Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

descendent87 · 2010-02-20 20:00:50

First of all I know this is just waiting to turn into a flame war but please try and keep this a civil discussion. (Also I'm not saying "this is what linux should do" just giving my opinion on the matter although I'm sure it's been discussed a million times before)
I know one of the big positives about linux is the freedom of choice but I can't help feel that in some ways it's also holding linux back in certain areas.
For example I'm not saying that Gnome, KDE, Openbox, Xmonad...(insert DM/WM of choice here) shouldn't exist, each of those caters to different userbases but for other projects I feel there would be a lot more progress if there were less alternatives.
Audio/Video is one of the biggest that comes to mind, there's ALSA, jack, OSS, pulseaudio and plenty more soundsystems, each have advantages/disadvantages compared to others but if they all were to merge together then surely it would create something far better than any of the current projects.
Same goes for video outputs, XV, VDPAU etc and things like Gstreamer & Xine.
Also it would make things a lot easier for developers, packagers since they wouldn't have to pick and choose which to support or spend extra time including all of them.
Another positive would be the amount of developers, most linux projects are done by voluntary developers who are working for free in their own time, a lot of projects seem to be suffering from lack of developers lately so obviously if there was just one audio system, one video output etc then there would be a lot more developers working on each project to fix bugs/add new features.

Thoughts/opinions/abuse?

Anikom15 · 2010-02-20 20:15:13

You are right!

Cyrusm · 2010-02-20 20:30:52

I smell trouble in this thread....

Last edited by Cyrusm (2010-02-20 20:32:29)

descendent87 · 2010-02-20 21:33:50

I know, it's sort of asking to turn nasty but hopefully we can keep it calm and civilised

skottish · 2010-02-20 21:34:04

Before this thread turns into the newest addition to the "sound sucks in Linux" thread collection, I'd highly recommend that everyone read the following page and all 229 subsequent replies. The absolute truth to why the state of sound in Linux is what it is lies here:

http://insanecoding.blogspot.com/2009/0 … sorry.html

--EDIT--

By the way, so it doesn't take too long to figure out, the people in this discussion are ALSA, OSSv4, Pulse Audio, Ardour, and other sound developers.

Skripka · 2010-02-20 21:36:00

I do believe the phrase "trying to herd cats", applies....

jasonwryan · 2010-02-20 21:42:45

Diversity encourages innovation and strengthens the overall free/libre software commons. We meed more, not less...

raf_kig · 2010-02-20 21:44:47

Sound in linux is awesome! Pulseaudio just rocks, I love being able to play music synchronized in several rooms :-)
And the ability to just use the closest box with speakers attached instead of my notebooks built-in, rerouting the currently running application on the fly.
Not to mention bluetooth-headsets :-)

toxygen · 2010-02-20 21:48:01

what i like about linux is progress does exist, albeit in steady, slow time lines, for the reasons you (OP) gave. i find the "progress must be quick and keep up with xyz competitor" to be a flawed logic when it comes to open source. it's the difference between having natural growth (ie, jungle/forest type of environment, where success is measured in terms of survival and adaptability) vs planned growth (ie farms, particularly big corporate ones, where success is quick and effective, but one little bug that is unplanned for or not predictable can bring the whole thing down).

so while some things in linux will grow and show "success" (in the latter sense) and wow the public, most of linux/unix has been steady, tried-and-true methods of success which have lasted us 20+ years.

and to comment on some hardware devices not showing a lot of success, this is a separate argument, as other OSes (MS/apple) have the benefit of the hardware manufacturer providing specs, whereas linux et al do not. on a level playing field, i guarantee you the quality and 'success' of OSS over closed systems would be equivalent or might even surpass the closed systems. as far as the variety of packages, different software doing similar but slightly different things, etc. again i must use the analogy of jungle/forest life (ie natural setting) where similar creatures exist and live off similar resources, some survive and adapt, others fall off the wayside.

Last edited by toxygen (2010-02-20 21:51:54)

descendent87 · 2010-02-20 21:56:37

Yeah that phrase fits pretty well. Thanks for the link skottish, interesting read (I'm already using OSSv4), and don't get me wrong I don't feel sound/video or anything else in linux sucks, just that it could be even better

Primoz · 2010-02-20 22:00:15

I like choice and I choose ALSA and will continue it indefinitely until I'll see some real reason for not using it.
I mean OK my multimedia key for sound control don't work, neither does Kmix. But I'll live with that, my main output is my receiver so I can control the sound on it and really don't need the sound control on computer directly.
And mute does work, so the only thing that I need directly at "source" is working....
So for now I staying with ALSA, but if anyone knows why any other sound system could work better I open for suggestions.
(BTW I'm using Spdif out.. that's why Kmix doesn't work, there's a "dirty" solution but I'm to lazy to use it)

skottish · 2010-02-20 22:06:27

descendent87 wrote:

Yeah that phrase fits pretty well. Thanks for the link skottish, interesting read (I'm already using OSSv4), and don't get me wrong I don't feel sound/video or anything else in linux sucks, just that it could be even better

Pretty painful reading, isn't it?

MrAllan · 2010-02-20 22:16:54

<off-topic> I don't really care if Linux is popular or not. What do I care about which OS the people around me use? I like Linux for what it is, not for how popular it is.

Bralkein · 2010-02-20 22:38:41

In my opinion, this question makes no sense whatsoever. For example, a helium balloon obviously makes a bad paperweight. You could fill the balloon with sand, then it would make a good paperweight - but then it's no longer a helium balloon, it's something completely different.

So it's like Free Software. People have the freedom to explore and change things and tinker and take a different path. They don't even need a reason to do any of this, the freedom is theirs regardless. The availability of these freedoms is obviously why Linux has seen such success in the first place. Often these freedoms allow people to do exciting and useful new things. Sometimes these freedoms cause problems too. But the problems don't exist independently of the benefits, the positive and negative parts are just different manifestations of the same fundamental characteristic, and they can't really be taken individually in any way that is meaningful.

descendent87 · 2010-02-20 23:18:41

MrAllan wrote:

<off-topic> I don't really care if Linux is popular or not. What do I care about which OS the people around me use? I like Linux for what it is, not for how popular it is.

I don't care about how popular linux is either, sure it would be nice if it was the most used OS but I doubt it ever will be. This post is nothing to do with "making linux popular" just "making linux better"

JohannesSM64 · 2010-02-21 20:59:06

Same goes for video outputs, XV, VDPAU etc and things like Gstreamer & Xine.

They are very different products.. I suggest you read up a little on that one.
What I'd really like to see is KISS truly desktop-independent standards for things like file associations, with no gconf etc. How nice wouldn't it be to have a file with one line for each mime type assoication, with a simple syntax like "image/bmp = mirage", and no further crap?
If all desktops adhered to simple, solid standards like this, I would have no problem with there being many choices.

Anikom15 · 2010-02-21 21:23:27

JohannesSM64 wrote:

Same goes for video outputs, XV, VDPAU etc and things like Gstreamer & Xine.
They are very different products.. I suggest you read up a little on that one.
What I'd really like to see is KISS truly desktop-independent standards for things like file associations, with no gconf etc. How nice wouldn't it be to have a file with one line for each mime type assoication, with a simple syntax like "image/bmp = mirage", and no further crap?
If all desktops adhered to simple, solid standards like this, I would have no problem with there being many choices.

"That doesn't adhere to our human interface guidelines."

Sounds like a home owner's association.

sand_man · 2010-02-21 22:25:00

But the nature of GNU/Linux means you cannot take the freedom away! Why even bother discussing it? That would be like trying to get MS to go open source. As long as any programmer can do whatever they want, they will!

Peasantoid · 2010-02-21 22:38:16

Choice is good.^J^D

ozar · 2010-02-21 22:56:07

descendent87 wrote:

I feel there would be a lot more progress if there were less alternatives.

Sure, but wouldn't that apply to other things as well, such as automobiles, mobile phones, televisions, etc? If there were only one model of each of those items and all the engineers and technicians had no other choice but to improve on that particular model, wouldn't progress be much further along on each of them? Your scenario could even be applied to the fact that we have too many flavors of ice cream to choose from.

I think you have to sacrifice progress at times so that people have choice, otherwise the majority of us would soon be bored to tears, if not death.

fsckd · 2010-02-21 23:12:24

I am fairly certain, the prevailing sentiment is the more people you throw at a project, the less progress there is.

JezdziecBezNicka · 2010-02-21 23:52:36

I feel there would be a lot more progress if there were less alternatives.

I sometimes feel that way too. Look at the kernel - it owes its success to the fact it is "the only one". In fact, this is the reason I skipped my native Archlinux forum and went straight to the source - we should gather, not scatter (too bad humans don't speak a common language, like aliens do in all sci-fi movies:).

But then again, diversity is hard-coded into human kind.

xenofungus · 2010-02-22 03:54:42

fsckd wrote:

I am fairly certain, the prevailing sentiment is the more people you throw at a project, the less progress there is.

+1

I even think that the fact that every developer can reinvent the wheel is the reason why we have cool wheels.

Have a gigantic codebase with lots of developers. Good luck trying to implement this great idea that requires changing something.

b9anders · 2010-02-22 12:32:54

Yes, it is holding linux back. The payoffs are to a large extent worthwhile however, imo.

And at any rate, from an open source perspective, the question is probably largely irrelevant. Open source will invariably diversify the selections. It's the nature of the beast.

Last edited by b9anders (2010-02-22 12:33:19)

schuay · 2010-02-22 13:38:37

skottish wrote:

http://insanecoding.blogspot.com/2009/0 … sorry.html

Thanks for that link, very interesting read (mostly the comments, not so much the article which reminds me a bit of all the 'filesystem1 FEELS faster than filesystem2' posts).

Edit - removed some incoherent rambling..

Last edited by schuay (2010-02-22 13:54:12)

Arch Linux

#1 2010-02-20 20:00:50

Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#2 2010-02-20 20:15:13

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#3 2010-02-20 20:30:52

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#4 2010-02-20 21:33:50

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#5 2010-02-20 21:34:04

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#6 2010-02-20 21:36:00

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#7 2010-02-20 21:42:45

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#8 2010-02-20 21:44:47

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#9 2010-02-20 21:48:01

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#10 2010-02-20 21:56:37

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#11 2010-02-20 22:00:15

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#12 2010-02-20 22:06:27

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#13 2010-02-20 22:16:54

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#14 2010-02-20 22:38:41

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#15 2010-02-20 23:18:41

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#16 2010-02-21 20:59:06

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#17 2010-02-21 21:23:27

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#18 2010-02-21 22:25:00

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#19 2010-02-21 22:38:16

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#20 2010-02-21 22:56:07

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#21 2010-02-21 23:12:24

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#22 2010-02-21 23:52:36

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#23 2010-02-22 03:54:42

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#24 2010-02-22 12:32:54

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

#25 2010-02-22 13:38:37

Re: Freedom of choice, is it holding linux back?

Board footer