But I think the music/audio system on OLPC is an outstanding "proof of
concept" to show that if they are implemented creatively neither linux nor
csound necessarily have to be hard to use.

I don't use VST anymore after my Vista box ate itself. While I can't argue
that VST or AU isn't powerful, its not unproblematic.

All the compositions I wrote in csound 10 years ago still compile today. But
God help me if I want to work with the compositions I wrote using Studio
Vision for Mac OS 8.

What we need is something like Tam Tam for Ubuntu. Right now Ubuntu is
perhaps the easiest install, but its audio/music support is really pretty
mediocre "out of the box," it would be a huge "shot in the arm" for the
power of Ubuntu for musicians to have csound5 just sitting there as a
synthesis/audio layer with software that is easy to use running on top of
it.

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:44 PM, Josh Lawrence <hardbop200@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Steven Yi <stevenyi@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This kind of thing has really been an issue for me, that closed source
> > software that goes into an unsupported state severely limits the
> > lifespan and history of computer music works.  I've discussed
> > long-term software in lectures and about considering what you are
> > investing time/money in in terms of future work.
>
> I've spent a lot of time thinking about this recently, and as someone
> who actively uses both closed and open source software, I would like
> to chime in.
>
> I am not a programmer, but a simple user.  As such, I am frequently
> overwhealmed at the complexity of getting certain things going on
> Linux.  For example:  If I want to use Ardour on Debian testing, it
> simply isn't available, so it must be compiled by hand.  Issues and
> problems abound, and thus begins the (sometimes) hours of research to
> learn what needs to be done to make it work.  Reaper on Windows XP?  A
> new version comes out, I install it, and it works.  So for me,
> closed-source software wins in the "ease of use catagory."
>
> Another example:  If my favorite application on Linux is abandoned, I
> do not have the skills to resurrect it.  If my favorite application on
> Windows is abandoned, I do not have access to the code to resurrect it
> (even if I could).  So on this front, it's a draw.
>
> Software synthesizers.  Csound?  Yes, for sure, hands-down the winner.
>  But for simple, "stick it in and play" functionality, you just can't
> beat VST instruments.  And God help you if you try to get that working
> on Linux.  Closed-source software wins on this front.
>
> Some open-source advocates might respond that my lack of skill is at
> fault here, and they would be correct.  Yet, I am not interested in
> becoming a programmer, I simply want to make music with my computer.
> For me, I need the complexity to get out of the way so I can focus on
> what interests me most.  I suspect that there are many musicians just
> like me that would happily use open-source software, if they could
> just get it to work - consistantly, easily, etc.  Windows is, by most
> accounts, an inferior OS to Linux, yet they have done an outstanding
> job of providing a consistant infrastructure, promoting it, and making
> stuff "just work."
>
> Until are addressed in Linux, I honestly can't see a compelling reason
> to move 100% to open-sourced software.  So I use a mix of both.
>
> --
> Josh Lawrence
> http://www.hardbop200.com
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>