lot.

Moral of the story, if you are paying retail price for MS products you are getting ripped off. You can easily get stuff at 20% or less of retail.

Yes you are correct here. The problem is that unless your medium sized to a large business it's very hard to get those kind of discounts. If you don't every server you purchase is almost exactly twice as expensive.

Look, people who love Linux love Linux. It's awesome to have such a passionate community that want to do the world a favor. I'm all for it and I have actually donated to a FOSS project, Audacity because its something I use to use a lot and thought I'd throw them $20. People need to get something for their sweat.

I just think that some in the Linux/FOSS community however just blast Windows because its cool or something. I'm all for lowering my costs. I'm all for freedom and choice, but that's just it. If I try something, it doesn't work out I move on. Sure I have my biases because I make a living working on Windows, it pays the bills. But I have to remember to have an open mind and force myself to learn about things I don't know.

So you've pointed me in the direction of Amarock, never have used it but looks kind of cool I and do plan on taking a look. Thanks!

I definitely don't bash Windows for the fun of it. I support both. So I know when to use Windows and when it' s just not worth using for something simple like a file server. The problem for me is MS doesn't realize that they can go too far with their pricing with avid computer users. I've been using their products since about Windows 2.0 / Dos 5.0, probably a little earlier but my memory gets foggy at that point.. so I know how much things used to cost, and I know when certain modules within Windows haven't changed all that much from version to version.

I started using Linux as my primary desktop probably somewhere around SP2 of Windows XP. I just got tired of the Windows Activation crap that was just making things far more complicated than they needed to be, and Vista...well that just sealed the deal for me. I'm not paying money for an OS that's not finished yet. Plus I kind of want to run 100% legal software. I don't want to download illegal software, and I don't want to steal MSDN products, and I'm just not going to pay money on something that I have to wait 6 months to a year after release to use in order to experience the level of quality a person should experience after paying that amount of money. It's a personal preference thing.

 

[kac77]

I think we should all walk about from this thread for few days and think about this. Both sides made valid points. Now, please digest each others ideas. You guys are randomly shooting at each other like crazy! Hey, I think even I learned few things. The end users might need some extra GUI tools.

LOL sounds like a god idea.

 

[AbJ32]

There's a difference. If there wasn't, turning Aero off wouldn't be considered a Performance option by MS it self now would it ? Are you telling me MS is wrong now too? As far as Windows 95, there's no doubt in my mind at all that it would fly like the wind. Trouble is it's buggy as hell and it's not even in the same universe as the linux kernel.

It's only considered a performance option on systems that aren't capable of rendering Aero due to insufficient graphical hardware.

How's this:

Graphical Programming

* gAlan, graphical audio language.
* Ingen, modular audio system formerly known as Om.
* jMax, modular visual programming environment for music. (NB: jMax is no longer in development.)
* OpenSoundWorld, sound programming environment.
* Pure Data or Pd, graphical programming language.

Audio Programming Languages (Text based)

* ChucK, an audio programming language for realtime synthesis, composition, and performance.
* Csound, composition, synthesis and processing.
* Nyquist, Lisp-based language for sound generation and analysis. Audacity supports plug-ins written in the Nyquist language.
* SuperCollider, Smalltalk-like language for real-time audio synthesis.

DJ Tools

* Digital-Scratch
* DJPlay
* Mixxx
* TerminatorX
* UltraMixer
* xwax

Drum Machine

* csDrummer, Record a drum session in a virtual studio
* Hydrogen
* Jackbeat

Recording / Editing

* Ardour, a multi-track audio recorder.
* Audacity, audio editor.
* Baudline, signal analyzer.
* Buzztard, music composer.
* Ecasound, audio recorder.
* Freecycle, beat slicer.
* Gnome Wave Cleaner, denoise, dehiss and amplify.
* gramofile, apply filters to reduce ticks and scratches on gramophone recordings.
* JAMin, JACK Audio Mastering interface.
* Jokosher, audio editor.
* LinuxSampler, sampler.
* LMMS, music composer
* mhWaveEdit, audio editor.
* Mp3gain, adjust MP3 playback volume without re-encoding.
* Mp3splt, splits MP3 and Ogg Vorbis files without re-encoding.
* MusE, MIDI sequencer (not to be confused with MuSE).
* NoteEdit, score writer.
* Renoise, modern tracker-style sequencer.
* ReZound, audio editor.
* Qtractor, a full featured multi-track audio and MIDI workstation.
* Rosegarden, MIDI sequencer.
* Seq24, a loop based midi sequencer.
* Snd, audio editor.
* Sweep, audio editor.
* Timemachine, small JACK buffer capture tool.
* Traverso DAW, a multi-track audio recorder.

Sound Server

* aRts, the KDE soundserver.
* EsounD, the Enlightened Sound Daemon.
* Fst, how to get the vst, instruments under Linux.
* JACK Audio Connection Kit, low latency sound server.
* JEsd, a Java implementation of EsounD.
* MAS, the Multimedia Audio Server, a network audio server for X.
* MuSE, a multipurpose network streaming sound server and mixer.
* NAS, the Network Audio System.
* NMM, Network-Integrated Multimedia Middleware.
* PulseAudio, a sound server. A drop-in replacement for EsounD.

Patch Bays

* Qjackctl, JACK control panel and patch bay
* Patchage, JACK patch bay

Synthesizers

* Aeolus, organ synth.
* AlsaModularSynth
* Amsynth
* Bristol, synthesiser emulation package.
* FluidSynth, with the QSynth interface.
* Gnaural, binaural beat and pink noise synthesizer.
* LMMS, tracker/sequencer/synth.
* OM Synth, (ingen) software synthesizer, LADSPA host.
* San-dysth
* Specimen, a MIDI controllable audio sampler.
* TiMidity, Play/Convert MIDI files as/to PCM
* RT-synth
* ZynAddSubFX, software synthesizer.

Effects Processing

* Ecamegapedal, real-time frontend for LADSPA plugins.
* FreqTweak, real-time audio processing with spectral displays.
* Jack Rack, a graphical frontend for the chaining together of multiple LADSPA plugins.
* Rakarrack, Guitar Effects Processor.
* LADSPA, the Linux Audio Developers Simple Plugin API.
* DSSI, Disposable Soft Synth Interface, a virtual instrument (software synthesizer) plugin architecture.
* SoX, the Audio Swiss Army knife.
* LV2, is the new audio Linux standard for plugins.

Don't make assumptions please. It makes it look like you've come to conclusions on stuff without actually trying any of it out yourself.

Most of those are plugins, languages and APIs. Rakarrack is the only complete instrument processing software on the list from the looks of it, and it's a severely disappointing program. Looks about as useful to me as a paraplegic race horse.

I looked at the list of effects for Rakarrack. Pretty pathetic. What happens if I want to create a high gain guitar patch with a split to two different virtual amps, then a second split to a phaser on channel A, and an octave divider on channel B, with tape echo following the split mix, then a low frequency oscillator over top of that? I don't see that happening with Rakarrack.

And that's assuming I get the same Latencies in Rakarrack as I do in the Native Instruments software I use with ASIO. And audio quality has to be there. If I'm not getting studio quality sound, modulations and effects from Rakarrack, it's not doing the job as well as what I'm using now.

The only problem is you'll be called out more times than I would to clean off all of the virus's they would get running Windows XP.

I'm running Vista, and I don't have any problems with viruses, even running with no anti-virus software and inexperienced patrons using my computer. If you use good browsing habits, you won't have trouble with Viruses. I don't know why I see so many linux users complaining about Windows having too many viruses. They're not a problem if you know what you're doing.

What happened to Vista? Oh that's right in order for it to do it's job as quickly as XP or Linux for that matter you're buying more RAM to accomplish the same goal and if wasn't the case why is Windows 7 thinner than VIsta? Are you saying you know better than MS here too?

In what way is Windows 7 'thinner' than Vista? It's the same kernel and a slightly improved driver model. Windows 7 still uses superfetch and indexing. From what I've seen so far, Windows 7 basically is Windows Vista with a ton of small little fixes, what one would call attention to detail. Also, at least for me, Windows Vista and Windows 7 are leaps and bounds faster than Windows XP ever was, along with being a lot more stable and a lot more secure, and Linux has never seemed to be any faster than Vista for what I do(And some of what I do, I can't really do with Linux).

 

[Klob]

Then why are you here all the time? Why do you hang out at a computer forum? Or is it, because you are upset people don't have the same attitude about your favorite things? Are you also a mindless zealot? You and him have something in common.

I was replying to you! And you and I have nothing in common. I hang out here to keep the zealots in line.

 

[heatlesssun]

In what way is Windows 7 'thinner' than Vista? It's the same kernel and a slightly improved driver model. Windows 7 still uses superfetch and indexing. From what I've seen so far, Windows 7 basically is Windows Vista with a ton of small little fixes, what one would call attention to detail. Also, at least for me, Windows Vista and Windows 7 are leaps and bounds faster than Windows XP ever was, along with being a lot more stable and a lot more secure, and Linux has never seemed to be any faster than Vista for what I do(And some of what I do, I can't really do with Linux).

Actually I think Windows 7 uses the MinWin kernel.

http://www.istartedsomething.com/20071019/eric-talk-demo-windows-7-minwin/

 

[AbJ32]

Actually I think Windows 7 uses the MinWin kernel.

http://www.istartedsomething.com/20071019/eric-talk-demo-windows-7-minwin/

Take note of the date of that article.

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/28/0315244&from=rss

 

[requiemnoise]

I was replying to you! And you and I have nothing in common. I hang out here to keep the zealots in line.

Oh god.. Another angry frustrated Windows users. Then, you should have quoted me. Do you randomly quote another person and pretend you quote someone else. Are you one of those people who get yelled at by the boss and beat his wife?

 

[kac77]

It's only considered a performance option on systems that aren't capable of rendering Aero due to insufficient graphical hardware..

Does it increase performace, or doesn't it? It does. It also works in Windows XP which supports absolutely zero hardware acceleration for the desktop. Therefore like I said before, the smaller amount of data required to accomplish a specific task the better it is.

Most of those are plugins, languages and APIs. Rakarrack is the only complete instrument processing software on the list from the looks of it, and it's a severely disappointing program. Looks about as useful to me as a paraplegic race horse.

I looked at the list of effects for Rakarrack. Pretty pathetic. What happens if I want to create a high gain guitar patch with a split to two different virtual amps, then a second split to a phaser on channel A, and an octave divider on channel B, with tape echo following the split mix, then a low frequency oscillator over top of that? I don't see that happening with Rakarrack.

And that's assuming I get the same Latencies in Rakarrack as I do in the Native Instruments software I use with ASIO. And audio quality has to be there. If I'm not getting studio quality sound, modulations and effects from Rakarrack, it's not doing the job as well as what I'm using now.

Good grief, Rakarrack has Jack support as does Ardour, take your instrument preprocessed output from Rakarrack and bring into Ardour then apply your amp, EQ, phase and octave adjustments there. I had a better repsonse earlier that actually talks about the software capability in far greater detail but the forum messed up so I decided to just tell you what to do. Really fast ..ardour is comparable to CuBase. With jack support any application compiled with it can be spliced into Ardour. Then you have the capabiltity to split, redirect and apply discrete channel effects in realtime. Latency, and timestretching adjustments are supported as well. "All of those plugins" by the way are for Ardour. So it would look somthing like this.

Instrument Source -> Rakarrack -> Effects <- JACK -> Ardour -> EQ, PHASE, OCTAVE -> Monitor

I'm running Vista, and I don't have any problems with viruses, even running with no anti-virus software and inexperienced patrons using my computer. If you use good browsing habits, you won't have trouble with Viruses. I don't know why I see so many linux users complaining about Windows having too many viruses. They're not a problem if you know what you're doing. .

Your average user doesn't, which is what we were talking about before. Notorn and Symantec have a pretty successful business for a reason.

 

[heatlesssun]

I'm familiar with Linux TV. There are mythtv distros out there (not that you need them now) setting up myth for the past two or three years is all point and click. I can get one setup in about 10 minutes at this point.

It may take you ten minutes but I’ve worked on it for a couple of weekends and never got it to work and from support threads I’ve read I wasn’t the only one struggling. If you have any information to pass along please share. It’s all point and click until it doesn’t work.

Yes you are correct here. The problem is that unless your medium sized to a large business it's very hard to get those kind of discounts. If you don't every server you purchase is almost exactly twice as expensive.

Looking simply at acquisition costs is only a small part of it. Of course if all you need is a web server to run a PHP forum like this then sure, why buy anything? But if your looking at putting together something more interesting, initial costs are only part of the story and you're going have to do some analysis to know what your total costs are going to be.

I definitely don't bash Windows for the fun of it. I support both. So I know when to use Windows and when it' s just not worth using for something simple like a file server. The problem for me is MS doesn't realize that they can go too far with their pricing with avid computer users. I've been using their products since about Windows 2.0 / Dos 5.0, probably a little earlier but my memory gets foggy at that point.. so I know how much things used to cost, and I know when certain modules within Windows haven't changed all that much from version to version.

I started using Linux as my primary desktop probably somewhere around SP2 of Windows XP. I just got tired of the Windows Activation crap that was just making things far more complicated than they needed to be, and Vista...well that just sealed the deal for me. I'm not paying money for an OS that's not finished yet. Plus I kind of want to run 100% legal software. I don't want to download illegal software, and I don't want to steal MSDN products, and I'm just not going to pay money on something that I have to wait 6 months to a year after release to use in order to experience the level of quality a person should experience after paying that amount of money. It's a personal preference thing.

I'm not saying that you are bashing Winodws per se, but I think that you are overstating its costs on average and sorry about you problems with Vista. While we all know that Vista is everyone's favorite whipping boy, I've not had any problems on it a a myriad of machines, even machines less powerful than a typical netbook (Vista Basic one that one of course).

Linux is cool. It's not a perfect solution by far on the desktop. It can produce cost savings on the desktop and it does have functionality and application support not in Windows. Windows is a Swiss Amry kinfe. The Windows ecosystem is just so vast that no other desktop platform receives it's level of attention (and some of it's bad in the form of malware) and support and its overall easy to use for the vast majority of people. I'm not saying that Linux isn't supported and recieves no attention, its simply is too small a part of the desktop market, that's all.

 

[AbJ32]

Good grief, Rakarrack has Jack support as does Ardour, take your instrument preprocessed output from Rakarrack and bring into Ardour then apply your amp, EQ, phase and octave adjustments there. I had a better repsonse earlier that actually talks about the software capability in far greater detail but the forum messed up so I decided to just tell you what to do. Really fast ..ardour is comparable to CuBase. With jack support any application compiled with it can be spliced into Ardour. Then you have the capabiltity to split, redirect and apply discrete channel effects in realtime. Latency, and timestretching adjustments are supported as well. "All of those plugins" by the way are for Ardour. So it would look somthing like this.

Instrument Source -> Rakarrack -> Effects <- JACK -> Ardour -> EQ, PHASE, OCTAVE -> Monitor

Which means I'm now using two programs to accomplish what I could have otherwise done in Native Instrument's software. That's just too cumbersome, and get's in the way of me doing what I want to do. Not to mention, Ardour's interface is clunky and painful. I'd rather use software geared towards musicians, and not audio engineers. It's a lot easier to do what you want when the interface is similar to a 'virtual pedal board'. Programs like NI's Guitar Rig 3 have effects modeled off of iconic guitar pedals and amps, which make it easy to create the patches I want. Doing the same thing through the solution you propose takes much more time and effort.

I'm also not convinced of how diverse of sounds I'd be able to get from Rakarrack, since it looks to have only one or two of each type of effect. It looks like a very bland piece of software for something as robust as music.

Your average user doesn't, which is what we were talking about before. Notorn and Symantec have a pretty successful business for a reason.

Your previous post implied that my computer has issues with viruses, due to the fact that it's running windows. That has nothing to do with average users, it's direct and personal.

 

[kac77]

It may take you ten minutes but I’ve worked on it for a couple of weekends and never got it to work and from support threads I’ve read I wasn’t the only one struggling. If you have any information to pass along please share. It’s all point and click until it doesn’t work. .

Ok I'll help you here trust me unlike some people (not you) I actually do speak from experience.

This is what you do. If you have Ubuntu already installed then it will take you 10 minutes. If not you can download mythbuntu iso here : http://www.mythbuntu.org/downloads

Ubuntu Already Installed :

Open up terminal
Type sudo apt-get install mythbuntu-control-centre

Then via gui go to System - > Administration - > Mythbuntu Control Center

Go to System Roles
Select Primary and Front End and Hit Apply

Once done go to Themes and Artwork
select all and hit apply

Then go to plugins select all but deselect MythPhone
and Hit apply

Then go to Advanced, read through this and select what you want. If you are going to do multiple frontends make sure MYSQL is available here to allow connections outside of 127.0.0.1

Then Click Apply

Finally go to codecs add in ffmpeg, pretty much everything.

Then Click Apply

If you don't have any tuner cards you are pretty much done. Start the frontend and go to Media Settings and set your directory for your videos or music files. Then go to the Video Manager your files will be added to the database then you are done. If you want TV Tuner support make sure you have either PCHDTV Tuner Cards or Hauppage PVR 150's 250's or 350's others are supported but these are pretty much idiot proof and require no additional drivers as they are compiled into the kernal already. So you install them the kernel sees them and off you u go. If you need backend setup instructions come back here and I'll tell you what to do. It's about an additional 10 minutes here. Mostly because you'll be scanning for channels.



Don't have Ubuntu Installed

http://www.mythbuntu.org/downloads

Download torrent and install on machine. (40 minutes give or take)
Then follow what I have provided above

I'm not saying that you are bashing Winodws per se, but I think that you are overstating its costs on average and sorry about you problems with Vista. While we all know that Vista is everyone's favorite whipping boy, I've not had any problems on it a a myriad of machines, even machines less powerful than a typical netbook (Vista Basic one that one of course).

I'm not really going to start the Vista talk here. Because you and I know first machines shipped by Dell and others were awful because of the lack of memory and decent onboard video. Add in Network Discovery horrors and initial incompatibility with Windows 2000 domains / print servers and you can imagine what I went through. It was only 10 machines so it wasn't a big deal I just imaged them and continued moving on. But Pre-SP1 was a joke.

 

[kac77]

Which means I'm now using two programs to accomplish what I could have otherwise done in Native Instrument's software. That's just too cumbersome, and get's in the way of me doing what I want to do. Not to mention, Ardour's interface is clunky and painful. I'd rather use software geared towards musicians, and not audio engineers. It's a lot easier to do what you want when the interface is similar to a 'virtual pedal board'. Programs like NI's Guitar Rig 3 have effects modeled off of iconic guitar pedals and amps, which make it easy to create the patches I want. Doing the same thing through the solution you propose takes much more time and effort.

I'm also not convinced of how diverse of sounds I'd be able to get from Rakarrack, since it looks to have only one or two of each type of effect. It looks like a very bland piece of software for something as robust as music..

Give me a break. You are using at least two programs no matter what.NI's Guitar Rig 3 isn't going to allow you to master your output if you are actually composing. If you are just jamming out then I could see your point. However, the moment you go to record and actually do something with the music any normal person would be using something like Cubase or Ardour in order to compress, equalize, mix and master afterwards. What are you just recording yourself? BTW NI's Guitar Rig 3 is WINE compatible, so now what's your excuse?

Because you said and I quote :

Well then, if you're sure of it, let's see you go find some open source audio production software and open source instrument processing software that gets the job done as well as what I currently use. Let's see it. .

So not only were you looking for "audio production" software you were looking for instrument processing software... and I gave you options for both of those needs. Not only that, but Guitar Rig can work in WINE. So if you are hell bent on using it there's nothing stopping you.
Here's a picture just in case you didn't think it was possible :
http://flickr.com/photos/sonium/195369743/
So now what? Got any other excuses?

Your previous post implied that my computer has issues with viruses, due to the fact that it's running windows. That has nothing to do with average users, it's direct and personal.

We've been talking in generalities this entire time. I've never said that your machine will get viruses. I said the average user like your family members. Or does everyone including your grandmother have a CS degree?

If $100 gets me an interface that my family members are capable of using without asking me 18 times a week how to check emails, then it's completely worth it. Add on top of that the fact that all the software I need works on it, and it runs just as fast as my alternatives, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be worth the money.

Then I said:

The only problem is you'll be called out more times than I would to clean off all of the virus's they would get running Windows XP.

Is everyone in your family using your audio workstation too?

Linux isn't perfect, then again nothing is. But if your going to make accusations not based on personal experience plan on someone like me taking you to task on it.

 

[heatlesssun]

I'm not really going to start the Vista talk here. Because you and I know first machines shipped by Dell and others were awful because of the lack of memory and decent onboard video. Add in Network Discovery horrors and initial incompatibility with Windows 2000 domains / print servers and you can imagine what I went through. It was only 10 machines so it wasn't a big deal I just imaged them and continued moving on. But Pre-SP1 was a joke.

kac77, thanks for the MythTV setup steps, much appreciated. The part that got my last time were my WinTV USB tuners, getting them setup was the problem. I'll go bad and take and try this again soon. I'm sure its improved since I last tried.

I wasn't so much trying to get into a Vista debate. To use a phrase I hate, "Vista is what it is." And what it is is who's using it. It runs great for me on the four machines I personally have it on and the 6 I've setup for others. A couple issues with some drivers and that's the bulk of it, even before SP1. That hasn't blinded me however to those who have had a lot of problems, thus "it is what it is".

When 7 goes gold though, my personal Vista machines will be migrated to 7 probably pretty quickly unless there's some show stoppers. I'm already full time on 7 with my main laptop convertible tablet pc and it's smoking for this Microsoftie!

Thanks Again!

 

[heatlesssun]

Take note of the date of that article.

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/28/0315244&from=rss

And this is even newer: http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/11/03/minwin-is-in-windows-7-for-what-its-worth/

So its apparently in Windows 7 but not the "real" kernel? It's a little confusing what that means but it must be in there for some real reason.

 

[requiemnoise]

Don't get me wrong, but I just laughed really hard reading that article.
I really can't take that website in a serious manner. The site looks like a someone's blog.

 

[heatlesssun]

Yes Windows support has been added. But it's not anywhere near the stability of the Linux versions since they've been native to Linux a lot longer. Becareful trying them out on Windows.

You wrote that in regards to Amarock. So I downloaded the latest KDE RC for Windows which includes it. Seems to work just fine on my Windows 7 tablet, even get sound through my bluetooth headphones though the controls don't work. Thanks again.

I do have to make a point and its not meant to be a rag. It just goes back to my point of personal bias. At the end of the day Linux is just an OS like Windows. They have both been designed and developed buy some of the worlds most brilliant minds that's just a fact. If one can't do XYZ on one platform or the other its only because someone hasn't gotten around to it for whatever reason. They are environments on which people build apps. Sure you can far more easily tweak the Linux OS proper because you have the source code where as you don't with Windows for the most part. But you sure as hell can tweak these cross-platform applications with the source!

Just another .02 worth and thanks again!

 

[heatlesssun]

Don't get me wrong, but I just laughed really hard reading that article.
I really can't take that website in a serious manner. The site looks like a someone's blog.

Cruchgear is referenced all around on tech sites. They are pretty anti-Microsoft for the most part or at least not big fans but reputable.

I have no idea what's going on with the MinWin in 7 but if Windows 7 can run well on notebooks MinWin must be part of the mix some how.

 

[requiemnoise]

Basically, a kernel extender that has NO USE until MS actually write some codes to use it? You aren't using it now.

 

[AbJ32]

Give me a break. You are using at least two programs no matter what.NI's Guitar Rig 3 isn't going to allow you to master your output if you are actually composing. If you are just jamming out then I could see your point. However, the moment you go to record and actually do something with the music any normal person would be using something like Cubase or Ardour in order to compress, equalize, mix and master afterwards. What are you just recording yourself? BTW NI's Guitar Rig 3 is WINE compatible, so now what's your excuse?

I'm using two programs should I decide I want to master my recordings. Since I'm not a drummer, or a pianist, etc., that doesn't happen all that often.

If I'm using Ardour to provide effects and modulation, then I have to use it all the time. No if's, and's or but's. Also, like I said, Ardour isn't geared towards musicians. Navigating it's interface is like getting around an iced over stairwell.

So not only were you looking for "audio production" software you were looking for instrument processing software... and I gave you options for both of those needs. Not only that, but Guitar Rig can work in WINE. So if you are hell bent on using it there's nothing stopping you.
Here's a picture just in case you didn't think it was possible :
http://flickr.com/photos/sonium/195369743/
So now what? Got any other excuses?

How exactly does WINE work with DirectSound? Does it try and replicate it layer by layer? Basically, what it comes down to is latency. If WINE has the same high latency as DirectSound, you simply cannot use the product due to the delay. Playing with high latency is near impossible.

We've been talking in generalities this entire time. I've never said that your machine will get viruses. I said the average user like your family members. Or does everyone including your grandmother have a CS degree?

Is everyone in your family using your audio workstation too?

No, they don't have Computer Science degrees, but seriously, people aren't stupid. If you tell them 'Don't open email attachments that end with .exe', usually, they won't.

And I figure, why not let them use my 'workstation'. There's such a thing as backups, for starters, so if they did infect my PC with viruses, I wouldn't have anything to worry about, since I back up any important data. But considering the fact that It's been at least 5 years since I've even gotten a virus, and said virus did little harm, I don't think there's a whole lot of reason to go buy another PC for them to use so I can keep my 'workstation' to myself.

People who have problems with viruses are usually people with 11 year old kids who go and download a ton of stuff. Just checking emails and shopping Amazon, accessing work websites and web applications, etc, is not going to give you viruses. Usually, between your email provider and not opening suspicious attachments, you won't have virus trouble.

Linux isn't perfect, then again nothing is. But if your going to make accusations not based on personal experience plan on someone like me taking you to task on it.

What's wrong with people and 'experience'? When somebody doesn't like Linux, they act like the person's never used it. I have well over a decade of personal experience to speak from, thank you very much. It's not like I downloaded Knoppix 2 months ago and couldn't get it to work right, so I go around bashing Linux. I've used Linux successfully for a while now, and it simply doesn't meet my needs as well as Windows.

 

[requiemnoise]

Currently, Linux isn't ready for professional recording. I'm a Sonar and Nuendo user. Music recording is only time I use Windows. Only time, I used Linux for sound was C sound in the past. Ardour is garbage. Just like I wouldn't use Windows for any heavy networking applications.

added
sorry. this site is running slow. I forgot to add MinWin will never see the light of day unless MS plans to start everything over again. Something tells me, they will use for something else such as a recovery console.

 

[Atech]

Linux can kiss my fanny.

I use Windows on my PC's for the daily tasks, can't be bothered to tweak and twist my OS after hours.
In my work we use both Windows and FreeBSD servers.
Windows for the easy of use...FreeBSD for the heavy loads on our production.
All our internal stuff runs on windows boxes, all of our production runs on FreeBSD, best of both worlds.

I would rather be dragged naked across a field of borken glass that to waste my spare time OS-teweking to see a simple flashmovie under linux..hence why I use PC-BSD on my latop..as a way to have a way of testing stuff in a unix evrioment and not be crippled tooo much at the same time.

Linux is only free if your sparetime has no value..

So for me (as a avid gamer) Windows is faster than FreeBSD..and linux is a piece of POS-hackerz-wannabee OS.

/flame on.

 

[Boomslang]

Just to address the initial question about Linux being faster or not, on a dual-boot machine (same hardware) with standard XP and Ubuntu installs, the command-line program 'oggenc' which transcodes WAV files to OGG was tested. On XP, it ran at an average of 21s over three trials on a test WAV file. On Ubuntu, the same operation on the same file ran at an average of 15.2s over three trials.

The binary packages provide by vorbis-tools were used in each case, so compile-time optimization may have been different. However, it was the same version from the same code.

Not very scientific, so I'm just throwing it out there.

 

[requiemnoise]

Linux can kiss my fanny.

I use Windows on my PC's for the daily tasks, can't be bothered to tweak and twist my OS after hours.
In my work we use both Windows and FreeBSD servers.
Windows for the easy of use...FreeBSD for the heavy loads on our production.
All our internal stuff runs on windows boxes, all of our production runs on FreeBSD, best of both worlds.

I would rather be dragged naked across a field of borken glass that to waste my spare time OS-teweking to see a simple flashmovie under linux..hence why I use PC-BSD on my latop..as a way to have a way of testing stuff in a unix evrioment and not be crippled tooo much at the same time.

Linux is only free if your sparetime has no value..

So for me (as a avid gamer) Windows is faster than FreeBSD..and linux is a piece of POS-hackerz-wannabee OS.

/flame on.

Why is it so easy to spot a complete BS in this forum? Especially, HS kids pretend to be in IT. Of course, if someone ask complicated questions about BSD, the result will be copy and paste from another site. These tools teachers use to find cheaters come in handy in everyday life.

Just to address the initial question about Linux being faster or not, on a dual-boot machine (same hardware) with standard XP and Ubuntu installs, the command-line program 'oggenc' which transcodes WAV files to OGG was tested. On XP, it ran at an average of 21s over three trials on a test WAV file. On Ubuntu, the same operation on the same file ran at an average of 15.2s over three trials.

The binary packages provide by vorbis-tools were used in each case, so compile-time optimization may have been different. However, it was the same version from the same code.

Not very scientific, so I'm just throwing it out there.

I had a similiar result. Encoding is a big part of single process speed test. Your input is appreciated.

 

[XOR != OR]

Linux is only free if your sparetime has no value..

Oh, that's so clever. Or would be. If you weren't the 1000th person to say it.

Of course, even were you the first, it'd still be incorrect. While I won't argue the basic premise, it neglects the overall point to the OS; to increase efficiency ( at least, that's mine ). To put it another way; throw the cost of the OS out the window ( nullifying one of MS's biggest disadvantage ), I'd still choose linux for most tasks. It's far easier to work with and administrate.

So for me, linux effectively makes me money by allowing me to complete tasks faster than my windows counterpart.

 

[Atech]

Why is it so easy to spot a complete BS in this forum? Especially, HS kids pretend to be in IT. Of course, if someone ask complicated questions about BSD, the result will be copy and paste from another site. These tools teachers use to find cheaters come in handy in everyday life.

Talking about me?
If so I am sorry to dissapoint you, I work for Fullrate A/S ( www.fullrate.dk ) as a network technician, thus eg. having root access to our DHCP-servers:

Eg, you could also pm me you mailadress, and verify for your self that I indeed am who I say I am(and at work right now), since I have a [email protected] emailadress...and we don't offer email to our customers (it's a hassle to maintain and support, and people can get free webmails, so we cut that out) thus only Fullrate A/S employees have such an email account.

I hope I misread our posting, as that would leave you to be a simple Ad Hominem poster..and the internet is full of those.

 

[kac77]

Currently, Linux isn't ready for professional recording. I'm a Sonar and Nuendo user. Music recording is only time I use Windows. Only time, I used Linux for sound was C sound in the past. Ardour is garbage. Just like I wouldn't use Windows for any heavy networking applications..

Hard to use... yes.... Garbage? Hardly. Is it the best? Nope not by far.. Then again I never said it was. Although Sonar is in another class completely. It starts off at 500 bucks and can reach stratospheric levels if you are going for a full studio setup .

 

[requiemnoise]

That's your opinion. Hard to use... yes.... Garbage? Hardly. Is it the best? Nope.. Then again I never said it was did I ?

Maybe, it was a bit harsh, but it is no way near professional. There are great hobbyist audio recording apps. I think there are great tools for Indie rocker bands to get started. Trained ears can easily tell the quality of tools that were used. Many reverb calculations aren't accurate. Many plugins are solid programming, but all the math are wrong. Even a good programmer has to hire a professional to explain the physics of the room. Even tools that come with Sonar ($450 app), the plugins aren't that high quality to me. I use Waves plugins, they are about $800 for the complete set. I would say Waves are about a bit equal to Eventide fx processors. Some Eventide rack units cost $3500 for reverb and pitch shifting. Some engineers spend $45,000 on fx units.

C sound is an interesting tool to sample. The issue is it takes a long time to make one patch. I prefer using Reaktor. At the same time, I gave up that field many years ago. I haven't used Windows for over a year at home.

 

[requiemnoise]

Although Sonar is in another class completely. It starts off at 500 bucks and can reach stratospheric levels if you are going for a full studio setup .

You are absolutely correct. It is a very expensive route to get the professional quality. I think what you are suggesting are great ideas for hobbyists and podcasters. I think for that purpose, your suggestions are right at the alley.

You have to understand, some engineers spend $3500 on monitors. Professional musical tools have really high price tags. At the same time, the profit margins are incredibly small.

I hope I didn&#8217;t came off negative.

 

[Atech]

You are absolutely correct. It is a very expensive route to get the professional quality. I think what you are suggesting are great ideas for hobbyists and podcasters. I think for that purpose, your suggestions are right at the alley.

You have to understand, some engineers spend $3500 on monitors. Professional musical tools have really high price tags. At the same time, the profit margins are incredibly small.

I hope I didn’t came off negative.

*knock-knock*

Would you please reply to my post..or shall I take your silence as you realized your mistaken and wanna forget you ever posted it?

 

[requiemnoise]

*knock-knock*

Would you please reply to my post..or shall I take your silence as you realized your mistaken and wanna forget you ever posted it?

I am sorry, son, but I am getting a bit tired of talking to annoying teenagers. Why don't you go to bed? Good night.

 

[Atech]

I am sorry, son, but I am getting a bit tired of talking to annoying teenagers. Why don't you go to bed? Good night.

I am 33 years old, don't you ever get tired of false accusations?
I can PROVE that I am who I am, that is why I dismiss Linux, based on experience.

Admit you goofed...or present yourself as just another Ad Hominem poster with only fallacies in your "arsenal"

Ball in your court.

 

[kac77]

Maybe, it was a bit harsh, but it is no way near professional. There are great hobbyist audio recording apps. I think there are great tools for Indie rocker bands to get started. Trained ears can easily tell the quality of tools that were used. Many reverb calculations aren't accurate. Many plugins are solid programming, but all the math are wrong. Even a good programmer has to hire a professional to explain the physics of the room. Even tools that come with Sonar ($450 app), the plugins aren't that high quality to me. I use Waves plugins, they are about $800 for the complete set. I would say Waves are about a bit equal to Eventide fx processors. Some Eventide rack units cost $3500 for reverb and pitch shifting. Some engineers spend $45,000 on fx units.

C sound is an interesting tool to sample. The issue is it takes a long time to make one patch. I prefer using Reaktor. At the same time, I gave up that field many years ago. I haven't used Windows for over a year at home.

You are mixing concepts, sound environments, and home studios versus professional studios which start around 20k and go all the way to a 100k or more. Depends on the type of production. If I'm sampling, mixing or cutting i would be better served for the money to use something like Cubase or Ardour for mixing purposes and start from the highest bit depth available and send the the output through a hardware compressor and adjust in as many passes as needed for clarity, depth and peaks.

Audio production from a professional studio is different. But there's nothing stopping anyone from using cubase, ardour, or sonar as a mixer or passthrough because there's no one setup for home studio use. There's all sorts of things you can do to adjust for any one weak link in the chain. You could get rid of them completely and go with digital hardware mixers and effects processors if you have the money.

There's just no way that any one piece of software or hardware can be all things when it comes to audio production. The producer, the sound source, and the expected audience will all play a role in what someone picks. I've seen all sorts of setups each one has a different benefit.

 

[kac77]

I hope I didn’t came off negative.

Nope not at all. You are correct. My advise is geared to the home studio. Although podcasters? ...LOL

 

[Klob]

Oh god.. Another angry frustrated Windows users. Then, you should have quoted me. Do you randomly quote another person and pretend you quote someone else. Are you one of those people who get yelled at by the boss and beat his wife?

You must have a reading comprehension issue because I did quote you. Why do you keep posting BS about someone you don't even know? And for the record: I am a Windows/Linux user and not just Windows.

 

[requiemnoise]

You must have a reading comprehension issue because I did quote you. Why do you keep posting BS about someone you don't even know? And for the record: I am a Windows/Linux user and not just Windows.

This all started with you, because this is what you said...

A refreshing breath of fresh air in this thread. My hat's off to you, sir.

I use Linux on about a dozen servers, a pair of desktops, a laptop, and a netbook. The only Windows machine I have is a laptop issued to me by my employer. I choose Linux because it treats me the way I want to be treated, and is faster in running the applications I choose to run.

You replied back and said.

If you agree with him then why do feel the need to follow that up with rationalizing to us why you do use Linux? I couldn't care less what OS you or anyone else here uses. What I don't like are pompous elitists who think they are smarter because they use Linux and not Windows.

If someone is trying to stop and avoid arguments, you love to put some flame on it. Talk like a true troll, who can't keep his mind open. Are you that bitter with your life?

 

[brucedeluxe169]

Talking about me?
If so I am sorry to dissapoint you, I work for Fullrate A/S ( www.fullrate.dk ) as a network technician, thus eg. having root access to our DHCP-servers:

Eg, you could also pm me you mailadress, and verify for your self that I indeed am who I say I am(and at work right now), since I have a [email protected] emailadress...and we don't offer email to our customers (it's a hassle to maintain and support, and people can get free webmails, so we cut that out) thus only Fullrate A/S employees have such an email account.

I hope I misread our posting, as that would leave you to be a simple Ad Hominem poster..and the internet is full of those.

lol ownage

requiemnoise = fail

*FreeBSD FTW

 

[requiemnoise]

lol ownage

requiemnoise = fail

*FreeBSD FTW

Maybe, you should buy a book about your favorite technology. After a while, it gets really boring to see your comments. Don't you ever get tired of saying, "Vista Ruleeezzzz. I'm a spreadsheet guy, but I know more about all the OSes than programmers and Sysadmins....LOL... SUCKERSZ...You know nothing." You spoke a true child. I'm sure a mailman will jump in soon and claims that he knows more than people work on system all day.

 

[Atech]

lol ownage

requiemnoise = fail

*FreeBSD FTW

Making asumptions and trying to bash someone, not on their argumentation, but with pure personal attack is a sure way to look like a retard..and begging to be slammed

Maybe, you should buy a book about your favorite technology. After a while, it gets really boring to see your comments. Don't you ever get tired of saying, "Vista Ruleeezzzz. I'm a spreadsheet guy, but I know more about all the OSes than programmers and Sysadmins....LOL... SUCKERSZ...You know nothing." You spoke a true child. I'm sure a mailman will jump in soon and claims that he knows more than people work on system all day.

(bold reported: no namecalling)

But why do you insist on hitting the wall and not the door.
You claimed I was a n00b (your first mistake)
I disproved that.
You claimed that I was a teenager..that is a lie..and about 13 years late. (your second mistake.)
Calling other members names was you third mistake

Now the wise thing would have been to admit you made a mistake.
Not try and pretend it didn't happen...and certainly not by calling members for "suckerz"...because that only validates my point about you being a fallacy poster with nothing to offer.

The more you try and pretend you didn't drop the ball...the worse you look.

Oh and this might interest you:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1248156
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1337143

 

[Unknown-One]

People seem to get confused between computer speed and GUI speed. The windows gui seems to be faster and slightly more responsive because of the OS architecture and how the GUI is more integrated into 'doze. In linux, the GUI is just another layer over the system, so it appears subjectively slower. Maybe objectively it even is slower.

Yes, this is rather well accepted, and one of the reasons the Windows 7 Beta "feels" so much faster than Vista. In addition to various kernel tweaks, Microsoft has reworked GUI animations to be faster so the OS feels more responsive. The larger window managers like Gnome and KDE don't do some of the things Windows does in order to make the system feel responsive, such as pre-drawing the window (gnome will wait for all resources to load before actually showing the window, which leaves you sitting waiting while nothing happens on the screen).

Once you add compiz on top of that with fancy overdone GUI effects, things really start to feel bogged down. Now you're waiting for the window manager to load resources and then waiting for an animation to finish on top of that, which needs additional resources loaded or computed. There's some serious optimization that could be done there...

But again, that's the GUI, not the raw computing abilities of the computer. Set up two web servers, video renderers, etc. with equivalent hardware, one windoze and one linux, and I would wager that actual performance is probably close to the same

I agree, GUI speed aside, neither OS hinders actual raw hardware performance.

with linux probably getting a slight edge in speed and an even larger edge in stability.

That all depends on what applications and services you're running. There's nothing wrong with the core of either OS, but you can't stop crappy written apps and drivers from sending their stability down the toilet.

As others have said, boot times can also be significantly faster in linux, with speeds now getting down to the 12-15 second time frame (see bootchart threads on Arch linux forum, for example). Let's see you boot into windows in 15 seconds. Probably not. And that adds up over time, considering all the rebooting you have to do in windows. So take overall performance for windows down another notch.

First off, it doesn't take my PC running Vista much longer than that to go from cold boot to full desktop, Windows 7 does it even faster, missing that 15 second mark by just a hair.

Keep in mind, that's only when I actually shut the system down. If I hibernate it (suspend to disk, S4) you're looking at under 15 seconds, and if put it to sleep (suspend to RAM, S3) tapping the power button brings you back to a working desktop in under 2 seconds.

Overall, therefore, imho linux is faster in most things, with windoze appearing to get a slight edge in the GUI. But that is also a virgin install. Give it a few weeks/months and most windoze systems (meaning the average person running them) start getting bogged down with spyware, registry corruptions, possible viruses, etc.

Interesting, in the 5 years I went without reinstalling Windows XP (not even a repair install) I never had any slowdowns, spyware, registry corruption, or viruses. All I did was put myself behind a Linksys router and run Avast antivirus. It was still as snappy the day I formatted the drive and installed Vista as it was the day I installed it (faster, actually, since I upgraded motherboards and various other components under it at various times).

not to mention all the resources that need to be used for scanning, defragging, etc. which you don't have to do in linux. The use of those resources will contribute to a performance hit long-term.

I'll give you virus scanning, not that Avast eats much into your resources at all. Defragging is another matter, entirely dependent upon what file system you have the OS installed on. Many file systems you can install Linux on do in fact benefit from occasion defragmenting.

At the very least, you have to give Windows Vista some credit for is background defragmenter, which works while the system is idle to keep the file system in line (not that NTFS is all that bad about fragmentation, not nearly as bad as FAT32 was).

And even if speaking of elite users, how many times do they reinstall for drivers, etc.? You don't have to do that in linux, either.

Why would you ever need to reinstall a driver on Windows? I've never had a driver spontaneously disappear...and I doubt you could give me the steps to reproduce such a "bug".

For the average user, I think it's safe to say that linux is going to be way faster 6-12 months down the road from the point of fresh install than windoze.

My 5 year run with the same Windows XP install says otherwise, and Vista actually gets faster the more you use it because it learns your usage patterns and caches information accordingly.

You also fail to consider the learning curve, it will take the average new user 6 to 12 months just to adjust to the new OS well enough to do anything as quickly as they could on Windows. Any issues they encounter could take quite a bit longer to troubleshoot since they've had no prior experience with the OS, taking overall productivity down the tubes for the short-run.

Oh, and by the way, it's spelled "Windows", not "windoze".