4909659
submission
Comments: 2 +- Answer to Adobe's Linux bash posted-> on Friday June 19 2009, @05:03AM Anonymous Coward
Submitted
by
Anonymous Coward
on Friday June 19 2009, @05:03AM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicsoftware.gif); width:65px; height:65px;
software
An anonymous reader writes "There have been past claims by Adobe and others that development on Linux is a jungle, particularly in regards to audio. However today, the author of the popular "The Sorry State of Sound in Linux" has posted a follow up showing Adobe's claims to be FUD, as well as being a good update on where OSS and ALSA are holding today, and why PulseAudio isn't a good idea."
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
One is not superior merely because one sees the world as odious.
-- Chateaubriand (1768-1848)
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
PulseAudio (Score:2)
PulseAudio is a terrible idea. And I have been annoyed since Fedora integrated it.. it's a massive PITA to remove.
I'm running a gorram PVR. Only install the minimum stuff I need, don't FORCE pulse on me.
Real eye opener (Score:1)
This was a great read. Ubuntu should be focusing on implementing OSSv4 in the next Ubuntu, not dicking around with getting it to boot faster. What's the point of a fast boot speed if your shitty pulseaudio sound server is delaying your audio making skype and games impossible.