KVRian
    Contact stian
    1442 posts since 1 Jan, 2005 from Norway

Post Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:49 pm

Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with Linux
on the desktop is that we would have to support so many different
distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in standard C++,
it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly short development
time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible with all
distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.

Best,
Stian

https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=575926
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustica_(software)#See_also

Let us hope that The AI will be able to code and write coded modules for
any distribution of Linux

--
Pity the fool who followed his GPS over the cliff

--
Pity the fool who followed his GPS over the cliff

On 9/1/23 23:38, Nic wrote:
>      KVRian
>     Contact stian
>     1442 posts since 1 Jan, 2005 from Norway
>
> Post Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:49 pm
>
> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with Linux
> on the desktop is that we would have to support so many different
> distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in standard C++,
> it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly short development
> time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible with all
> distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.
>
> Best,
> Stian
>
> https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=575926
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustica_(software)#See_also
>
> Let us hope that The AI will be able to code and write coded modules for
> any distribution of Linux

When AI starts to mature, it will tell the linux religion to stop with
that perpetuum growing nr of distribution insanity.

( and listen to Edmund ) :-)

--
-------------

The moment any organization established from pure noble intentions get
some influence, it will be corrupted from both inside and outside.
Then we have organizations established from pure evil.

Edmund

On 9/1/23 6:23 PM, Edmund wrote:
> On 9/1/23 23:38, Nic wrote:
>>       KVRian
>>      Contact stian
>>      1442 posts since 1 Jan, 2005 from Norway
>>
>> Post Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:49 pm
>>
>> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with
>> Linux on the desktop is that we would have to support so many
>> different distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in
>> standard C++, it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly
>> short development time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible
>> with all distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.
>>
>> Best,
>> Stian
>>
>> https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=575926
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustica_(software)#See_also
>>
>> Let us hope that The AI will be able to code and write coded modules
>> for any distribution of Linux
>
> When AI starts to mature, it will tell the linux religion to stop with
> that perpetuum growing nr of distribution insanity.
>
> ( and listen to Edmund ) :-)
>
>
> What does Edmund have to say? Besides your usual bitching about Linux
> Mint, just think after several layers of  compost them young
> intelligent folks will solve that Linux gap, where every coded program
> will run on Linux for free.
>
>

Nic cited:
> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with
> Linux on the desktop is that we would have to support so many
> different distributions.

I was reading about a markup language the other day, Markdown, which was
initially released almost 20 y ago.

> As Markdown's popularity grew rapidly, many Markdown implementations
> appeared, driven mostly by the need for additional features such as
> tables, footnotes, definition lists,[note 1] and Markdown inside HTML
> blocks.

Now, there are as many different v of Markdown as their are
implementations which number in the scores, so one might say that it
would be 'difficult' for any particular implementation result to be
'compatible' across the scores of other markdown implementations.

In the case of linux and open source, 'all' a dev has to do is make his
source code available to the community. The 'friends' of a particular
distro or distro version can compile his 'product' for their distro's
preferred packaging or for a flatpak or for a snap or appimage.

However, it doesn't work that way for Acoustica, as it is proprietary
for MS Win or MacOS.

There are numerous articles written about the 20 or 25 best alternatives
to Acoustica for linux. Since I don't know anything about digital audio
editors, I can't comment on the linux alternatives.

--
Mike Easter

On 9/1/23 7:45 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic cited:
>> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with
>> Linux on the desktop is that we would have to support so many
>> different distributions.
>
> I was reading about a markup language the other day, Markdown, which was
> initially released almost 20 y ago.
>
>> As Markdown's popularity grew rapidly, many Markdown implementations
>> appeared, driven mostly by the need for additional features such as
>> tables, footnotes, definition lists,[note 1] and Markdown inside HTML
>> blocks.
>
> Now, there are as many different v of Markdown as their are
> implementations which number in the scores, so one might say that it
> would be 'difficult' for any particular implementation result to be
> 'compatible' across the scores of other markdown implementations.
>
> In the case of linux and open source, 'all' a dev has  to do is make
> his source code available to the community.  The 'friends' of a
> particular distro or distro version can compile his 'product' for
> their distro's preferred packaging or for a flatpak or for a snap or
> appimage.
>
> However, it doesn't work that way for Acoustica, as it is proprietary
> for MS Win or MacOS.
>
> There are numerous articles written about the 20 or 25 best
> alternatives to Acoustica for linux.  Since I don't know anything
> about digital audio editors, I can't comment on the linux alternatives.
>
>
And so a Linux User must pass up this really nice music software.

Nic wrote:
> And so a Linux User must pass up this really nice music software.

Or alternatively, he could use some other really nice music software, or
he could run a v of Win in a linux VM, or he could have more than one
device to include a device which was Mac or Win.

Personally, I have a lot of 'devices' around here. 5 in this room, 4
desktops and 1 old RPi 3B, 1 laptop in the kitchen TV area, 1 laptop in
the living room TV area, and 1 very ancient laptop in the bedroom area I
never turn on anymore. Some of them are capable of running W7 and is
the 'most used Win' but not that much, 1 is capable of running W10 but I
never do, and 1 runs Chrome OS.

My understanding is that the Standard acoustica for Win is about $60,
while the Premium ed. is $300.

It isn't likely I would be purchasing either of those licenses even tho'
I could run them on a W7 or W10 machine. Would you? Actually my
interest is so low that I wouldn't even test the downloadable free trial.

--
Mike Easter

On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 18:55:06 -0700
Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:

> Nic wrote:
> > And so a Linux User must pass up this really nice music software.
>
> Or alternatively, he could use some other really nice music software, or
> he could run a v of Win in a linux VM, or he could have more than one
> device to include a device which was Mac or Win.
>
> Personally, I have a lot of 'devices' around here. 5 in this room, 4
> desktops and 1 old RPi 3B, 1 laptop in the kitchen TV area, 1 laptop in
> the living room TV area, and 1 very ancient laptop in the bedroom area I
> never turn on anymore. Some of them are capable of running W7 and is
> the 'most used Win' but not that much, 1 is capable of running W10 but I
> never do, and 1 runs Chrome OS.
>
> My understanding is that the Standard acoustica for Win is about $60,
> while the Premium ed. is $300.
>
> It isn't likely I would be purchasing either of those licenses even tho'
> I could run them on a W7 or W10 machine. Would you? Actually my
> interest is so low that I wouldn't even test the downloadable free trial.
>
>
> --
> Mike Easter

--
Is there any music in your life?

nic wrote:
> Is there any music in your life?

I have a mostly oldies radio station on 24/7. When I'm out basking in
the sun, I'm listening to a smartphone (w/ no plan) functioning like an
iPod w/ all oldies, mostly Eagles, which I ripped from collections of CDs.

There are a number of 'generations' of music I don't listen to at all.

--
Mike Easter

Mike Easter wrote:
> There are a number of 'generations' of music I don't listen to at all.

Oh, yeah. And on my daily walk I don't listen to music at all, as I
prefer silence & meditation then. When I rode an exercise bike in the
past, I always listened to music; I never dev/d the meditation mode then.

--
Mike Easter

On 9/2/23 00:38, Nic wrote:
> On 9/1/23 6:23 PM, Edmund wrote:
>> On 9/1/23 23:38, Nic wrote:
>>>       KVRian
>>>      Contact stian
>>>      1442 posts since 1 Jan, 2005 from Norway
>>>
>>> Post Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:49 pm
>>>
>>> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with
>>> Linux on the desktop is that we would have to support so many
>>> different distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in
>>> standard C++, it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly
>>> short development time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible
>>> with all distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Stian
>>>
>>> https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=575926
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustica_(software)#See_also
>>>
>>> Let us hope that The AI will be able to code and write coded modules
>>> for any distribution of Linux
>>
>> When AI starts to mature, it will tell the linux religion to stop with
>> that perpetuum growing nr of distribution insanity.
>>
>> ( and listen to Edmund ) :-)
>>
>>
>> What does Edmund have to say? Besides your usual bitching about Linux
>> Mint, just think after several layers of  compost them young
>> intelligent folks will solve that Linux gap, where every coded program
>> will run on Linux for free.

You are not able to understand the difference between bitching and
having well motivated positive criticism.
Young intelligent people will undoubtedly fully agree with me, it are
the old stubborn fundamentalists that you find in all extreme religions
that cannot accept any kind of criticism about there religion. That why
religions are stuck in a time ages ago and it is why our religion does
not improve.

--
-------------

The moment any organization established from pure noble intentions get
some influence, it will be corrupted from both inside and outside.
Then we have organizations established from pure evil.

Edmund

On 9/1/23 9:55 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> And so a Linux User must pass up this really nice music software.
>
> Or alternatively, he could use some other really nice music software,
> or he could run a v of Win in a linux VM, or he could have more than
> one device to include a device which was Mac or Win.
>
> Personally, I have a lot of 'devices' around here. 5 in this room, 4
> desktops and 1 old RPi 3B, 1 laptop in the kitchen TV area, 1 laptop
> in the living room TV area, and 1 very ancient laptop in the bedroom
> area I never turn on anymore.  Some of them are capable of running W7
> and is the 'most used Win' but not that much, 1 is capable of running
> W10 but I never do, and 1 runs Chrome OS.
>
> My understanding is that the Standard acoustica for Win is about $60,
> while the Premium ed. is $300.
>
> It isn't likely I would be purchasing either of those licenses even
> tho' I could run them on a W7 or W10 machine.  Would you? Actually my
> interest is so low that I wouldn't even test the downloadable free trial.
>
>
I did purchase a license, a few too many years ago, not sure which one.
There was some kind of special deal, I can't remember, but it was a very
good music creation program. I think it is too complex for a w7 vm,
asking for a headache.

On 9/2/23 08:55, this is what Nic wrote:
> On 9/1/23 9:55 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
>> Nic wrote:
>>> And so a Linux User must pass up this really nice music software.
>>
>> Or alternatively, he could use some other really nice music software, or he could run a v of Win in a linux VM, or he
>> could have more than one device to include a device which was Mac or Win.
>>
>> Personally, I have a lot of 'devices' around here. 5 in this room, 4 desktops and 1 old RPi 3B, 1 laptop in the
>> kitchen TV area, 1 laptop in the living room TV area, and 1 very ancient laptop in the bedroom area I never turn on
>> anymore.  Some of them are capable of running W7 and is the 'most used Win' but not that much, 1 is capable of running
>> W10 but I never do, and 1 runs Chrome OS.
>>
>> My understanding is that the Standard acoustica for Win is about $60, while the Premium ed. is $300.
>>
>> It isn't likely I would be purchasing either of those licenses even tho' I could run them on a W7 or W10 machine.
>> Would you? Actually my interest is so low that I wouldn't even test the downloadable free trial.
>>
>>
> I did purchase a license, a few too many years ago, not sure which one. There was some kind of special deal, I can't
> remember, but it was a very good music creation program. I think it is too complex for a w7 vm, asking for a headache.
I bought the Acoustica Label Maker software. Back in the days when I printed labels or the actual discs for the music
CDs and video DVD's. I have about 50 each printable CDs and DVDs. Of what use they are I"m not sure. Best I can do
is use them for a car CD. They're just collecting dust now.
--
Linux Mint 21.2 Cinnamon
Al

Nic wrote:
> I think it is too complex for a w7 vm

While I'm not a 'fan' of VMs, my 'taste' is mainly because of that need
to run two different OSes to run one application, but...

.... it seems to me that given sufficient ram, so that you have enough
ram to 'throw away' some running 'the other' OS and its application,
namely the VM, then one should be able to 'get the job done'.

That is, 'sufficient' ram to run a linux + VM + Win7 + Acoustica and its
fodder.

Personally, I would run the Acoustica on a W7 box w/ only 8G ram.

Acoustica says that it wants a machine w/ 4G ram.

--
Mike Easter

On 9/2/23 17:53, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> I think it is too complex for a w7 vm
>
> While I'm not a 'fan' of VMs, my 'taste' is mainly because of that need
> to run two different OSes to run one application, but...
>
> ... it seems to me that given sufficient ram, so that you have enough
> ram to 'throw away' some running 'the other' OS and its application,
> namely the VM, then one should be able to 'get the job done'.
>
> That is, 'sufficient' ram to run a linux + VM + Win7 + Acoustica and its
> fodder.
>
> Personally, I would run the Acoustica on a W7 box w/ only 8G ram.
>
> Acoustica says that it wants a machine w/ 4G ram.
>
>
Apart from that there is a much better way to run VM's, I am sure you
guys support more linux flavors in order to prevent companies will
release a linux version of their products.

You are not wasting time and resources one little bit.

Never mind what they said :
Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with Linux
on the desktop is that we would have to support so many different
distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in standard C++,
it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly short development
time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible with all
distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.

--
-------------

The moment any organization established from pure noble intentions get
some influence, it will be corrupted from both inside and outside.
Then we have organizations established from pure evil.

Edmund

Edmund wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> Nic wrote:
>>> I think it is too complex for a w7 vm
>>
>> While I'm not a 'fan' of VMs, my 'taste' is mainly because of that
>> need to run two different OSes to run one application, but...
>>
>> ... it seems to me that given sufficient ram, so that you have enough
>> ram to 'throw away' some running 'the other' OS and its application,
>> namely the VM, then one should be able to 'get the job done'.
>>
>> That is, 'sufficient' ram to run a linux + VM + Win7 + Acoustica and
>> its fodder.
>>
>> Personally, I would run the Acoustica on a W7 box w/ only 8G ram.
>>
>> Acoustica says that it wants a machine w/ 4G ram.
>>
>>
> Apart from that there is a much better way to run VM's, I am sure you
> guys support more linux flavors in order to prevent companies will
> release a linux version of their products.
>
> You are not wasting time and resources one little bit.
>
> Never mind what they said :
> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with Linux
> on the desktop is that we would have to support so many different
> distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in standard C++,
> it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly short development
> time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible with all
> distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.
>
I'm not understanding your 'argument' Edmund, except that if you are
arguing that open source linux is at a 'disadvantage' because someone
like Acoustica's dev finds it too difficult to provide a lot of
different proprietary closed source versions of his product/s because of
the variability of linux distributions, packaging, desktop environments,
and alternate decisions about init/s and systemd, then I agree w/ the
fact that is a problem for such proprietary work. But not necessarily a
problem for linux, per se.

There is all kinds of proprietary 'stuff' in the world such as 'drivers'
or 'blobs' for hardware.

That does NOT mean there *should* be just one such thing as linux.
There /could/ be a 'standard' version of linux, but that idea hasn't
been able to fly from the beginning and hasn't gotten any traction over
the decades.

Neither RedHat nor Canonical nor Debian nor anyone else 'rules the
roost' in terms of calling the shots except in its own bailiwick, and
that isn't going to change.

--
Mike Easter

On 9/2/2023 12:02 PM, Edmund wrote:
> On 9/2/23 17:53, Mike Easter wrote:
>> Nic wrote:
>>> I think it is too complex for a w7 vm
>>
>> While I'm not a 'fan' of VMs, my 'taste' is mainly because of that need to run two different OSes to run one application, but...
>>
>> ... it seems to me that given sufficient ram, so that you have enough ram to 'throw away' some running 'the other' OS and its application, namely the VM, then one should be able to 'get the job done'.
>>
>> That is, 'sufficient' ram to run a linux + VM + Win7 + Acoustica and its fodder.
>>
>> Personally, I would run the Acoustica on a W7 box w/ only 8G ram.
>>
>> Acoustica says that it wants a machine w/ 4G ram.
>>
>>
> Apart from that there is a much better way to run VM's, I am sure you guys support more linux flavors in order to prevent companies will
> release a linux version of their products.
>
> You are not wasting time and resources one little bit.
>
> Never mind what they said :
> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with Linux on the desktop is that we would have to support so many different distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in standard C++, it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly short development time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible with all distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.

Edmund, it's pretty simple really.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F5ccc682e-3ad4-42c6-852e-dbbaf51ec85e_977x581.jpeg

OK, as an amateur MBA, I make a .deb version, release it,
see how many users will pay my licensing fee. Because a few of
the top distros, are Debian based.

I then only develop for the next least obscure distro, as time permits.

There is absolutely no reason to develop for all of them, because... you can't.
Distrowatch does not necessarily have all distributions. What about the Chinese
market ? Does any English speaking site document that ?

So you start with a chart, and you test-market.

How did you do ?

Did you make enough money to pay for those two new (Linux) developers you hired ?

Your financial situation will not change rapidly, if you include a Puppy version
of your tool. Or a Linux From Scratch version.

This is one reason distros do not release user statistics. IT would make
them "too easy to ignore".

You could also attempt distribution with Flatpak or the like.
That may afford a way to package dependencies and get you
off a certain treadmill.

You can also wrap your home project in QT5 and make it cross-platform,
but there would still be somewhat of a treadmill by doing that.

Summary: Let us be honest. The developer tried to make excuses.
The real reason, is if you are 30% of the entire computer market,
he addresses your needs. If you have a lower market share, you
are ignored. I mean, how many products like that, would the
FreeBSD people be offered ? :-) Or someone running a copy of BeOS.

And if we let those charts rule every decision, the only new
software would be available on SmartPhones and nothing else.
Because, apparently, the market saturation of SmartPhones is <cough> "100%".

Paul

On 9/2/23 12:47 PM, Paul wrote:
> On 9/2/2023 12:02 PM, Edmund wrote:
>> On 9/2/23 17:53, Mike Easter wrote:
>>> Nic wrote:
>>>> I think it is too complex for a w7 vm
>>> While I'm not a 'fan' of VMs, my 'taste' is mainly because of that need to run two different OSes to run one application, but...
>>>
>>> ... it seems to me that given sufficient ram, so that you have enough ram to 'throw away' some running 'the other' OS and its application, namely the VM, then one should be able to 'get the job done'.
>>>
>>> That is, 'sufficient' ram to run a linux + VM + Win7 + Acoustica and its fodder.
>>>
>>> Personally, I would run the Acoustica on a W7 box w/ only 8G ram.
>>>
>>> Acoustica says that it wants a machine w/ 4G ram.
>>>
>>>
>> Apart from that there is a much better way to run VM's, I am sure you guys support more linux flavors in order to prevent companies will
>> release a linux version of their products.
>>
>> You are not wasting time and resources one little bit.
>>
>> Never mind what they said :
>> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with Linux on the desktop is that we would have to support so many different distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in standard C++, it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly short development time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible with all distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.
> Edmund, it's pretty simple really.
>
> https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F5ccc682e-3ad4-42c6-852e-dbbaf51ec85e_977x581.jpeg
>
> OK, as an amateur MBA, I make a .deb version, release it,
> see how many users will pay my licensing fee. Because a few of
> the top distros, are Debian based.
>
> I then only develop for the next least obscure distro, as time permits.
>
> There is absolutely no reason to develop for all of them, because... you can't.
> Distrowatch does not necessarily have all distributions. What about the Chinese
> market ? Does any English speaking site document that ?
>
> So you start with a chart, and you test-market.
>
> How did you do ?
>
> Did you make enough money to pay for those two new (Linux) developers you hired ?
>
> Your financial situation will not change rapidly, if you include a Puppy version
> of your tool. Or a Linux From Scratch version.
>
> This is one reason distros do not release user statistics. IT would make
> them "too easy to ignore".
>
> You could also attempt distribution with Flatpak or the like.
> That may afford a way to package dependencies and get you
> off a certain treadmill.
>
> You can also wrap your home project in QT5 and make it cross-platform,
> but there would still be somewhat of a treadmill by doing that.
>
> Summary: Let us be honest. The developer tried to make excuses.
> The real reason, is if you are 30% of the entire computer market,
> he addresses your needs. If you have a lower market share, you
> are ignored. I mean, how many products like that, would the
> FreeBSD people be offered ? :-) Or someone running a copy of BeOS.
>
> And if we let those charts rule every decision, the only new
> software would be available on SmartPhones and nothing else.
> Because, apparently, the market saturation of SmartPhones is <cough> "100%".
>
> Paul
Is a Flatpak the same as an Appimage?   That is a good point about the
SmartPhones and market saturation.

Nic wrote:
> Is a Flatpak the same as an Appimage?

No; one way to understand both of them better is from their 'roots' or dev.

AppImage came from gnome's xdg-app
https://help.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/3.20/developers.html.en

Flatpak came from Klik.

Or, here's an article comparing snap, flatpak , & appimage

https://phoenixnap.com/kb/flatpak-vs-snap-vs-appimage

Perhaps the latter article is the best way to compare them by features
as opposed to history.

--
Mike Easter

On 9/2/23 2:07 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> Is a Flatpak the same as an Appimage?
>
> No; one way to understand both of them better is from their 'roots' or
> dev.
>
> AppImage came from gnome's xdg-app
> https://help.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/3.20/developers.html.en
>
> Flatpak came from Klik.
>
> Or, here's an article comparing snap, flatpak , & appimage
>
> https://phoenixnap.com/kb/flatpak-vs-snap-vs-appimage
>
> Perhaps the latter article is the best way to compare them by features
> as opposed to history.
>
It seems that the Appimage got the best scores. Thanks for the link to
the article, very informative.

Nic wrote:
> It seems that the Appimage got the best scores. Thanks for the link to
> the article, very informative.

Well, appimage is the lightest, that is a plus, since bulk and thus
'inefficiency' is part of the problem. Personally I prefer to use
conventional .deb packages for my usual distro Mint. Mint conventional
..debs include not only those from its own repo/s but those of Ub repo/s
which are a great many because of Ub repo/s being derived from the
wealth of Deb repo/s, as well as all of those many .ppa packagers for
the various Ub versions.

It is 'rare' that I would have occasion to load a flatpak for a Mint.
I'm not sure I recall having loaded a Snap except by 'accident' when
testing some Ub distro which enables Snap by default and then seems to
hide the fact to try to 'force' snap usage on its users.

Ub seems to make some 'headstrong' decisions on some things and then
'double-down' on its decisions even when many users are unhappy about
something.

It is 'interesting' to see that many of the 'sea' of dev/s who like to
make their own Ub 'spin' and call it another distro have drifted from Ub
as a base to Deb as a base, but I would consider Mint to be the 'leader'
of the field, which 'primarily' sticks w/ Ub for its base, while
departing from Ub on important decisions such as how it handles the
choice of desktops (dropping KDE while dev/ing Cinnamon and molding the
other gtk DEs), whether it includes Snap (NOT), and continuing to *also*
base on Deb, not just Ub. I find that an 'admirable' distribution and
balance of its resources.

--
Mike Easter

On 9/2/23 5:24 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> It seems that the Appimage got the best scores. Thanks for the link
>> to the article, very informative.
>
> Well, appimage is the lightest, that is a plus, since bulk and thus
> 'inefficiency' is part of the problem.  Personally I prefer to use
> conventional .deb packages for my usual distro Mint.  Mint
> conventional .debs include not only those from its own repo/s but
> those of Ub repo/s which are a great many because of Ub repo/s being
> derived from the wealth of Deb repo/s, as well as all of those many
> .ppa packagers for the various Ub versions.
>
> It is 'rare' that I would have occasion to load a flatpak for a Mint.
> I'm not sure I recall having loaded a Snap except by 'accident' when
> testing some Ub distro which enables Snap by default and then seems to
> hide the fact to try to 'force' snap usage on its users.
>
> Ub seems to make some 'headstrong' decisions on some things and then
> 'double-down' on its decisions even when many users are unhappy about
> something.
>
> It is 'interesting' to see that many of the 'sea' of dev/s who like to
> make their own Ub 'spin' and call it another distro have drifted from
> Ub as a base to Deb as a base, but I would consider Mint to be the
> 'leader' of the field, which 'primarily' sticks w/ Ub for its base,
> while departing from Ub on important decisions such as how it handles
> the choice of desktops (dropping KDE while dev/ing Cinnamon and
> molding the other gtk DEs), whether it includes Snap (NOT), and
> continuing to *also* base on Deb, not just Ub.  I find that an
> 'admirable' distribution and balance of its resources.
>
Spoken like a true Mint devotee😁

Mike Easter wrote:
> (dropping KDE while dev/ing Cinnamon and molding the other gtk DEs),

I should have said that somewhat differently. Mint not only dropped
KDE, being based on Qt while its supported DEs were GTKs, but it also
'dropped' the *primary* GTK 'leader' Gnome, in favor of the 'forks'
Cinnamon and Mate and retaining the 'other' gtk XFCE. Many consider
XFCE to try to be the 'lightest' gtk, but now that LXDE is essentially
'gone over' dev-wise to LXQt it isn't so light. XFCE isn't really any
lighter than a light version of KDE.

I applaud the Mint dropping of Gnome. I accept the 'rationale' behind
the dropping of KDE by Mint because I understand, but I consider KDE to
be the better of the DEs if all we have to consider is Gnome vs KDE.
Fortunately Gnome forking has brought us more than those two choices.

--
Mike Easter

Nic wrote:
> Spoken like a true Mint devotee

I'm a Mint devotee who also likes KDE :-)

.... but then I like to mess w/ a lot of different distro/s besides Mint,
my 'everyday driver'.

'In the beginning' -- the first '06 LM releases were based on KDE &
Gnome (but of course both early KDE and Gnome were very different), by
'08 there were also an XFCE & Fluxbox WM, by '10 LXDE was also added, by
'11-'12 the 'twisting' of Gnome resulted in Cinnamon & Mate and NO GNOME
by '12, fluxbox & lxde had already been dropped, by '18 KDE was dropped.
The LMDEs started in '14 which included Mate w/ Cinn, but was soon
dropped in favor of just LMDE Cinnamon.

--
Mike Easter

On 9/2/23 18:31, Mike Easter wrote:
> Edmund wrote:
>>  Mike Easter wrote:
>>> Nic wrote:
>>>> I think it is too complex for a w7 vm
>>>
>>> While I'm not a 'fan' of VMs, my 'taste' is mainly because of that
>>> need to run two different OSes to run one application, but...
>>>
>>> ... it seems to me that given sufficient ram, so that you have enough
>>> ram to 'throw away' some running 'the other' OS and its application,
>>> namely the VM, then one should be able to 'get the job done'.
>>>
>>> That is, 'sufficient' ram to run a linux + VM + Win7 + Acoustica and
>>> its fodder.
>>>
>>> Personally, I would run the Acoustica on a W7 box w/ only 8G ram.
>>>
>>> Acoustica says that it wants a machine w/ 4G ram.
>>>
>>>
>> Apart from that there is a much better way to run VM's, I am sure you
>> guys support more linux flavors in order to prevent companies will
>> release a linux version of their products.
>>
>> You are not wasting time and resources one little bit.
>>
>> Never mind what they said :
>> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with
>> Linux on the desktop is that we would have to support so many
>> different distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in
>> standard C++, it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly
>> short development time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible
>> with all distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.
>>
> I'm not understanding your 'argument' Edmund,

I know

--
-------------

The moment any organization established from pure noble intentions get
some influence, it will be corrupted from both inside and outside.
Then we have organizations established from pure evil.

Edmund

On 9/2/23 18:47, Paul wrote:
> On 9/2/2023 12:02 PM, Edmund wrote:
>> On 9/2/23 17:53, Mike Easter wrote:
>>> Nic wrote:
>>>> I think it is too complex for a w7 vm
>>>
>>> While I'm not a 'fan' of VMs, my 'taste' is mainly because of that need to run two different OSes to run one application, but...
>>>
>>> ... it seems to me that given sufficient ram, so that you have enough ram to 'throw away' some running 'the other' OS and its application, namely the VM, then one should be able to 'get the job done'.
>>>
>>> That is, 'sufficient' ram to run a linux + VM + Win7 + Acoustica and its fodder.
>>>
>>> Personally, I would run the Acoustica on a W7 box w/ only 8G ram.
>>>
>>> Acoustica says that it wants a machine w/ 4G ram.
>>>
>>>
>> Apart from that there is a much better way to run VM's, I am sure you guys support more linux flavors in order to prevent companies will
>> release a linux version of their products.
>>
>> You are not wasting time and resources one little bit.
>>
>> Never mind what they said :
>> Thanks for the kind words about Acoustica! The major problem with Linux on the desktop is that we would have to support so many different distributions. Since Acoustica uses JUCE and is written in standard C++, it would be possible to build for Linux after a fairly short development time, I suppose. My worries is making it compatible with all distributions and supporting the platform in the long run.
>
> Edmund, it's pretty simple really.
>
> https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F5ccc682e-3ad4-42c6-852e-dbbaf51ec85e_977x581.jpeg
>
> OK, as an amateur MBA, I make a .deb version, release it,
> see how many users will pay my licensing fee. Because a few of
> the top distros, are Debian based.
>
> I then only develop for the next least obscure distro, as time permits.
>
> There is absolutely no reason to develop for all of them, because... you can't.

Well there you have it!

> Distrowatch does not necessarily have all distributions. What about the Chinese
> market ? Does any English speaking site document that ?
>
> So you start with a chart, and you test-market.
>
> How did you do ?
>
> Did you make enough money to pay for those two new (Linux) developers you hired ?
>
> Your financial situation will not change rapidly, if you include a Puppy version
> of your tool. Or a Linux From Scratch version.
>
> This is one reason distros do not release user statistics. IT would make
> them "too easy to ignore".
>
> You could also attempt distribution with Flatpak or the like.
> That may afford a way to package dependencies and get you
> off a certain treadmill.
>
> You can also wrap your home project in QT5 and make it cross-platform,
> but there would still be somewhat of a treadmill by doing that.
>
> Summary: Let us be honest. The developer tried to make excuses.
> The real reason, is if you are 30% of the entire computer market,
> he addresses your needs. If you have a lower market share, you
> are ignored. I mean, how many products like that, would the
> FreeBSD people be offered ? :-) Or someone running a copy of BeOS.
>
> And if we let those charts rule every decision, the only new
> software would be available on SmartPhones and nothing else.
> Because, apparently, the market saturation of SmartPhones is <cough> "100%".
>
> Paul

I am sure the community can come up with lots more circular reasoning
and explain the release stupidity away.

Never mind I know and we don't agree, it is a huge waste of time and
resources.

--
-------------

The moment any organization established from pure noble intentions get
some influence, it will be corrupted from both inside and outside.
Then we have organizations established from pure evil.

Edmund