<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_19_0155235</id>
	<title>PulseAudio Creator Responds To Critics</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1255941540000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Dan Jones writes <i>"As <a href="//linux.slashdot.org/story/09/06/19/1937210/">recently discussed here</a>, Linux sound development has come under fire for being overly complex and, more specifically, PulseAudio has been criticized for not being a 'good idea.' In a lengthy interview, <a href="http://www.cio.com.au/article/320807/open\_source\_identity\_pulseaudio\_creator\_lennart\_poettering">PulseAudio creator Lennart Poettering has responded to the many critics</a> of the new-generation sound server and says such complaints and criticisms about PulseAudio in some Internet forums are not really shared by the vast majority of technical people. While Poettering admits PulseAudio itself is not bug-free, he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dan Jones writes " As recently discussed here , Linux sound development has come under fire for being overly complex and , more specifically , PulseAudio has been criticized for not being a 'good idea .
' In a lengthy interview , PulseAudio creator Lennart Poettering has responded to the many critics of the new-generation sound server and says such complaints and criticisms about PulseAudio in some Internet forums are not really shared by the vast majority of technical people .
While Poettering admits PulseAudio itself is not bug-free , he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dan Jones writes "As recently discussed here, Linux sound development has come under fire for being overly complex and, more specifically, PulseAudio has been criticized for not being a 'good idea.
' In a lengthy interview, PulseAudio creator Lennart Poettering has responded to the many critics of the new-generation sound server and says such complaints and criticisms about PulseAudio in some Internet forums are not really shared by the vast majority of technical people.
While Poettering admits PulseAudio itself is not bug-free, he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791929</id>
	<title>what to do...</title>
	<author>ninjanissan</author>
	<datestamp>1255953540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>apt-get remove pulseaudio</htmltext>
<tokenext>apt-get remove pulseaudio</tokentext>
<sentencetext>apt-get remove pulseaudio</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800237</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>ShawnX</author>
	<datestamp>1255947300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Colin, that's fine and dandy but...

Your daemon can't even handle the fact when I use konsole and press backspace to trigger the beep several times will coredump the server.

I will continue to remove PulseAudio from my systems until

1) its CPU usage is reasonable
2) It can let me control my hardware properly. Especially for me where the HW has no PCM capture (I have to use ALSA + jackd + jack\_capture to get around this problem)

3) It does not crash so much causing me no end of pain with multiple apps requiring audio.

Frankly I wish someone would push/convince Linus to get OSS4 into the kernel and help us get rid of ALSA (deprecate it) and then strip PulseAudio down to just network audio ONLY.

We've had enough crap in the Linux Audio subsystem for so long, it's time to do the right thing and chunk the whole shit out.

I'll accept more pain if we get it right, finally.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Colin , that 's fine and dandy but.. . Your daemon ca n't even handle the fact when I use konsole and press backspace to trigger the beep several times will coredump the server .
I will continue to remove PulseAudio from my systems until 1 ) its CPU usage is reasonable 2 ) It can let me control my hardware properly .
Especially for me where the HW has no PCM capture ( I have to use ALSA + jackd + jack \ _capture to get around this problem ) 3 ) It does not crash so much causing me no end of pain with multiple apps requiring audio .
Frankly I wish someone would push/convince Linus to get OSS4 into the kernel and help us get rid of ALSA ( deprecate it ) and then strip PulseAudio down to just network audio ONLY .
We 've had enough crap in the Linux Audio subsystem for so long , it 's time to do the right thing and chunk the whole shit out .
I 'll accept more pain if we get it right , finally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Colin, that's fine and dandy but...

Your daemon can't even handle the fact when I use konsole and press backspace to trigger the beep several times will coredump the server.
I will continue to remove PulseAudio from my systems until

1) its CPU usage is reasonable
2) It can let me control my hardware properly.
Especially for me where the HW has no PCM capture (I have to use ALSA + jackd + jack\_capture to get around this problem)

3) It does not crash so much causing me no end of pain with multiple apps requiring audio.
Frankly I wish someone would push/convince Linus to get OSS4 into the kernel and help us get rid of ALSA (deprecate it) and then strip PulseAudio down to just network audio ONLY.
We've had enough crap in the Linux Audio subsystem for so long, it's time to do the right thing and chunk the whole shit out.
I'll accept more pain if we get it right, finally.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794993</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>Achromatic1978</author>
	<datestamp>1255971000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>#!/bin/bash<br>set -x</p><p>if [ ! -d<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/oss ]<br>then<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; soundoff<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; soundon<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; mv<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel/oss<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/oss<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; depmod -a<br>fi</p><p>rmmod oss\_hdaudio<br>rmmod osscore<br>modprobe osscore vmix\_loopdevs=1 &amp;&amp;<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<br>modprobe oss\_hdaudio &amp;&amp;<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/sbin/ossdetect -d &amp;&amp;<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<br>sh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/lib/oss/etc/legacy\_devices &amp;&amp;<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/sbin/ossdevlinks -v<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/sbin/savemixer -L -v<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<br>modprobe snd\_usb\_audio</p></div></blockquote><p>And to think, they say Linux isn't ready for Grandma to use, yet!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext># ! /bin/bashset -xif [ !
-d /lib/modules/ $ ( uname -r ) /oss ] then                                 soundoff                                 soundon                                 mv /lib/modules/ $ ( uname -r ) /kernel/oss /lib/modules/ $ ( uname -r ) /oss                                 depmod -afirmmod oss \ _hdaudiormmod osscoremodprobe osscore vmix \ _loopdevs = 1 &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp;modprobe oss \ _hdaudio &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/ossdetect -d &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp;sh /usr/lib/oss/etc/legacy \ _devices &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/ossdevlinks -vsleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/savemixer -L -vsleep 1 &amp;&amp;modprobe snd \ _usb \ _audioAnd to think , they say Linux is n't ready for Grandma to use , yet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>#!/bin/bashset -xif [ !
-d /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/oss ]then
                                soundoff
                                soundon
                                mv /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel/oss /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/oss
                                depmod -afirmmod oss\_hdaudiormmod osscoremodprobe osscore vmix\_loopdevs=1 &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp;modprobe oss\_hdaudio &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/ossdetect -d &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp;sh /usr/lib/oss/etc/legacy\_devices &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/ossdevlinks -vsleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/savemixer -L -vsleep 1 &amp;&amp;modprobe snd\_usb\_audioAnd to think, they say Linux isn't ready for Grandma to use, yet!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797145</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255979160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm going to agree with the AC: your post is a failure. The build-up is massive and then you finish without a single real point.</p><p>I'll take GNOME as an example: your point seemed to be that GNOME is an example of poor code quality, horrible design and uncooperative developers, with BSDs as a reference point. After reading your comment I don't know which BSD Desktop Environment I should look at to see comparable code that is higher quality (something that apparently should leave GNOME so far behind it isn't even funny). I have no idea how GNOME is an abomination (don't get me wrong, I know GNOME has problems, but you imply a lot more). I don't know any of the numerous occassions where the GNOME developers were told about this.</p><p>Please explain, preferably in a way that justifies all the trash talk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to agree with the AC : your post is a failure .
The build-up is massive and then you finish without a single real point.I 'll take GNOME as an example : your point seemed to be that GNOME is an example of poor code quality , horrible design and uncooperative developers , with BSDs as a reference point .
After reading your comment I do n't know which BSD Desktop Environment I should look at to see comparable code that is higher quality ( something that apparently should leave GNOME so far behind it is n't even funny ) .
I have no idea how GNOME is an abomination ( do n't get me wrong , I know GNOME has problems , but you imply a lot more ) .
I do n't know any of the numerous occassions where the GNOME developers were told about this.Please explain , preferably in a way that justifies all the trash talk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to agree with the AC: your post is a failure.
The build-up is massive and then you finish without a single real point.I'll take GNOME as an example: your point seemed to be that GNOME is an example of poor code quality, horrible design and uncooperative developers, with BSDs as a reference point.
After reading your comment I don't know which BSD Desktop Environment I should look at to see comparable code that is higher quality (something that apparently should leave GNOME so far behind it isn't even funny).
I have no idea how GNOME is an abomination (don't get me wrong, I know GNOME has problems, but you imply a lot more).
I don't know any of the numerous occassions where the GNOME developers were told about this.Please explain, preferably in a way that justifies all the trash talk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791993</id>
	<title>Re:10 years ago, sound DID work reliably in Linux</title>
	<author>Wonko the Sane</author>
	<datestamp>1255954380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PulseAudio isn't written for the hardware of 10 years ago. It is written for 2009 where a typical user has multiple independent pieces of hardware each capable of sound input and/or output that may or may not be present all the time (webcams, headsets, bluetooth, etc.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PulseAudio is n't written for the hardware of 10 years ago .
It is written for 2009 where a typical user has multiple independent pieces of hardware each capable of sound input and/or output that may or may not be present all the time ( webcams , headsets , bluetooth , etc .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PulseAudio isn't written for the hardware of 10 years ago.
It is written for 2009 where a typical user has multiple independent pieces of hardware each capable of sound input and/or output that may or may not be present all the time (webcams, headsets, bluetooth, etc.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792205</id>
	<title>Why getting it wrong sucks</title>
	<author>AceJohnny</author>
	<datestamp>1255956600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PulseAudio was adopted to solve the problem of broken audio for some users, but PulseAudio broke stuff for some users for whom things worked before.</p><p>There is more loud complaining about newly-broken systems than there is praise for newly-working systems (humans are a fussy lot), and the complaining is drowning the praise.</p><p>Lesson: when you change something, make sure it works well and more importantly doesn't break anything for existing users, or the backlash will be terrible. Apple knows this, Ubuntu is learning this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PulseAudio was adopted to solve the problem of broken audio for some users , but PulseAudio broke stuff for some users for whom things worked before.There is more loud complaining about newly-broken systems than there is praise for newly-working systems ( humans are a fussy lot ) , and the complaining is drowning the praise.Lesson : when you change something , make sure it works well and more importantly does n't break anything for existing users , or the backlash will be terrible .
Apple knows this , Ubuntu is learning this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PulseAudio was adopted to solve the problem of broken audio for some users, but PulseAudio broke stuff for some users for whom things worked before.There is more loud complaining about newly-broken systems than there is praise for newly-working systems (humans are a fussy lot), and the complaining is drowning the praise.Lesson: when you change something, make sure it works well and more importantly doesn't break anything for existing users, or the backlash will be terrible.
Apple knows this, Ubuntu is learning this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793601</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>segedunum</author>
	<datestamp>1255964940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I should...why? Pulseaudio works great here - no problems at all, no high CPU usage, nothing.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I'm pleased for you. You've been lucky. That doesn't mean that others don't have problems though and no, I'm afraid they're not a minority when you look at the forums of many distributions and the bug reports. I suspect many people just give up to be honest.</p><blockquote><div><p>It's clear to anyone that has looked into this that most people are very happy with Pulseaudio.</p></div></blockquote><p>
If they were then we wouldn't get articles like this and Lennart wouldn't be as defensive as he is.</p><blockquote><div><p>Linux would have far more problems going back to OSS4 (hey, why I can't set per-app volume, why audio over bluetooth doesn't works as I want?).</p></div></blockquote><p>
They can and do, and at least it wouldn't break existing sound use cases for many users and existing applications and break the one sound card with speakers plugged in standard set up in many cases. We already have OSS -&gt; ALSA and ALSA -&gt; OSS interfaces that have been around for some time. PulseAudio reimplementing ALSA to look like ALSA is just plain silly. There's no point in solving some problems if you break a ton of others that have been solved previously.</p><blockquote><div><p>All the important distros ship it, and the users that have problems are clearly a \_minority\_, which is only getting smaller and smaller with each new version of Pulseaudio, Alsa and the kernel. And the geeks that fear changes and love to bitch about are running out of excuses.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Dream on. Sound servers of the type that we have found in the Linux desktop world over the years have been strewn with cow pats from the devil's own satanic herd and should have largely been consigned to the trash years ago. We've had arts and esound largely to cover up for ALSA, no one has been able to agree on any one sound server, there are always a ton of issues and it always takes years to solve those issues. Talking about each new version of the kernel and PulseAudio to fix issues now after all these years when sound and even ALSA for many people have started to work is laughable. History, and the Linux desktop world's inability to learn from the past, is against PulseAudio but Lennart seems determined to bludgeon it in.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I should...why ?
Pulseaudio works great here - no problems at all , no high CPU usage , nothing .
I 'm pleased for you .
You 've been lucky .
That does n't mean that others do n't have problems though and no , I 'm afraid they 're not a minority when you look at the forums of many distributions and the bug reports .
I suspect many people just give up to be honest.It 's clear to anyone that has looked into this that most people are very happy with Pulseaudio .
If they were then we would n't get articles like this and Lennart would n't be as defensive as he is.Linux would have far more problems going back to OSS4 ( hey , why I ca n't set per-app volume , why audio over bluetooth does n't works as I want ? ) .
They can and do , and at least it would n't break existing sound use cases for many users and existing applications and break the one sound card with speakers plugged in standard set up in many cases .
We already have OSS - &gt; ALSA and ALSA - &gt; OSS interfaces that have been around for some time .
PulseAudio reimplementing ALSA to look like ALSA is just plain silly .
There 's no point in solving some problems if you break a ton of others that have been solved previously.All the important distros ship it , and the users that have problems are clearly a \ _minority \ _ , which is only getting smaller and smaller with each new version of Pulseaudio , Alsa and the kernel .
And the geeks that fear changes and love to bitch about are running out of excuses .
Dream on .
Sound servers of the type that we have found in the Linux desktop world over the years have been strewn with cow pats from the devil 's own satanic herd and should have largely been consigned to the trash years ago .
We 've had arts and esound largely to cover up for ALSA , no one has been able to agree on any one sound server , there are always a ton of issues and it always takes years to solve those issues .
Talking about each new version of the kernel and PulseAudio to fix issues now after all these years when sound and even ALSA for many people have started to work is laughable .
History , and the Linux desktop world 's inability to learn from the past , is against PulseAudio but Lennart seems determined to bludgeon it in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I should...why?
Pulseaudio works great here - no problems at all, no high CPU usage, nothing.
I'm pleased for you.
You've been lucky.
That doesn't mean that others don't have problems though and no, I'm afraid they're not a minority when you look at the forums of many distributions and the bug reports.
I suspect many people just give up to be honest.It's clear to anyone that has looked into this that most people are very happy with Pulseaudio.
If they were then we wouldn't get articles like this and Lennart wouldn't be as defensive as he is.Linux would have far more problems going back to OSS4 (hey, why I can't set per-app volume, why audio over bluetooth doesn't works as I want?).
They can and do, and at least it wouldn't break existing sound use cases for many users and existing applications and break the one sound card with speakers plugged in standard set up in many cases.
We already have OSS -&gt; ALSA and ALSA -&gt; OSS interfaces that have been around for some time.
PulseAudio reimplementing ALSA to look like ALSA is just plain silly.
There's no point in solving some problems if you break a ton of others that have been solved previously.All the important distros ship it, and the users that have problems are clearly a \_minority\_, which is only getting smaller and smaller with each new version of Pulseaudio, Alsa and the kernel.
And the geeks that fear changes and love to bitch about are running out of excuses.
Dream on.
Sound servers of the type that we have found in the Linux desktop world over the years have been strewn with cow pats from the devil's own satanic herd and should have largely been consigned to the trash years ago.
We've had arts and esound largely to cover up for ALSA, no one has been able to agree on any one sound server, there are always a ton of issues and it always takes years to solve those issues.
Talking about each new version of the kernel and PulseAudio to fix issues now after all these years when sound and even ALSA for many people have started to work is laughable.
History, and the Linux desktop world's inability to learn from the past, is against PulseAudio but Lennart seems determined to bludgeon it in.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791369</id>
	<title>The year of...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255946760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next year will be the year of (working) audio on Linux...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next year will be the year of ( working ) audio on Linux.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next year will be the year of (working) audio on Linux...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795919</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>jmorris42</author>
	<datestamp>1255974540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Each time Linux redesigns some subsystem there are problems, and we see<br>&gt; the same people bitching about how we should use $ALTERNATIVE instead...</p><p>No, the situation with Pulse is different in several ways.</p><p>1.  With previous changes there was pain in the transition but even those suffering most could see that the change was going to be a good thing.  Not so with Pulse.  Pulseaudio is a system that would be, at best, a minor improvement in a perfect world and a never ending nightmare in the real one.  Harsh charge?  Read on.</p><p>2.  Pulse blameshifts all it's problems to apps and drivers.  Ok, apps (open source ones anyway) will eventually get fixed.  Drivers won't.  Motherboards do not ship with sound drivers for Linux.  Linux ships generic drivers for the sound chips on popular systems.  There is a big difference.  Board makers connect those generic chips in a myriad of ways, poorly documented if at all outside the Windows driver.  Manual intervention and exploration is usually required to figure out what is connected to what and how best to configure things.  Pulse's design is to remove all controls except one big volume slider.</p><p>Examples:  My desktop system requires careful balancing of the VIA DXS, PCM and Master sliders to get enough output to drive my speakers and avoid clipping in the digital side of the system.  My Thinkpad needs an easy way to mute the master output to silence the internal speaker while leaving the external output alone to get good results while docked.  Feel free to add your story, if enough of us provide use cases where ONE slider won't work.... they will ignore all of us.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p><p>3.  It still isn't even clear exactly what problem Pulse is supposed to be a solution to.  Every major application had finally achieved stable ALSA support, and ALSA works.  Being able to move sound streams between devices while they play is gee whiz and all, but it isn't a problem most of us are needing enough to endure a lot of pain to get.  It might be worth the pain if we were being promised this would be THE audio solution but the Pulse devs themselves admit it isn't, Pulse can't touch JACKs realtime features.</p><p>4.  But the biggest problem with Pulse is the devs.  There are real problems but this time, unlike past transitions, this isn't a case of they haven't fixed all the bugs yet, it isn't even a case where they tell ya to submit a damned patch if ya want your problem fixed NOW.  Both of those cases are normal examples of Free Software development.  No, what is new is bugs being closed with "That problem can't exist within our philosophy and thus can't be fixed, buy new hardware and hope it works."  In other words, that problem can't be fixed without exposing complexity we don't believe should exist.  They have forgotten the second half of "Make things as simple as possible, but no more."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Each time Linux redesigns some subsystem there are problems , and we see &gt; the same people bitching about how we should use $ ALTERNATIVE instead...No , the situation with Pulse is different in several ways.1 .
With previous changes there was pain in the transition but even those suffering most could see that the change was going to be a good thing .
Not so with Pulse .
Pulseaudio is a system that would be , at best , a minor improvement in a perfect world and a never ending nightmare in the real one .
Harsh charge ?
Read on.2 .
Pulse blameshifts all it 's problems to apps and drivers .
Ok , apps ( open source ones anyway ) will eventually get fixed .
Drivers wo n't .
Motherboards do not ship with sound drivers for Linux .
Linux ships generic drivers for the sound chips on popular systems .
There is a big difference .
Board makers connect those generic chips in a myriad of ways , poorly documented if at all outside the Windows driver .
Manual intervention and exploration is usually required to figure out what is connected to what and how best to configure things .
Pulse 's design is to remove all controls except one big volume slider.Examples : My desktop system requires careful balancing of the VIA DXS , PCM and Master sliders to get enough output to drive my speakers and avoid clipping in the digital side of the system .
My Thinkpad needs an easy way to mute the master output to silence the internal speaker while leaving the external output alone to get good results while docked .
Feel free to add your story , if enough of us provide use cases where ONE slider wo n't work.... they will ignore all of us .
: ( 3. It still is n't even clear exactly what problem Pulse is supposed to be a solution to .
Every major application had finally achieved stable ALSA support , and ALSA works .
Being able to move sound streams between devices while they play is gee whiz and all , but it is n't a problem most of us are needing enough to endure a lot of pain to get .
It might be worth the pain if we were being promised this would be THE audio solution but the Pulse devs themselves admit it is n't , Pulse ca n't touch JACKs realtime features.4 .
But the biggest problem with Pulse is the devs .
There are real problems but this time , unlike past transitions , this is n't a case of they have n't fixed all the bugs yet , it is n't even a case where they tell ya to submit a damned patch if ya want your problem fixed NOW .
Both of those cases are normal examples of Free Software development .
No , what is new is bugs being closed with " That problem ca n't exist within our philosophy and thus ca n't be fixed , buy new hardware and hope it works .
" In other words , that problem ca n't be fixed without exposing complexity we do n't believe should exist .
They have forgotten the second half of " Make things as simple as possible , but no more .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Each time Linux redesigns some subsystem there are problems, and we see&gt; the same people bitching about how we should use $ALTERNATIVE instead...No, the situation with Pulse is different in several ways.1.
With previous changes there was pain in the transition but even those suffering most could see that the change was going to be a good thing.
Not so with Pulse.
Pulseaudio is a system that would be, at best, a minor improvement in a perfect world and a never ending nightmare in the real one.
Harsh charge?
Read on.2.
Pulse blameshifts all it's problems to apps and drivers.
Ok, apps (open source ones anyway) will eventually get fixed.
Drivers won't.
Motherboards do not ship with sound drivers for Linux.
Linux ships generic drivers for the sound chips on popular systems.
There is a big difference.
Board makers connect those generic chips in a myriad of ways, poorly documented if at all outside the Windows driver.
Manual intervention and exploration is usually required to figure out what is connected to what and how best to configure things.
Pulse's design is to remove all controls except one big volume slider.Examples:  My desktop system requires careful balancing of the VIA DXS, PCM and Master sliders to get enough output to drive my speakers and avoid clipping in the digital side of the system.
My Thinkpad needs an easy way to mute the master output to silence the internal speaker while leaving the external output alone to get good results while docked.
Feel free to add your story, if enough of us provide use cases where ONE slider won't work.... they will ignore all of us.
:(3.  It still isn't even clear exactly what problem Pulse is supposed to be a solution to.
Every major application had finally achieved stable ALSA support, and ALSA works.
Being able to move sound streams between devices while they play is gee whiz and all, but it isn't a problem most of us are needing enough to endure a lot of pain to get.
It might be worth the pain if we were being promised this would be THE audio solution but the Pulse devs themselves admit it isn't, Pulse can't touch JACKs realtime features.4.
But the biggest problem with Pulse is the devs.
There are real problems but this time, unlike past transitions, this isn't a case of they haven't fixed all the bugs yet, it isn't even a case where they tell ya to submit a damned patch if ya want your problem fixed NOW.
Both of those cases are normal examples of Free Software development.
No, what is new is bugs being closed with "That problem can't exist within our philosophy and thus can't be fixed, buy new hardware and hope it works.
"  In other words, that problem can't be fixed without exposing complexity we don't believe should exist.
They have forgotten the second half of "Make things as simple as possible, but no more.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793195</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255963020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I also ensured that it is very easy to turn PA off if you don't want it"</p><p>Keep the good work : best thing about PA !</p><p>For the record, I never got it to output ANY sound on any Mandriva I tested, on which it was... never really got it working on any distro, by the way (either with integrated soundcard or on my M-Audio Delta Audiophile). Closest thing was on Fedora, where it was at best barely spitting some bits of sound each few seconds (at worst, no sound at all).</p><p>So, yeah : keep working on the ease of PA deactivation. Really keep on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I also ensured that it is very easy to turn PA off if you do n't want it " Keep the good work : best thing about PA ! For the record , I never got it to output ANY sound on any Mandriva I tested , on which it was... never really got it working on any distro , by the way ( either with integrated soundcard or on my M-Audio Delta Audiophile ) .
Closest thing was on Fedora , where it was at best barely spitting some bits of sound each few seconds ( at worst , no sound at all ) .So , yeah : keep working on the ease of PA deactivation .
Really keep on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I also ensured that it is very easy to turn PA off if you don't want it"Keep the good work : best thing about PA !For the record, I never got it to output ANY sound on any Mandriva I tested, on which it was... never really got it working on any distro, by the way (either with integrated soundcard or on my M-Audio Delta Audiophile).
Closest thing was on Fedora, where it was at best barely spitting some bits of sound each few seconds (at worst, no sound at all).So, yeah : keep working on the ease of PA deactivation.
Really keep on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792991</id>
	<title>I have problems, and I'm a sysadmin!</title>
	<author>Gunstick</author>
	<datestamp>1255962120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yeah, pulseaudio not working here.<br>Well it works almost all the time though, after I installed about 20 more pulseaudio packages not installed by default in ubuntu.<br>Still it happens that suddenly either the pulseaudio deamon looses access to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp or pulseaudio refuses connections and I have to restart it. Effects are: webbrowser hanging because flash can't send audio. Or youtube videos playing, but in silence.</p><p>If<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp is not supposed to be opened directly by user programs why the hell does it still exist?<br>Why is there no<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/pulsedsp and then the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp is created by pulseaudio and manages all the legacy crap.<br>It's all bad design, really.</p><p>Also a good distribution should include only compliant audio applications (including IM and stuff) or adapt those programs so that they work with the chosen audio infrastructure. Hey ubuntu, you want the desktop, well get your sound working!</p><p>This text typed on a dell PC where there is only sound on the headphone jack but not on the internal speaker (yes it's connected!)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yeah , pulseaudio not working here.Well it works almost all the time though , after I installed about 20 more pulseaudio packages not installed by default in ubuntu.Still it happens that suddenly either the pulseaudio deamon looses access to /dev/dsp or pulseaudio refuses connections and I have to restart it .
Effects are : webbrowser hanging because flash ca n't send audio .
Or youtube videos playing , but in silence.If /dev/dsp is not supposed to be opened directly by user programs why the hell does it still exist ? Why is there no /dev/pulsedsp and then the /dev/dsp is created by pulseaudio and manages all the legacy crap.It 's all bad design , really.Also a good distribution should include only compliant audio applications ( including IM and stuff ) or adapt those programs so that they work with the chosen audio infrastructure .
Hey ubuntu , you want the desktop , well get your sound working ! This text typed on a dell PC where there is only sound on the headphone jack but not on the internal speaker ( yes it 's connected !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yeah, pulseaudio not working here.Well it works almost all the time though, after I installed about 20 more pulseaudio packages not installed by default in ubuntu.Still it happens that suddenly either the pulseaudio deamon looses access to /dev/dsp or pulseaudio refuses connections and I have to restart it.
Effects are: webbrowser hanging because flash can't send audio.
Or youtube videos playing, but in silence.If /dev/dsp is not supposed to be opened directly by user programs why the hell does it still exist?Why is there no /dev/pulsedsp and then the /dev/dsp is created by pulseaudio and manages all the legacy crap.It's all bad design, really.Also a good distribution should include only compliant audio applications (including IM and stuff) or adapt those programs so that they work with the chosen audio infrastructure.
Hey ubuntu, you want the desktop, well get your sound working!This text typed on a dell PC where there is only sound on the headphone jack but not on the internal speaker (yes it's connected!
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791533</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>UPi</author>
	<datestamp>1255948800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On a related note, haven't we recently seen the pattern of  blaming drivers and applications, done by a certain megacorporation, as a way of explaining the failure of a recent operating system? Don't they have a patent or something on doing this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On a related note , have n't we recently seen the pattern of blaming drivers and applications , done by a certain megacorporation , as a way of explaining the failure of a recent operating system ?
Do n't they have a patent or something on doing this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a related note, haven't we recently seen the pattern of  blaming drivers and applications, done by a certain megacorporation, as a way of explaining the failure of a recent operating system?
Don't they have a patent or something on doing this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792751</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>Interoperable</author>
	<datestamp>1255960680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the current state of audio on Linux is to blame, and it's Pulse (well OK, everyone else as well) that's trying to fix it. Much of the trouble arises from not having a consistent standard to deal with across all Linux flavors. I agree that only having one choice would go against the grain of the Linux philosophy, but at the same time it may make it more likely for hardware developers and software developers alike to try to make compatible stuff.</p><p>Pulse is much better today than it was even a year ago and when it works, it works damn well. Give it some time to mature and as it acquires more market share we'll see much better compatibility.</p><p>I was completely converted to Pulse when I was able to stream music from any PC to any other PC in my house. It really is awesome to have the mpd server on my media center stream flawlessly over my network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the current state of audio on Linux is to blame , and it 's Pulse ( well OK , everyone else as well ) that 's trying to fix it .
Much of the trouble arises from not having a consistent standard to deal with across all Linux flavors .
I agree that only having one choice would go against the grain of the Linux philosophy , but at the same time it may make it more likely for hardware developers and software developers alike to try to make compatible stuff.Pulse is much better today than it was even a year ago and when it works , it works damn well .
Give it some time to mature and as it acquires more market share we 'll see much better compatibility.I was completely converted to Pulse when I was able to stream music from any PC to any other PC in my house .
It really is awesome to have the mpd server on my media center stream flawlessly over my network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the current state of audio on Linux is to blame, and it's Pulse (well OK, everyone else as well) that's trying to fix it.
Much of the trouble arises from not having a consistent standard to deal with across all Linux flavors.
I agree that only having one choice would go against the grain of the Linux philosophy, but at the same time it may make it more likely for hardware developers and software developers alike to try to make compatible stuff.Pulse is much better today than it was even a year ago and when it works, it works damn well.
Give it some time to mature and as it acquires more market share we'll see much better compatibility.I was completely converted to Pulse when I was able to stream music from any PC to any other PC in my house.
It really is awesome to have the mpd server on my media center stream flawlessly over my network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799719</id>
	<title>Re:GStreamer?</title>
	<author>msuarezalvarez</author>
	<datestamp>1255945080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You seem to think that PA and GStreamer are competing or something. You clearly do not have any idea of what at least one of them is...</htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to think that PA and GStreamer are competing or something .
You clearly do not have any idea of what at least one of them is.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to think that PA and GStreamer are competing or something.
You clearly do not have any idea of what at least one of them is...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792569</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793301</id>
	<title>ALSA devs are to blame for this mess</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255963560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PulseAudio is a source of many problems, yes, but it's no worse than all the other bandaids, like Esound, NAS, etc.</p><p>The reason why all these bandaids were introduced is because ALSA devs continue to refuse to make the kernel audio devices multi-open.  In any sane world, opening an audio driver a second time would not fail or hang or stutter, but instead would <b>AUTOMATICALLY</b> connect all audio inputs to a kernel software mixer and hence work transparently.</p><p>Instead, because the ALSA devs are utterly insane, they require dmix to be configured up for ALSA apps in user-space, and provide no direct multi-open driver for legacy applications.  As a result, audio in the Linux world is just borked.  It doesn't have a hope of working in the presence of the billions of legacy audio apps or with proprietary crap like Flash for example (and if Flash works then something else won't, or a second instance of Flash will break, etc).  And that's why crap like PulseAudio gets invented as a bandaid.</p><p>Sure, PulseAudio is a royal pain, but the people who deserve the worst kicking are the morons at ALSA, who for years have refused to add kernel multi-open to their audio drivers for no sensible reason.</p><p>If ALSA continues along its current path of total myopia, the best solution for Linux is probably to scrap ALSA and replace it with the latest OSS.  Then no bandaids will be needed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PulseAudio is a source of many problems , yes , but it 's no worse than all the other bandaids , like Esound , NAS , etc.The reason why all these bandaids were introduced is because ALSA devs continue to refuse to make the kernel audio devices multi-open .
In any sane world , opening an audio driver a second time would not fail or hang or stutter , but instead would AUTOMATICALLY connect all audio inputs to a kernel software mixer and hence work transparently.Instead , because the ALSA devs are utterly insane , they require dmix to be configured up for ALSA apps in user-space , and provide no direct multi-open driver for legacy applications .
As a result , audio in the Linux world is just borked .
It does n't have a hope of working in the presence of the billions of legacy audio apps or with proprietary crap like Flash for example ( and if Flash works then something else wo n't , or a second instance of Flash will break , etc ) .
And that 's why crap like PulseAudio gets invented as a bandaid.Sure , PulseAudio is a royal pain , but the people who deserve the worst kicking are the morons at ALSA , who for years have refused to add kernel multi-open to their audio drivers for no sensible reason.If ALSA continues along its current path of total myopia , the best solution for Linux is probably to scrap ALSA and replace it with the latest OSS .
Then no bandaids will be needed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PulseAudio is a source of many problems, yes, but it's no worse than all the other bandaids, like Esound, NAS, etc.The reason why all these bandaids were introduced is because ALSA devs continue to refuse to make the kernel audio devices multi-open.
In any sane world, opening an audio driver a second time would not fail or hang or stutter, but instead would AUTOMATICALLY connect all audio inputs to a kernel software mixer and hence work transparently.Instead, because the ALSA devs are utterly insane, they require dmix to be configured up for ALSA apps in user-space, and provide no direct multi-open driver for legacy applications.
As a result, audio in the Linux world is just borked.
It doesn't have a hope of working in the presence of the billions of legacy audio apps or with proprietary crap like Flash for example (and if Flash works then something else won't, or a second instance of Flash will break, etc).
And that's why crap like PulseAudio gets invented as a bandaid.Sure, PulseAudio is a royal pain, but the people who deserve the worst kicking are the morons at ALSA, who for years have refused to add kernel multi-open to their audio drivers for no sensible reason.If ALSA continues along its current path of total myopia, the best solution for Linux is probably to scrap ALSA and replace it with the latest OSS.
Then no bandaids will be needed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791543</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255949040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the only situation that anyone says: "If it has Pulse... its dead"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the only situation that anyone says : " If it has Pulse... its dead "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the only situation that anyone says: "If it has Pulse... its dead"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791889</id>
	<title>Pulse Audio is a nightmare.</title>
	<author>Zombie Ryushu</author>
	<datestamp>1255953240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pulse Audio is killing Audio on Linux. It breaks everything. Its compatible with almost nothing. Even if you disable it, its not really gone, because everything processed through ALSA gets processed through PA using extra CPU cycles. Its horrible, and my distributor won't get rid of it in spite of repeated calls for Pulse Audio's death.</p><p>As for the mixer issue. If a given sound card does not support hardware mixing, it should be up to the ALSA Driver to handle that. If a given sound card does not support hardware midi, it should be up to ALSA to see to it Timidity handles that. I'd give anything to be able to remove Pulse from the big name Linux distros. We need one Audio driver frame work: ALSA. We need one game abstraction layer. SDL.</p><p>No more Pulse Audio, no more JACK, no more Port Audio. None of that bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pulse Audio is killing Audio on Linux .
It breaks everything .
Its compatible with almost nothing .
Even if you disable it , its not really gone , because everything processed through ALSA gets processed through PA using extra CPU cycles .
Its horrible , and my distributor wo n't get rid of it in spite of repeated calls for Pulse Audio 's death.As for the mixer issue .
If a given sound card does not support hardware mixing , it should be up to the ALSA Driver to handle that .
If a given sound card does not support hardware midi , it should be up to ALSA to see to it Timidity handles that .
I 'd give anything to be able to remove Pulse from the big name Linux distros .
We need one Audio driver frame work : ALSA .
We need one game abstraction layer .
SDL.No more Pulse Audio , no more JACK , no more Port Audio .
None of that bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pulse Audio is killing Audio on Linux.
It breaks everything.
Its compatible with almost nothing.
Even if you disable it, its not really gone, because everything processed through ALSA gets processed through PA using extra CPU cycles.
Its horrible, and my distributor won't get rid of it in spite of repeated calls for Pulse Audio's death.As for the mixer issue.
If a given sound card does not support hardware mixing, it should be up to the ALSA Driver to handle that.
If a given sound card does not support hardware midi, it should be up to ALSA to see to it Timidity handles that.
I'd give anything to be able to remove Pulse from the big name Linux distros.
We need one Audio driver frame work: ALSA.
We need one game abstraction layer.
SDL.No more Pulse Audio, no more JACK, no more Port Audio.
None of that bullshit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792509</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Thalaric</author>
	<datestamp>1255959000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, you managed to hate on Alsa, Linux, Gnome, C++ and the End User all in one post. Condolulations, this may be the most faddish post I've ever seen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , you managed to hate on Alsa , Linux , Gnome , C + + and the End User all in one post .
Condolulations , this may be the most faddish post I 've ever seen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, you managed to hate on Alsa, Linux, Gnome, C++ and the End User all in one post.
Condolulations, this may be the most faddish post I've ever seen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794049</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>sarhjinian</author>
	<datestamp>1255966680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Why aren't you complaining that if you kill X, your desktop dies?"</p></div></blockquote><p>
Because that's not analogious to what Pulse is doing.  A better analogy would be if Firefox's crashing killed your whole X session and left your video card in such a state that you couldn't bring X back up until you rebooted.
<br> <br>
Sure, the flaw is in Firefox, but there's no way a fundamental subsystem like Pulse (or X) should be so incapable of handling errors gracefully.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Why are n't you complaining that if you kill X , your desktop dies ?
" Because that 's not analogious to what Pulse is doing .
A better analogy would be if Firefox 's crashing killed your whole X session and left your video card in such a state that you could n't bring X back up until you rebooted .
Sure , the flaw is in Firefox , but there 's no way a fundamental subsystem like Pulse ( or X ) should be so incapable of handling errors gracefully .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Why aren't you complaining that if you kill X, your desktop dies?
"
Because that's not analogious to what Pulse is doing.
A better analogy would be if Firefox's crashing killed your whole X session and left your video card in such a state that you couldn't bring X back up until you rebooted.
Sure, the flaw is in Firefox, but there's no way a fundamental subsystem like Pulse (or X) should be so incapable of handling errors gracefully.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792293</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797103</id>
	<title>Re:Are they deaf!?</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255979040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't speak for anyone else, but \_I\_ test PulseAudio with a Chaintech AV-710 S/PDIF output to a Firestone Audio Spitfire DAC, to Firestone Cute headphone amp, to Grado HF-1 headphones. That's about a $800 headphone stack right there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't speak for anyone else , but \ _I \ _ test PulseAudio with a Chaintech AV-710 S/PDIF output to a Firestone Audio Spitfire DAC , to Firestone Cute headphone amp , to Grado HF-1 headphones .
That 's about a $ 800 headphone stack right there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't speak for anyone else, but \_I\_ test PulseAudio with a Chaintech AV-710 S/PDIF output to a Firestone Audio Spitfire DAC, to Firestone Cute headphone amp, to Grado HF-1 headphones.
That's about a $800 headphone stack right there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804711</id>
	<title>PulseAudio fails there too</title>
	<author>r00t</author>
	<datestamp>1256068800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By default, sound doesn't go everywhere. Given that quieting a device is much easier than searching for the obscure knob needed to make it go, this is an idiotic default.</p><p>What I really need is something like iptables and friends for sound. Yep, in the kernel, routing every which way. If I want to route the console beep out over VoIP, I should be able to just issue a few commands to set up audio routing and tunneling to do that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By default , sound does n't go everywhere .
Given that quieting a device is much easier than searching for the obscure knob needed to make it go , this is an idiotic default.What I really need is something like iptables and friends for sound .
Yep , in the kernel , routing every which way .
If I want to route the console beep out over VoIP , I should be able to just issue a few commands to set up audio routing and tunneling to do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By default, sound doesn't go everywhere.
Given that quieting a device is much easier than searching for the obscure knob needed to make it go, this is an idiotic default.What I really need is something like iptables and friends for sound.
Yep, in the kernel, routing every which way.
If I want to route the console beep out over VoIP, I should be able to just issue a few commands to set up audio routing and tunneling to do that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794309</id>
	<title>Don't want to join the bandwaggon...</title>
	<author>McNihil</author>
	<datestamp>1255967760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but I do have to say that Pulse Audio... well I have nothing good to say about it. OSS worked for me back in the day and I rarely had any issues. ALSA worked for me after some fidgeting but things got stable quite fast. Pulse Audio.... nothing but trouble since Fedora 9 and onward. Is it getting better? Possibly it is, but on all machines that I have used it on it always becomes excruciatingly painful with its odd volumes and.... ok I feel a rant coming along here and I don't want to really diss anything that I didn't actually pay for. But daym... I do have to say that if the rest of GNU/Linux was done this way we would not be here today PERIOD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but I do have to say that Pulse Audio... well I have nothing good to say about it .
OSS worked for me back in the day and I rarely had any issues .
ALSA worked for me after some fidgeting but things got stable quite fast .
Pulse Audio.... nothing but trouble since Fedora 9 and onward .
Is it getting better ?
Possibly it is , but on all machines that I have used it on it always becomes excruciatingly painful with its odd volumes and.... ok I feel a rant coming along here and I do n't want to really diss anything that I did n't actually pay for .
But daym... I do have to say that if the rest of GNU/Linux was done this way we would not be here today PERIOD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but I do have to say that Pulse Audio... well I have nothing good to say about it.
OSS worked for me back in the day and I rarely had any issues.
ALSA worked for me after some fidgeting but things got stable quite fast.
Pulse Audio.... nothing but trouble since Fedora 9 and onward.
Is it getting better?
Possibly it is, but on all machines that I have used it on it always becomes excruciatingly painful with its odd volumes and.... ok I feel a rant coming along here and I don't want to really diss anything that I didn't actually pay for.
But daym... I do have to say that if the rest of GNU/Linux was done this way we would not be here today PERIOD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792587</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista Defense!</title>
	<author>Estragib</author>
	<datestamp>1255959600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTFA:</p><blockquote><div><p>It's not my intention to shift the blame around though. PA [PulseAudio] and the other layers of our stack should not be viewed as independent parts. If PA uses a new or previously unused feature of the drivers then we need to fix the drivers at the same time.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA : It 's not my intention to shift the blame around though .
PA [ PulseAudio ] and the other layers of our stack should not be viewed as independent parts .
If PA uses a new or previously unused feature of the drivers then we need to fix the drivers at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA:It's not my intention to shift the blame around though.
PA [PulseAudio] and the other layers of our stack should not be viewed as independent parts.
If PA uses a new or previously unused feature of the drivers then we need to fix the drivers at the same time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791573</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801619</id>
	<title>context aware?</title>
	<author>jipn4</author>
	<datestamp>1255954260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>For example, if a video is running in one application the system should automatically reduce the volume of everything else and increase it when the video is finished.</i></p><p>I'd be grateful if PulseAudio figured out that when Rhythmbox plays something, I might actually want to hear it, instead of routing it into some bitbucket.  Heck, I'd be grateful if I could even figure out myself which of the dozens of screens and configuration options I need to press to make sound come out somewhere.  As far as I'm concerned, PulseAudio is by far the worst component of the Gnome desktop.</p><p><i>All the big Linux distributions have adopted PulseAudio and it is an integral part of both the Palm Pre and the Nokia N900 devices, as well as Intel's Moblin.</i></p><p>Those devices are preconfigured for known hardware, so that's not so much of a problem.  But on normal desktops, which often have multiple sources and sinks, trying to get sound out can be extremely frustrating.</p><p><i>So, where do they come from? Usually from users who are encountering problems when running PA in conjunction with particular hardware drivers, or higher-level software.</i></p><p>Exactly.  And PulseAudio makes it a hair-raising experience to try and fix those problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For example , if a video is running in one application the system should automatically reduce the volume of everything else and increase it when the video is finished.I 'd be grateful if PulseAudio figured out that when Rhythmbox plays something , I might actually want to hear it , instead of routing it into some bitbucket .
Heck , I 'd be grateful if I could even figure out myself which of the dozens of screens and configuration options I need to press to make sound come out somewhere .
As far as I 'm concerned , PulseAudio is by far the worst component of the Gnome desktop.All the big Linux distributions have adopted PulseAudio and it is an integral part of both the Palm Pre and the Nokia N900 devices , as well as Intel 's Moblin.Those devices are preconfigured for known hardware , so that 's not so much of a problem .
But on normal desktops , which often have multiple sources and sinks , trying to get sound out can be extremely frustrating.So , where do they come from ?
Usually from users who are encountering problems when running PA in conjunction with particular hardware drivers , or higher-level software.Exactly .
And PulseAudio makes it a hair-raising experience to try and fix those problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For example, if a video is running in one application the system should automatically reduce the volume of everything else and increase it when the video is finished.I'd be grateful if PulseAudio figured out that when Rhythmbox plays something, I might actually want to hear it, instead of routing it into some bitbucket.
Heck, I'd be grateful if I could even figure out myself which of the dozens of screens and configuration options I need to press to make sound come out somewhere.
As far as I'm concerned, PulseAudio is by far the worst component of the Gnome desktop.All the big Linux distributions have adopted PulseAudio and it is an integral part of both the Palm Pre and the Nokia N900 devices, as well as Intel's Moblin.Those devices are preconfigured for known hardware, so that's not so much of a problem.
But on normal desktops, which often have multiple sources and sinks, trying to get sound out can be extremely frustrating.So, where do they come from?
Usually from users who are encountering problems when running PA in conjunction with particular hardware drivers, or higher-level software.Exactly.
And PulseAudio makes it a hair-raising experience to try and fix those problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795155</id>
	<title>Re:Too many choices....</title>
	<author>allquixotic</author>
	<datestamp>1255971660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Max, I also like to play around with stuff, and I feel your pain that Foo Application has a relatively poor chance of using the APIs that your sound stack supports. But, there are actually very many ways to allow applications to use different audio APIs at the same time, in parallel, by chaining together multiple APIs or sound servers. This is worst solution in terms of performance, but the best solution in terms of compatibility. With the right configuration, 99\% of sound-using apps will "just work", regardless of what API they use.</p><p>Check out my recent-ish blog article on this: <a href="http://tiyukquellmalz.org/blogs/blog5.php/2009/08/23/dreaming-of-universal-audio-stacks" title="tiyukquellmalz.org" rel="nofollow">http://tiyukquellmalz.org/blogs/blog5.php/2009/08/23/dreaming-of-universal-audio-stacks</a> [tiyukquellmalz.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Max , I also like to play around with stuff , and I feel your pain that Foo Application has a relatively poor chance of using the APIs that your sound stack supports .
But , there are actually very many ways to allow applications to use different audio APIs at the same time , in parallel , by chaining together multiple APIs or sound servers .
This is worst solution in terms of performance , but the best solution in terms of compatibility .
With the right configuration , 99 \ % of sound-using apps will " just work " , regardless of what API they use.Check out my recent-ish blog article on this : http : //tiyukquellmalz.org/blogs/blog5.php/2009/08/23/dreaming-of-universal-audio-stacks [ tiyukquellmalz.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Max, I also like to play around with stuff, and I feel your pain that Foo Application has a relatively poor chance of using the APIs that your sound stack supports.
But, there are actually very many ways to allow applications to use different audio APIs at the same time, in parallel, by chaining together multiple APIs or sound servers.
This is worst solution in terms of performance, but the best solution in terms of compatibility.
With the right configuration, 99\% of sound-using apps will "just work", regardless of what API they use.Check out my recent-ish blog article on this: http://tiyukquellmalz.org/blogs/blog5.php/2009/08/23/dreaming-of-universal-audio-stacks [tiyukquellmalz.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791551</id>
	<title>Pulseaudio works for me better than ALSA or jack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255949040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use linux computers to play games (HoN, Savage 2), listen to music, talk via skype, watch videos using Kaffeine/VLC, watch youtube videos, etc. I also have a usb headset that I need to work in conjunction with my built in cards on both my laptop and desktop. Therefore I need an audio stack that can handle all that at the same time. When I used to use ALSA, it was a pain in the neck to configure everything to run, and even then some applications just would not behave when I tried to launch more than one sound output at the same time.  I haven't tried OSS 4, but the OSS that comes with ubuntu is unusable for multiple applications and hard to use with multiple sound cards. For some time, I solved this by using jack server, but it has to be configured manually, and is apparently designed for music production rather than playback so I constantly had problems with it. Pulseaudio has been great. At first it was a little buggy and shaky, but with the newest versions that come with Karmic Alphas (now Betas) are stable and great quality. The only bug that has been bothering me is that my usb headset's microphone does not work with my laptop's intel sound card microphone, but since my laptop's microphone is good quality, it doesn't really affect me that much. It seems to be a common problem since a long time ago, but I don't think anyone has been able to report it efficiently. Anyway, I like pulseaudio for what it allows me to do. Obviously it's a young software project so there are going to be bugs and inefficiencies, but if everyone would support the idea and start fixing bugs instead of sitting there and complaining about it not being a "good idea", then perhaps we would have a very good sound system in linux that everyone could use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use linux computers to play games ( HoN , Savage 2 ) , listen to music , talk via skype , watch videos using Kaffeine/VLC , watch youtube videos , etc .
I also have a usb headset that I need to work in conjunction with my built in cards on both my laptop and desktop .
Therefore I need an audio stack that can handle all that at the same time .
When I used to use ALSA , it was a pain in the neck to configure everything to run , and even then some applications just would not behave when I tried to launch more than one sound output at the same time .
I have n't tried OSS 4 , but the OSS that comes with ubuntu is unusable for multiple applications and hard to use with multiple sound cards .
For some time , I solved this by using jack server , but it has to be configured manually , and is apparently designed for music production rather than playback so I constantly had problems with it .
Pulseaudio has been great .
At first it was a little buggy and shaky , but with the newest versions that come with Karmic Alphas ( now Betas ) are stable and great quality .
The only bug that has been bothering me is that my usb headset 's microphone does not work with my laptop 's intel sound card microphone , but since my laptop 's microphone is good quality , it does n't really affect me that much .
It seems to be a common problem since a long time ago , but I do n't think anyone has been able to report it efficiently .
Anyway , I like pulseaudio for what it allows me to do .
Obviously it 's a young software project so there are going to be bugs and inefficiencies , but if everyone would support the idea and start fixing bugs instead of sitting there and complaining about it not being a " good idea " , then perhaps we would have a very good sound system in linux that everyone could use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use linux computers to play games (HoN, Savage 2), listen to music, talk via skype, watch videos using Kaffeine/VLC, watch youtube videos, etc.
I also have a usb headset that I need to work in conjunction with my built in cards on both my laptop and desktop.
Therefore I need an audio stack that can handle all that at the same time.
When I used to use ALSA, it was a pain in the neck to configure everything to run, and even then some applications just would not behave when I tried to launch more than one sound output at the same time.
I haven't tried OSS 4, but the OSS that comes with ubuntu is unusable for multiple applications and hard to use with multiple sound cards.
For some time, I solved this by using jack server, but it has to be configured manually, and is apparently designed for music production rather than playback so I constantly had problems with it.
Pulseaudio has been great.
At first it was a little buggy and shaky, but with the newest versions that come with Karmic Alphas (now Betas) are stable and great quality.
The only bug that has been bothering me is that my usb headset's microphone does not work with my laptop's intel sound card microphone, but since my laptop's microphone is good quality, it doesn't really affect me that much.
It seems to be a common problem since a long time ago, but I don't think anyone has been able to report it efficiently.
Anyway, I like pulseaudio for what it allows me to do.
Obviously it's a young software project so there are going to be bugs and inefficiencies, but if everyone would support the idea and start fixing bugs instead of sitting there and complaining about it not being a "good idea", then perhaps we would have a very good sound system in linux that everyone could use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795607</id>
	<title>Not just Pulseaudio, but too many sound servers</title>
	<author>black88</author>
	<datestamp>1255973340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Choice is usually a great thing.  I love that there are many web browsers, ides, windows managers, and distros available.  The big problem I personally see is many, not all, developers, if not careful, can lean far too much to the side of the "Cathedral" development model without realizing it.  So what the hell does Lennart Poettering have against end users that he thinks he can simply dismiss the valid criticism of Pulseaudio?  I personally will not get into the technical aspects of it because it's beyond me, suffice to say that I don't have a problem with Pulse itself, but with the way users are not allowed a choice in the matter.</p><p>It's not that big of a deal if you don't need your computer to do anything special with sound, but if you are like me, you would want your distro of choice (Ubuntu is mine) to be able to run Alsa and Jack without any interference from other sound servers.</p><p>Plus, there are far too many choices in sound server available, at least in Ubuntu.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Choice is usually a great thing .
I love that there are many web browsers , ides , windows managers , and distros available .
The big problem I personally see is many , not all , developers , if not careful , can lean far too much to the side of the " Cathedral " development model without realizing it .
So what the hell does Lennart Poettering have against end users that he thinks he can simply dismiss the valid criticism of Pulseaudio ?
I personally will not get into the technical aspects of it because it 's beyond me , suffice to say that I do n't have a problem with Pulse itself , but with the way users are not allowed a choice in the matter.It 's not that big of a deal if you do n't need your computer to do anything special with sound , but if you are like me , you would want your distro of choice ( Ubuntu is mine ) to be able to run Alsa and Jack without any interference from other sound servers.Plus , there are far too many choices in sound server available , at least in Ubuntu .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Choice is usually a great thing.
I love that there are many web browsers, ides, windows managers, and distros available.
The big problem I personally see is many, not all, developers, if not careful, can lean far too much to the side of the "Cathedral" development model without realizing it.
So what the hell does Lennart Poettering have against end users that he thinks he can simply dismiss the valid criticism of Pulseaudio?
I personally will not get into the technical aspects of it because it's beyond me, suffice to say that I don't have a problem with Pulse itself, but with the way users are not allowed a choice in the matter.It's not that big of a deal if you don't need your computer to do anything special with sound, but if you are like me, you would want your distro of choice (Ubuntu is mine) to be able to run Alsa and Jack without any interference from other sound servers.Plus, there are far too many choices in sound server available, at least in Ubuntu.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800789</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>dotancohen</author>
	<datestamp>1255949820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Compare video and 'compositing', and '3d effects'. Luckily, that works well for me now, but it didn't in the past, and still doesn't work (completely) for many people. When compositing or 3d effects don't work for your system, then either is has already been switched off automatically, or you can switch it off easily in the system settings (and even with a special three-finger salute (alt-shift-f12)), and you system will work as if compositing and 3d effect never existed. It never breaks video on your system.</p></div><p>Tell that to the KDE4 devs:<br><a href="https://bugs.kde.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=196379" title="kde.org">https://bugs.kde.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=196379</a> [kde.org]</p><p>In short, non-composting KDE4 is designed to look like garbage.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Compare video and 'compositing ' , and '3d effects' .
Luckily , that works well for me now , but it did n't in the past , and still does n't work ( completely ) for many people .
When compositing or 3d effects do n't work for your system , then either is has already been switched off automatically , or you can switch it off easily in the system settings ( and even with a special three-finger salute ( alt-shift-f12 ) ) , and you system will work as if compositing and 3d effect never existed .
It never breaks video on your system.Tell that to the KDE4 devs : https : //bugs.kde.org/show \ _bug.cgi ? id = 196379 [ kde.org ] In short , non-composting KDE4 is designed to look like garbage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compare video and 'compositing', and '3d effects'.
Luckily, that works well for me now, but it didn't in the past, and still doesn't work (completely) for many people.
When compositing or 3d effects don't work for your system, then either is has already been switched off automatically, or you can switch it off easily in the system settings (and even with a special three-finger salute (alt-shift-f12)), and you system will work as if compositing and 3d effect never existed.
It never breaks video on your system.Tell that to the KDE4 devs:https://bugs.kde.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=196379 [kde.org]In short, non-composting KDE4 is designed to look like garbage.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792527</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793929</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>sarhjinian</author>
	<datestamp>1255966260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The comment about video/compositing is interesting, because if there's anything worse than Linux audio, it's Linux video.  At least with Pulse you can see the light at the end of the tunnel; I have no idea how the Driver/GEM/Mesa/DRM/DRI/GLX/XAA/EXA/UXA/KMS/Xv/WTF/BBQ clusterf\_ck will ever get sorted out, not when everyone seems to be working on parallel, incompatible products.  And yes, I know that if I get some experimental driver from X.org's git server and/or make sure I only use Intel/nVidia/ATi and/or precisely tweak xorg.conf.  Eventually I did that, but there's no way that video should be as inconsistent as it is for this long.</p><p>Meanwhile, I can run a hacked-up version of OS X on the same hardware and somehow video just works.  No tearing, no stuttering, no worries.</p><p>Pulse, by comparison, isn't so bad.  I managed to get it working such that I could play to my Airport Express, USB headphones, desktop speakers and/or a combination of the above on a per-app basis, all without involving git or dealing with drivers.  If it has a problem, it's that the tools to manage it aren't well-integrated into many distros (Ubuntu, I'm looking at you) and aren't terribly user-friendly, and that applications can bring it down.  That's a serious problem: a driver killing the sound system is fine, in a way, but it shouldn't be possible for, say, Songbird or Flash to kill audio any more than it should be possible for them to kill your display server.</p><p>I can see the point of PulseAudio, and what it needs is a little polish and robustness.  Video on Linux, though, is showing the worst symptoms of "too many cooks" and "herding cats".  Worse is that we've come to accept this as the status quo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The comment about video/compositing is interesting , because if there 's anything worse than Linux audio , it 's Linux video .
At least with Pulse you can see the light at the end of the tunnel ; I have no idea how the Driver/GEM/Mesa/DRM/DRI/GLX/XAA/EXA/UXA/KMS/Xv/WTF/BBQ clusterf \ _ck will ever get sorted out , not when everyone seems to be working on parallel , incompatible products .
And yes , I know that if I get some experimental driver from X.org 's git server and/or make sure I only use Intel/nVidia/ATi and/or precisely tweak xorg.conf .
Eventually I did that , but there 's no way that video should be as inconsistent as it is for this long.Meanwhile , I can run a hacked-up version of OS X on the same hardware and somehow video just works .
No tearing , no stuttering , no worries.Pulse , by comparison , is n't so bad .
I managed to get it working such that I could play to my Airport Express , USB headphones , desktop speakers and/or a combination of the above on a per-app basis , all without involving git or dealing with drivers .
If it has a problem , it 's that the tools to manage it are n't well-integrated into many distros ( Ubuntu , I 'm looking at you ) and are n't terribly user-friendly , and that applications can bring it down .
That 's a serious problem : a driver killing the sound system is fine , in a way , but it should n't be possible for , say , Songbird or Flash to kill audio any more than it should be possible for them to kill your display server.I can see the point of PulseAudio , and what it needs is a little polish and robustness .
Video on Linux , though , is showing the worst symptoms of " too many cooks " and " herding cats " .
Worse is that we 've come to accept this as the status quo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The comment about video/compositing is interesting, because if there's anything worse than Linux audio, it's Linux video.
At least with Pulse you can see the light at the end of the tunnel; I have no idea how the Driver/GEM/Mesa/DRM/DRI/GLX/XAA/EXA/UXA/KMS/Xv/WTF/BBQ clusterf\_ck will ever get sorted out, not when everyone seems to be working on parallel, incompatible products.
And yes, I know that if I get some experimental driver from X.org's git server and/or make sure I only use Intel/nVidia/ATi and/or precisely tweak xorg.conf.
Eventually I did that, but there's no way that video should be as inconsistent as it is for this long.Meanwhile, I can run a hacked-up version of OS X on the same hardware and somehow video just works.
No tearing, no stuttering, no worries.Pulse, by comparison, isn't so bad.
I managed to get it working such that I could play to my Airport Express, USB headphones, desktop speakers and/or a combination of the above on a per-app basis, all without involving git or dealing with drivers.
If it has a problem, it's that the tools to manage it aren't well-integrated into many distros (Ubuntu, I'm looking at you) and aren't terribly user-friendly, and that applications can bring it down.
That's a serious problem: a driver killing the sound system is fine, in a way, but it shouldn't be possible for, say, Songbird or Flash to kill audio any more than it should be possible for them to kill your display server.I can see the point of PulseAudio, and what it needs is a little polish and robustness.
Video on Linux, though, is showing the worst symptoms of "too many cooks" and "herding cats".
Worse is that we've come to accept this as the status quo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792527</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801991</id>
	<title>Re:Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>Veroxii</author>
	<datestamp>1255956480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disabled pulse (not uninstalled it) last night following this guide: <a href="http://idyllictux.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/ubuntu-904-jaunty-keeping-the-beast-pulseaudio-at-bay/" title="wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://idyllictux.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/ubuntu-904-jaunty-keeping-the-beast-pulseaudio-at-bay/</a> [wordpress.com]</p><p>So far so good - fixed up my Skype lag issues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disabled pulse ( not uninstalled it ) last night following this guide : http : //idyllictux.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/ubuntu-904-jaunty-keeping-the-beast-pulseaudio-at-bay/ [ wordpress.com ] So far so good - fixed up my Skype lag issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disabled pulse (not uninstalled it) last night following this guide: http://idyllictux.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/ubuntu-904-jaunty-keeping-the-beast-pulseaudio-at-bay/ [wordpress.com]So far so good - fixed up my Skype lag issues.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29798359</id>
	<title>Re:Why do I care where the bugs are?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255983660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make a shell script?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make a shell script ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make a shell script?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792607</id>
	<title>Re:Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255959780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) sudo chmod a-x<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/bin/pulseaudio<br>2) sudo apt-get install libsdl1.2debian-alsa (or libsdl1.2debian-all)<br>3) change all apps to use alsa and/or sdl<br>4) profit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) sudo chmod a-x /usr/bin/pulseaudio2 ) sudo apt-get install libsdl1.2debian-alsa ( or libsdl1.2debian-all ) 3 ) change all apps to use alsa and/or sdl4 ) profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) sudo chmod a-x /usr/bin/pulseaudio2) sudo apt-get install libsdl1.2debian-alsa (or libsdl1.2debian-all)3) change all apps to use alsa and/or sdl4) profit!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791519</id>
	<title>Way not to get the point: why users are angry</title>
	<author>Idaho</author>
	<datestamp>1255948680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>While Poettering admits PulseAudio itself is not bug-free, he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications.</p></div></blockquote><p>Even if he may be 100\% right about that: way not to get the point!</p><p>I don't care whether problems are caused by the kernel, a driver, an application, the phase of the moon, or whatever. The thing is, if some "trivial" piece of hardware which has been part of mostly every computer since about 1990, still *does not fucking work* correctly today, I don't give a rat's ass whose fault that is. Especially if it appears the same "problems" have been solved satisfactorily at least 10 years ago on every other OS in mainstream use.</p><p>In the meantime, Linux has changed both the audio driver model (ALSA, OSS, who knows what else), and in addition to that, the "application interfaces" (arts, esd, PulseAudio, etc.) so frequently, that it is hardly any wonder that application developers are taking the piss and not updating their software to match the bugs/workarounds to whatever the current "flavor of the week" API for audio interfacing is.</p><p>Perhaps PulseAudio is just getting most of the "blame" because it is the most recently changed part of the audio subsystem, so if things used to work before, and now they don't, of course you're going to blame PulseAudio. Even if it is not by itself the "real" culprit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While Poettering admits PulseAudio itself is not bug-free , he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications.Even if he may be 100 \ % right about that : way not to get the point ! I do n't care whether problems are caused by the kernel , a driver , an application , the phase of the moon , or whatever .
The thing is , if some " trivial " piece of hardware which has been part of mostly every computer since about 1990 , still * does not fucking work * correctly today , I do n't give a rat 's ass whose fault that is .
Especially if it appears the same " problems " have been solved satisfactorily at least 10 years ago on every other OS in mainstream use.In the meantime , Linux has changed both the audio driver model ( ALSA , OSS , who knows what else ) , and in addition to that , the " application interfaces " ( arts , esd , PulseAudio , etc .
) so frequently , that it is hardly any wonder that application developers are taking the piss and not updating their software to match the bugs/workarounds to whatever the current " flavor of the week " API for audio interfacing is.Perhaps PulseAudio is just getting most of the " blame " because it is the most recently changed part of the audio subsystem , so if things used to work before , and now they do n't , of course you 're going to blame PulseAudio .
Even if it is not by itself the " real " culprit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While Poettering admits PulseAudio itself is not bug-free, he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications.Even if he may be 100\% right about that: way not to get the point!I don't care whether problems are caused by the kernel, a driver, an application, the phase of the moon, or whatever.
The thing is, if some "trivial" piece of hardware which has been part of mostly every computer since about 1990, still *does not fucking work* correctly today, I don't give a rat's ass whose fault that is.
Especially if it appears the same "problems" have been solved satisfactorily at least 10 years ago on every other OS in mainstream use.In the meantime, Linux has changed both the audio driver model (ALSA, OSS, who knows what else), and in addition to that, the "application interfaces" (arts, esd, PulseAudio, etc.
) so frequently, that it is hardly any wonder that application developers are taking the piss and not updating their software to match the bugs/workarounds to whatever the current "flavor of the week" API for audio interfacing is.Perhaps PulseAudio is just getting most of the "blame" because it is the most recently changed part of the audio subsystem, so if things used to work before, and now they don't, of course you're going to blame PulseAudio.
Even if it is not by itself the "real" culprit.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792905</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1255961640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, it depends.  I certainly want something a lot more sophisticated than just a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp that everything gets written to.  When I'm playing a DVD, I do not want some stupid flash ad to start talking to me.  I don't want a ding noise informing me that updates are ready.  So a certain level of smart behavious would be good.  Likewise, working networking features would be good: I'd like to be able to hook up my MP3 collection to the hi-fi via the laptop that sits in the living room, and so forth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , it depends .
I certainly want something a lot more sophisticated than just a /dev/dsp that everything gets written to .
When I 'm playing a DVD , I do not want some stupid flash ad to start talking to me .
I do n't want a ding noise informing me that updates are ready .
So a certain level of smart behavious would be good .
Likewise , working networking features would be good : I 'd like to be able to hook up my MP3 collection to the hi-fi via the laptop that sits in the living room , and so forth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, it depends.
I certainly want something a lot more sophisticated than just a /dev/dsp that everything gets written to.
When I'm playing a DVD, I do not want some stupid flash ad to start talking to me.
I don't want a ding noise informing me that updates are ready.
So a certain level of smart behavious would be good.
Likewise, working networking features would be good: I'd like to be able to hook up my MP3 collection to the hi-fi via the laptop that sits in the living room, and so forth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731</id>
	<title>10 years ago, sound DID work reliably in Linux</title>
	<author>r00t</author>
	<datestamp>1255951560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was on 486 hardware and even worse!</p><p>The problems started with ESD or esound, the Enlightenment Sound Daemon. Prior to that, sound daemons were unusual. Nobody actually ran one. Enlightenment (the insane game-inspired window manager) got one, GNOME briefly used Enlightenment, and we've been stuck with sound daemons ever since.</p><p>The OSS to ALSA transition was the other botch. It used to be that an app just did open() on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/audio or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp and made sound. Any competant UNIX programmer could handle that. Now we have a kernel API that is essentially unusable, so you have to use ALSA libraries to do anything. Actually, those are **barely** usable.</p><p>Really, it wasn't always like this. My 486 DX4-75 with 8 MB RAM (slackware, fvwm-1.x) could handle audio. Back then, programmers didn't fuck around adding bugs and bloat. They wrote stuff that worked, nice and solid, on the hardware that we had.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was on 486 hardware and even worse ! The problems started with ESD or esound , the Enlightenment Sound Daemon .
Prior to that , sound daemons were unusual .
Nobody actually ran one .
Enlightenment ( the insane game-inspired window manager ) got one , GNOME briefly used Enlightenment , and we 've been stuck with sound daemons ever since.The OSS to ALSA transition was the other botch .
It used to be that an app just did open ( ) on /dev/audio or /dev/dsp and made sound .
Any competant UNIX programmer could handle that .
Now we have a kernel API that is essentially unusable , so you have to use ALSA libraries to do anything .
Actually , those are * * barely * * usable.Really , it was n't always like this .
My 486 DX4-75 with 8 MB RAM ( slackware , fvwm-1.x ) could handle audio .
Back then , programmers did n't fuck around adding bugs and bloat .
They wrote stuff that worked , nice and solid , on the hardware that we had .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was on 486 hardware and even worse!The problems started with ESD or esound, the Enlightenment Sound Daemon.
Prior to that, sound daemons were unusual.
Nobody actually ran one.
Enlightenment (the insane game-inspired window manager) got one, GNOME briefly used Enlightenment, and we've been stuck with sound daemons ever since.The OSS to ALSA transition was the other botch.
It used to be that an app just did open() on /dev/audio or /dev/dsp and made sound.
Any competant UNIX programmer could handle that.
Now we have a kernel API that is essentially unusable, so you have to use ALSA libraries to do anything.
Actually, those are **barely** usable.Really, it wasn't always like this.
My 486 DX4-75 with 8 MB RAM (slackware, fvwm-1.x) could handle audio.
Back then, programmers didn't fuck around adding bugs and bloat.
They wrote stuff that worked, nice and solid, on the hardware that we had.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799755</id>
	<title>Re:Distribution problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255945200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's unpossible. Ubuntu is the only lunix, and so it works flawlessly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's unpossible .
Ubuntu is the only lunix , and so it works flawlessly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's unpossible.
Ubuntu is the only lunix, and so it works flawlessly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>diegocgteleline.es</author>
	<datestamp>1255963080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I should...why? Pulseaudio works great here - no problems at all, no high CPU usage, nothing. It's funny that people will happily waste hours of their time getting rid of alsa while they critize pulseaudio for wasting their time with its problems...</p><p>It's clear to anyone that has looked into this that most people are very happy with Pulseaudio. All the important distros ship it, and the users that have problems are clearly a \_minority\_, which is only getting smaller and smaller with each new version of Pulseaudio, Alsa and the kernel. And the geeks that fear changes and love to bitch about are running out of excuses. Linux would have far more problems going back to OSS4 (hey, why I can't set per-app volume, why audio over bluetooth doesn't works as I want?).</p><p>Each time Linux redesigns some subsystem there are problems, and we see the same people bitching about how we should use $ALTERNATIVE instead and how Linux is not ready for the desktop. But with the time the problems dissapear and the linux desktop gets more and more solid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I should...why ?
Pulseaudio works great here - no problems at all , no high CPU usage , nothing .
It 's funny that people will happily waste hours of their time getting rid of alsa while they critize pulseaudio for wasting their time with its problems...It 's clear to anyone that has looked into this that most people are very happy with Pulseaudio .
All the important distros ship it , and the users that have problems are clearly a \ _minority \ _ , which is only getting smaller and smaller with each new version of Pulseaudio , Alsa and the kernel .
And the geeks that fear changes and love to bitch about are running out of excuses .
Linux would have far more problems going back to OSS4 ( hey , why I ca n't set per-app volume , why audio over bluetooth does n't works as I want ?
) .Each time Linux redesigns some subsystem there are problems , and we see the same people bitching about how we should use $ ALTERNATIVE instead and how Linux is not ready for the desktop .
But with the time the problems dissapear and the linux desktop gets more and more solid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I should...why?
Pulseaudio works great here - no problems at all, no high CPU usage, nothing.
It's funny that people will happily waste hours of their time getting rid of alsa while they critize pulseaudio for wasting their time with its problems...It's clear to anyone that has looked into this that most people are very happy with Pulseaudio.
All the important distros ship it, and the users that have problems are clearly a \_minority\_, which is only getting smaller and smaller with each new version of Pulseaudio, Alsa and the kernel.
And the geeks that fear changes and love to bitch about are running out of excuses.
Linux would have far more problems going back to OSS4 (hey, why I can't set per-app volume, why audio over bluetooth doesn't works as I want?
).Each time Linux redesigns some subsystem there are problems, and we see the same people bitching about how we should use $ALTERNATIVE instead and how Linux is not ready for the desktop.
But with the time the problems dissapear and the linux desktop gets more and more solid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792743</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>WillDraven</author>
	<datestamp>1255960620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Soviet Russia Pulse kills YOU!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Russia Pulse kills YOU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Russia Pulse kills YOU!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793129</id>
	<title>Re:Why getting it wrong sucks</title>
	<author>Gunstick</author>
	<datestamp>1255962720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>mine didn't work with oss</p><p>it did not with alsa</p><p>and still does not with pulse</p><p>Seems i'm always on the recieving side.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>mine did n't work with ossit did not with alsaand still does not with pulseSeems i 'm always on the recieving side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mine didn't work with ossit did not with alsaand still does not with pulseSeems i'm always on the recieving side.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792205</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791433</id>
	<title>Who knew?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255947420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lady Gaga apparently uses Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lady Gaga apparently uses Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lady Gaga apparently uses Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792131</id>
	<title>This is why we have Macs</title>
	<author>mikelieman</author>
	<datestamp>1255955880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe the solution to any *PROFESSIONAL* Linux Audio Production issue is to just go buy a Mac.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the solution to any * PROFESSIONAL * Linux Audio Production issue is to just go buy a Mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the solution to any *PROFESSIONAL* Linux Audio Production issue is to just go buy a Mac.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791841</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255952880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>one of the major annoyances of ubuntu 9.04 was having to kill pulseaudio at each startup so that sounds would work. i'm glad i'm back to windows</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>one of the major annoyances of ubuntu 9.04 was having to kill pulseaudio at each startup so that sounds would work .
i 'm glad i 'm back to windows</tokentext>
<sentencetext>one of the major annoyances of ubuntu 9.04 was having to kill pulseaudio at each startup so that sounds would work.
i'm glad i'm back to windows</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795193</id>
	<title>Re:Who knew?</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1255971840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Lady Gaga apparently uses Linux.</p></div><p>No no no...  It's Lady <em>Mega</em> and <em>Lord</em> Giga...  And when they use Masterforce, they transform and combine to form Overlord.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lady Gaga apparently uses Linux.No no no... It 's Lady Mega and Lord Giga... And when they use Masterforce , they transform and combine to form Overlord .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lady Gaga apparently uses Linux.No no no...  It's Lady Mega and Lord Giga...  And when they use Masterforce, they transform and combine to form Overlord.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792239</id>
	<title>Ugh, Yea, Pulse sucks</title>
	<author>Urza9814</author>
	<datestamp>1255956900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was using PulseAudio for a while. Every time I booted up I'd have to manually restart pulse. Then one day it just stopped working entirely. So then every time I booted I'd have to manually stop pulse and start alsa. Then that stopped working entirely. Finally I just completely removed PulseAudio, and everything has been working perfectly ever since.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was using PulseAudio for a while .
Every time I booted up I 'd have to manually restart pulse .
Then one day it just stopped working entirely .
So then every time I booted I 'd have to manually stop pulse and start alsa .
Then that stopped working entirely .
Finally I just completely removed PulseAudio , and everything has been working perfectly ever since .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was using PulseAudio for a while.
Every time I booted up I'd have to manually restart pulse.
Then one day it just stopped working entirely.
So then every time I booted I'd have to manually stop pulse and start alsa.
Then that stopped working entirely.
Finally I just completely removed PulseAudio, and everything has been working perfectly ever since.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</id>
	<title>who's to blame.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255945380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When an application can make the soundsystem stop working for all other applications, than there is a bug in the soundsystem, not just the application that caused the problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When an application can make the soundsystem stop working for all other applications , than there is a bug in the soundsystem , not just the application that caused the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When an application can make the soundsystem stop working for all other applications, than there is a bug in the soundsystem, not just the application that caused the problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796093</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1255975380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Above all, more than anything else, there needs to be a return to implementation, rather than interface, simplicity. As priorities, faddishness, popularity, and most of all, the end user, need to die.</i></p><p>If you're trolling, that's brilliant.</p><p>If not, then... WTF! Even ESR, the craziest of the crazy, has written articles about how much open source usability sucks shit. Like this article: <a href="http://catb.org/esr/writings/cups-horror.html" title="catb.org">http://catb.org/esr/writings/cups-horror.html</a> [catb.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Above all , more than anything else , there needs to be a return to implementation , rather than interface , simplicity .
As priorities , faddishness , popularity , and most of all , the end user , need to die.If you 're trolling , that 's brilliant.If not , then... WTF ! Even ESR , the craziest of the crazy , has written articles about how much open source usability sucks shit .
Like this article : http : //catb.org/esr/writings/cups-horror.html [ catb.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Above all, more than anything else, there needs to be a return to implementation, rather than interface, simplicity.
As priorities, faddishness, popularity, and most of all, the end user, need to die.If you're trolling, that's brilliant.If not, then... WTF! Even ESR, the craziest of the crazy, has written articles about how much open source usability sucks shit.
Like this article: http://catb.org/esr/writings/cups-horror.html [catb.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792395</id>
	<title>Re:Why do I care where the bugs are?</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1255958340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ALSA isn't working very well for me.  How do you make it work to have 3 applications play audio concurrently?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ALSA is n't working very well for me .
How do you make it work to have 3 applications play audio concurrently ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ALSA isn't working very well for me.
How do you make it work to have 3 applications play audio concurrently?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792109</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>LizardKing</author>
	<datestamp>1255955640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fundamentally, PulseAudio is architecturally flawed, and I don't get the impression from reading the rest of the Slashdot comments that people are confusing the roles of a networked audio daemon and a lower level kernel API. The problem is that PA is userspace, trying to do things that require kernel level control of timing. This is made worse by ALSA on Linux, which has poor latency, poor design, appalling code and sketchy documentation. I don't say this based on anecdotal comments from others, but on my experience working with ALSA in order to abstract the differences between various Unix like systems. In the BSD world, PA has only been (grudgingly) accepted because so many things now depend on it - but it actually duplicates some of the functionality already offered by the native kernel API. And just because a few big names are using it doesn't magically make PA any good - I can think of a number of widely used technologies that are piss poor compared to alternatives, but have become entrenched for reasons other than technical excellence. As for switching users on a desktop machine, I don't know anyone who does this, nor can I think of any reason why doing so would absolutely require an over engineered audio daemon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fundamentally , PulseAudio is architecturally flawed , and I do n't get the impression from reading the rest of the Slashdot comments that people are confusing the roles of a networked audio daemon and a lower level kernel API .
The problem is that PA is userspace , trying to do things that require kernel level control of timing .
This is made worse by ALSA on Linux , which has poor latency , poor design , appalling code and sketchy documentation .
I do n't say this based on anecdotal comments from others , but on my experience working with ALSA in order to abstract the differences between various Unix like systems .
In the BSD world , PA has only been ( grudgingly ) accepted because so many things now depend on it - but it actually duplicates some of the functionality already offered by the native kernel API .
And just because a few big names are using it does n't magically make PA any good - I can think of a number of widely used technologies that are piss poor compared to alternatives , but have become entrenched for reasons other than technical excellence .
As for switching users on a desktop machine , I do n't know anyone who does this , nor can I think of any reason why doing so would absolutely require an over engineered audio daemon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fundamentally, PulseAudio is architecturally flawed, and I don't get the impression from reading the rest of the Slashdot comments that people are confusing the roles of a networked audio daemon and a lower level kernel API.
The problem is that PA is userspace, trying to do things that require kernel level control of timing.
This is made worse by ALSA on Linux, which has poor latency, poor design, appalling code and sketchy documentation.
I don't say this based on anecdotal comments from others, but on my experience working with ALSA in order to abstract the differences between various Unix like systems.
In the BSD world, PA has only been (grudgingly) accepted because so many things now depend on it - but it actually duplicates some of the functionality already offered by the native kernel API.
And just because a few big names are using it doesn't magically make PA any good - I can think of a number of widely used technologies that are piss poor compared to alternatives, but have become entrenched for reasons other than technical excellence.
As for switching users on a desktop machine, I don't know anyone who does this, nor can I think of any reason why doing so would absolutely require an over engineered audio daemon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794047</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Tubal-Cain</author>
	<datestamp>1255966680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>OSSv4 or older flavours simply does not have the API to deal with a modern linux desktop, plain and simple.</p></div><p>And yet for me it's the only system that will play multiple audio files at one time. ALSA/PA give the entire sound card to that paused youtube video loading in the background.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>OSSv4 or older flavours simply does not have the API to deal with a modern linux desktop , plain and simple.And yet for me it 's the only system that will play multiple audio files at one time .
ALSA/PA give the entire sound card to that paused youtube video loading in the background .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OSSv4 or older flavours simply does not have the API to deal with a modern linux desktop, plain and simple.And yet for me it's the only system that will play multiple audio files at one time.
ALSA/PA give the entire sound card to that paused youtube video loading in the background.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792311</id>
	<title>Pulseaudio a Proprietary software?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255957500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really containing less bugs, not really fast, not really working well, not really simple, not really flexible,...<br>It's really like reading about OSS vs. Proprietary battle...or say s/Proprietary/Pulseaudio/<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really containing less bugs , not really fast , not really working well , not really simple , not really flexible,...It 's really like reading about OSS vs. Proprietary battle...or say s/Proprietary/Pulseaudio/ : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really containing less bugs, not really fast, not really working well, not really simple, not really flexible,...It's really like reading about OSS vs. Proprietary battle...or say s/Proprietary/Pulseaudio/ :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804381</id>
	<title>Re:This is why I switched back to Windows</title>
	<author>TerranFury</author>
	<datestamp>1255976940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not a troll but rather solid advice.  Do not give Linux, even the comparatively-easy Ubuntu, to novice computer users.  The second they're asked to do a distro upgrade -- and this happens every few months -- they'll be calling you for help because, face it, a bunch of stuff will break (hundreds of posts in the Ubuntu forums stand testament to this fact).  Whereas Windows will just silently and without causing problems install minor patches.</p><p>Maybe the answer is to use something stabler than Ubuntu which has a slower release cycle.  Debian stable?</p><p>But if the choice is between XP and Ubuntu... I'm starting to think (and I did not originally) that it's easier to get XP secure enough than it is to make a Linux user-friendly and functional enough.</p><p>OSX may also be worth considering seriously.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not a troll but rather solid advice .
Do not give Linux , even the comparatively-easy Ubuntu , to novice computer users .
The second they 're asked to do a distro upgrade -- and this happens every few months -- they 'll be calling you for help because , face it , a bunch of stuff will break ( hundreds of posts in the Ubuntu forums stand testament to this fact ) .
Whereas Windows will just silently and without causing problems install minor patches.Maybe the answer is to use something stabler than Ubuntu which has a slower release cycle .
Debian stable ? But if the choice is between XP and Ubuntu... I 'm starting to think ( and I did not originally ) that it 's easier to get XP secure enough than it is to make a Linux user-friendly and functional enough.OSX may also be worth considering seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not a troll but rather solid advice.
Do not give Linux, even the comparatively-easy Ubuntu, to novice computer users.
The second they're asked to do a distro upgrade -- and this happens every few months -- they'll be calling you for help because, face it, a bunch of stuff will break (hundreds of posts in the Ubuntu forums stand testament to this fact).
Whereas Windows will just silently and without causing problems install minor patches.Maybe the answer is to use something stabler than Ubuntu which has a slower release cycle.
Debian stable?But if the choice is between XP and Ubuntu... I'm starting to think (and I did not originally) that it's easier to get XP secure enough than it is to make a Linux user-friendly and functional enough.OSX may also be worth considering seriously.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792507</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795041</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1255971240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's clear to anyone that has looked into this that most people are very happy with Pulseaudio. All the important distros ship it, and the users that have problems are clearly a \_minority\_, which is only getting smaller and smaller with each new version of Pulseaudio, Alsa and the kernel.</p> </div><p>It was clearly a minority of users who had actual problems with Vista. Guess what, it was still a flop. A large enough minority having problems is also a big deal - and for PulseAudio, it's pretty damn large.</p><p>In fact, this from TFA:</p><p><i>he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications</i></p><p>Sounds <em>precisely</em> like early Vista apologetics. What do I care if it's a driver problem when it bluescreens every 2 hours on me? Similarly, what do I care if it's a driver problem when my sound is messed up? Especially when both ALSA and OSS - which provide the drivers - work just fine on their own...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's clear to anyone that has looked into this that most people are very happy with Pulseaudio .
All the important distros ship it , and the users that have problems are clearly a \ _minority \ _ , which is only getting smaller and smaller with each new version of Pulseaudio , Alsa and the kernel .
It was clearly a minority of users who had actual problems with Vista .
Guess what , it was still a flop .
A large enough minority having problems is also a big deal - and for PulseAudio , it 's pretty damn large.In fact , this from TFA : he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applicationsSounds precisely like early Vista apologetics .
What do I care if it 's a driver problem when it bluescreens every 2 hours on me ?
Similarly , what do I care if it 's a driver problem when my sound is messed up ?
Especially when both ALSA and OSS - which provide the drivers - work just fine on their own.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's clear to anyone that has looked into this that most people are very happy with Pulseaudio.
All the important distros ship it, and the users that have problems are clearly a \_minority\_, which is only getting smaller and smaller with each new version of Pulseaudio, Alsa and the kernel.
It was clearly a minority of users who had actual problems with Vista.
Guess what, it was still a flop.
A large enough minority having problems is also a big deal - and for PulseAudio, it's pretty damn large.In fact, this from TFA:he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applicationsSounds precisely like early Vista apologetics.
What do I care if it's a driver problem when it bluescreens every 2 hours on me?
Similarly, what do I care if it's a driver problem when my sound is messed up?
Especially when both ALSA and OSS - which provide the drivers - work just fine on their own...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793473</id>
	<title>It may be in distros, BUT...</title>
	<author>Murpster</author>
	<datestamp>1255964340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many people install a distro with PulseAudio, then disable it? I one of the first things I do on a new Fedora install is rip out PulseAudio. I know many many other people who do the same. Just because some Linux flavor "adopts" it and installs it by default, you can't assume that everyone using those distros actually uses the piece of crap.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many people install a distro with PulseAudio , then disable it ?
I one of the first things I do on a new Fedora install is rip out PulseAudio .
I know many many other people who do the same .
Just because some Linux flavor " adopts " it and installs it by default , you ca n't assume that everyone using those distros actually uses the piece of crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many people install a distro with PulseAudio, then disable it?
I one of the first things I do on a new Fedora install is rip out PulseAudio.
I know many many other people who do the same.
Just because some Linux flavor "adopts" it and installs it by default, you can't assume that everyone using those distros actually uses the piece of crap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800991</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>diegocgteleline.es</author>
	<datestamp>1255950960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Pulseaudio is a system that would be, at best, a minor improvement in a perfect world and a never ending nightmare in the real one.</i></p><p>The current linux audio system was far from perfect. ALSA also was a minor improvement back when OSS + esd were the perfect world.</p><p><i>2. Pulse blameshifts all it's problems to apps and drivers. Ok, apps (open source ones anyway) will eventually get fixed. Drivers won't. Motherboards do not ship with sound drivers for Linux. Linux ships generic drivers for the sound chips on popular systems. There is a big difference.</i></p><p>The alsa drivers have lots of quirks to make sure it works for a given model of a given brand, just take a look at the sound/pci/hda git log output. There's nothing windows does here that linux can't do...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pulseaudio is a system that would be , at best , a minor improvement in a perfect world and a never ending nightmare in the real one.The current linux audio system was far from perfect .
ALSA also was a minor improvement back when OSS + esd were the perfect world.2 .
Pulse blameshifts all it 's problems to apps and drivers .
Ok , apps ( open source ones anyway ) will eventually get fixed .
Drivers wo n't .
Motherboards do not ship with sound drivers for Linux .
Linux ships generic drivers for the sound chips on popular systems .
There is a big difference.The alsa drivers have lots of quirks to make sure it works for a given model of a given brand , just take a look at the sound/pci/hda git log output .
There 's nothing windows does here that linux ca n't do.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pulseaudio is a system that would be, at best, a minor improvement in a perfect world and a never ending nightmare in the real one.The current linux audio system was far from perfect.
ALSA also was a minor improvement back when OSS + esd were the perfect world.2.
Pulse blameshifts all it's problems to apps and drivers.
Ok, apps (open source ones anyway) will eventually get fixed.
Drivers won't.
Motherboards do not ship with sound drivers for Linux.
Linux ships generic drivers for the sound chips on popular systems.
There is a big difference.The alsa drivers have lots of quirks to make sure it works for a given model of a given brand, just take a look at the sound/pci/hda git log output.
There's nothing windows does here that linux can't do...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797663</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255981320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Examples: My desktop system requires careful balancing of the VIA DXS, PCM and Master sliders to get enough output to drive my speakers and avoid clipping in the digital side of the system."</p><p>By all means file a bug. Contrary to your later assertions, we (myself, in co-ordination with Lennart and Jaroslav) have developed a process for reporting this kind of issue in a way which provides the correct information for us to efficiently adjust things so that ALSA exposes an interface to PA which allows it to properly control your volume. Cue celebrations. See <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=497966#c1" title="redhat.com">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=497966#c1</a> [redhat.com] for instructions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Examples : My desktop system requires careful balancing of the VIA DXS , PCM and Master sliders to get enough output to drive my speakers and avoid clipping in the digital side of the system .
" By all means file a bug .
Contrary to your later assertions , we ( myself , in co-ordination with Lennart and Jaroslav ) have developed a process for reporting this kind of issue in a way which provides the correct information for us to efficiently adjust things so that ALSA exposes an interface to PA which allows it to properly control your volume .
Cue celebrations .
See https : //bugzilla.redhat.com/show \ _bug.cgi ? id = 497966 # c1 [ redhat.com ] for instructions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Examples: My desktop system requires careful balancing of the VIA DXS, PCM and Master sliders to get enough output to drive my speakers and avoid clipping in the digital side of the system.
"By all means file a bug.
Contrary to your later assertions, we (myself, in co-ordination with Lennart and Jaroslav) have developed a process for reporting this kind of issue in a way which provides the correct information for us to efficiently adjust things so that ALSA exposes an interface to PA which allows it to properly control your volume.
Cue celebrations.
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=497966#c1 [redhat.com] for instructions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791907</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1255953420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll stick my neck out here. First, Pulse relies on the Alsa driver.  There is no hardware issue, and the driver issue seems to be the Alsa driver.  OSS4 works on my hardware, where Pulse and Alsa failed.  And, of course, the Windows sound drivers work on that same hardware.</p><p>People with sound issues on Alsa and Pulse should try OSS4.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll stick my neck out here .
First , Pulse relies on the Alsa driver .
There is no hardware issue , and the driver issue seems to be the Alsa driver .
OSS4 works on my hardware , where Pulse and Alsa failed .
And , of course , the Windows sound drivers work on that same hardware.People with sound issues on Alsa and Pulse should try OSS4 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll stick my neck out here.
First, Pulse relies on the Alsa driver.
There is no hardware issue, and the driver issue seems to be the Alsa driver.
OSS4 works on my hardware, where Pulse and Alsa failed.
And, of course, the Windows sound drivers work on that same hardware.People with sound issues on Alsa and Pulse should try OSS4.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791745</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791885</id>
	<title>Re:10 years ago, sound DID work reliably in Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255953240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get off my lawn!  Kidsh theshe daysh do not know how to code, back in my day everything wash jusht one and zero.  Get a job hippie!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get off my lawn !
Kidsh theshe daysh do not know how to code , back in my day everything wash jusht one and zero .
Get a job hippie !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get off my lawn!
Kidsh theshe daysh do not know how to code, back in my day everything wash jusht one and zero.
Get a job hippie!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792807</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>ledow</author>
	<datestamp>1255961100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, I don't use a normal "desktop" distro, so PulseAudio has pretty much slipped me by completely (good old ALSA, not broke, ain't gonna fix it) but the one line that scared the crap out of me was:</p><p>"For example, if a video is running in one application the system should automatically reduce the volume of everything else and increase it when the video is finished."</p><p>Er no.  The system will damn well do what I tell it to.  My volume levels are *my* domain, them being a user interface.  I don't mind it being capable but the word "automatically" scares me.  It also seems to add extremely unnecessary levels of complexity to a desktop system by literally abstracting every sound source and every output device (including network-audio) into separate entities - isn't the idea of a sound daemon of any kind to *merge* those entities seamlessly?  That was the bit I liked hearing about PulseAudio - integration of esd, arts, alsa, oss, etc. into one place, but to then abstract out every program with it's own volume control seems daft (and adding another step into the "where the hell is that volume control that's making it so loud" process).</p><p>You know what I want?  One damn volume control that controls the final output to my speakers (multiple independent speaker sets is an advanced configuration that I and most other people really don't care about, hotplugged or not).  And everything *behind* that should be filtered and normalised so it's all the same volume unless I *specifically* say otherwise.  Audio professionals are working *with* sound, so they have the tools to do what they like.  99\% of desktop users just want their IM notifications to be heard as well as their MP3's without having to play with sliders all the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , I do n't use a normal " desktop " distro , so PulseAudio has pretty much slipped me by completely ( good old ALSA , not broke , ai n't gon na fix it ) but the one line that scared the crap out of me was : " For example , if a video is running in one application the system should automatically reduce the volume of everything else and increase it when the video is finished .
" Er no .
The system will damn well do what I tell it to .
My volume levels are * my * domain , them being a user interface .
I do n't mind it being capable but the word " automatically " scares me .
It also seems to add extremely unnecessary levels of complexity to a desktop system by literally abstracting every sound source and every output device ( including network-audio ) into separate entities - is n't the idea of a sound daemon of any kind to * merge * those entities seamlessly ?
That was the bit I liked hearing about PulseAudio - integration of esd , arts , alsa , oss , etc .
into one place , but to then abstract out every program with it 's own volume control seems daft ( and adding another step into the " where the hell is that volume control that 's making it so loud " process ) .You know what I want ?
One damn volume control that controls the final output to my speakers ( multiple independent speaker sets is an advanced configuration that I and most other people really do n't care about , hotplugged or not ) .
And everything * behind * that should be filtered and normalised so it 's all the same volume unless I * specifically * say otherwise .
Audio professionals are working * with * sound , so they have the tools to do what they like .
99 \ % of desktop users just want their IM notifications to be heard as well as their MP3 's without having to play with sliders all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, I don't use a normal "desktop" distro, so PulseAudio has pretty much slipped me by completely (good old ALSA, not broke, ain't gonna fix it) but the one line that scared the crap out of me was:"For example, if a video is running in one application the system should automatically reduce the volume of everything else and increase it when the video is finished.
"Er no.
The system will damn well do what I tell it to.
My volume levels are *my* domain, them being a user interface.
I don't mind it being capable but the word "automatically" scares me.
It also seems to add extremely unnecessary levels of complexity to a desktop system by literally abstracting every sound source and every output device (including network-audio) into separate entities - isn't the idea of a sound daemon of any kind to *merge* those entities seamlessly?
That was the bit I liked hearing about PulseAudio - integration of esd, arts, alsa, oss, etc.
into one place, but to then abstract out every program with it's own volume control seems daft (and adding another step into the "where the hell is that volume control that's making it so loud" process).You know what I want?
One damn volume control that controls the final output to my speakers (multiple independent speaker sets is an advanced configuration that I and most other people really don't care about, hotplugged or not).
And everything *behind* that should be filtered and normalised so it's all the same volume unless I *specifically* say otherwise.
Audio professionals are working *with* sound, so they have the tools to do what they like.
99\% of desktop users just want their IM notifications to be heard as well as their MP3's without having to play with sliders all the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792027</id>
	<title>Re:10 years ago, sound DID work reliably in Linux</title>
	<author>jmv</author>
	<datestamp>1255954680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>10 years ago, you couldn't play two sounds at the same time unless your card could handle it in hardware. Also, that's about when (IIRC) they started introducing cards (e.g. AC97) that could only two one or two rates or (in some cases) could only do stereo. The driver would simply refuse to handle mono or 8 kHz so you had to resample by yourself. ALSA was *generally* a good idea, but with a bad implementation. It's better than OSS, but still suffers from some of the same problems, like the fact that the range of many hardware parameters is decided by the card (but at least the sampling rate was OK) and makes it near impossible to write code that works with all cards. As far as I'm concerned, *all* the sound servers on Linux (can't speak for other OSs) prior to PulseAudio were complete garbage. PulseAudio may have issues, but it's the first one to at least do its job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>10 years ago , you could n't play two sounds at the same time unless your card could handle it in hardware .
Also , that 's about when ( IIRC ) they started introducing cards ( e.g .
AC97 ) that could only two one or two rates or ( in some cases ) could only do stereo .
The driver would simply refuse to handle mono or 8 kHz so you had to resample by yourself .
ALSA was * generally * a good idea , but with a bad implementation .
It 's better than OSS , but still suffers from some of the same problems , like the fact that the range of many hardware parameters is decided by the card ( but at least the sampling rate was OK ) and makes it near impossible to write code that works with all cards .
As far as I 'm concerned , * all * the sound servers on Linux ( ca n't speak for other OSs ) prior to PulseAudio were complete garbage .
PulseAudio may have issues , but it 's the first one to at least do its job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10 years ago, you couldn't play two sounds at the same time unless your card could handle it in hardware.
Also, that's about when (IIRC) they started introducing cards (e.g.
AC97) that could only two one or two rates or (in some cases) could only do stereo.
The driver would simply refuse to handle mono or 8 kHz so you had to resample by yourself.
ALSA was *generally* a good idea, but with a bad implementation.
It's better than OSS, but still suffers from some of the same problems, like the fact that the range of many hardware parameters is decided by the card (but at least the sampling rate was OK) and makes it near impossible to write code that works with all cards.
As far as I'm concerned, *all* the sound servers on Linux (can't speak for other OSs) prior to PulseAudio were complete garbage.
PulseAudio may have issues, but it's the first one to at least do its job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800559</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Nivex</author>
	<datestamp>1255948860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ya know, you had me... right up until "the end user, need to die."  In the end it is ALL about the user, without whom all you have is SkyNet, or the MCP.  Do you want to write code for your machine overlord, or for a fellow human being?</p><p>Ultimately that end user wants his/her computer to \_just work\_, which would happen if the tenets you laid out in your diatribe were followed.  I find it strange that you would contradict yourself so vehemently right at the very end.</p><p>I think I know what you're actually trying to say here, but it would be foolhardy for me to infer that you contradicted yourself \_again\_ by being an elitist (self-righteous) BOFH who is better than the "end user".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ya know , you had me... right up until " the end user , need to die .
" In the end it is ALL about the user , without whom all you have is SkyNet , or the MCP .
Do you want to write code for your machine overlord , or for a fellow human being ? Ultimately that end user wants his/her computer to \ _just work \ _ , which would happen if the tenets you laid out in your diatribe were followed .
I find it strange that you would contradict yourself so vehemently right at the very end.I think I know what you 're actually trying to say here , but it would be foolhardy for me to infer that you contradicted yourself \ _again \ _ by being an elitist ( self-righteous ) BOFH who is better than the " end user " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ya know, you had me... right up until "the end user, need to die.
"  In the end it is ALL about the user, without whom all you have is SkyNet, or the MCP.
Do you want to write code for your machine overlord, or for a fellow human being?Ultimately that end user wants his/her computer to \_just work\_, which would happen if the tenets you laid out in your diatribe were followed.
I find it strange that you would contradict yourself so vehemently right at the very end.I think I know what you're actually trying to say here, but it would be foolhardy for me to infer that you contradicted yourself \_again\_ by being an elitist (self-righteous) BOFH who is better than the "end user".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792267</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>V!NCENT</author>
	<datestamp>1255957080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not a bug; it's a feature. Ha.. ha.. h-... no I am not joking: having max volume music playing while you awnser the voip sucks, so apps should be able to turn of or lower the sound of other apps, but if the app crashes then yeah... that sucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a bug ; it 's a feature .
Ha.. ha.. h-... no I am not joking : having max volume music playing while you awnser the voip sucks , so apps should be able to turn of or lower the sound of other apps , but if the app crashes then yeah... that sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a bug; it's a feature.
Ha.. ha.. h-... no I am not joking: having max volume music playing while you awnser the voip sucks, so apps should be able to turn of or lower the sound of other apps, but if the app crashes then yeah... that sucks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29798331</id>
	<title>Re:Why do I care where the bugs are?</title>
	<author>Malibee</author>
	<datestamp>1255983540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I personally find the networking aspects of Pulse to be quite handy. I have mpd running on my file server, streaming to a PulseAudio server on my media center (Ubuntu Jaunty). I also have it stream to my desktop.</p><p>Using the nifty iPhone app MPod, I can control my playlist from the palm of my hand, in a fashion that beats a universal remote all hollow, since I can actually see the playlist I'm queuing, instead of having to squint at the screen (yes, I have a small display, don't laugh) or get in position to view the screen. And there's nothing like being able to switch tracks while you're on the can (there's a joke in there somewhere, but I can't quite find it).</p><p>I hope to one day figure out some sort of motion sensing or proximity detection mechanism to selectively enable/disable mpd outputs so that I can be listening to music on my sound system, and when I leave the room and into my office I can pick up my headphones, and the same playlist will be playing there automatically. Sort of like motion controlled lights, except it's sound.</p><p>I'd also really like to see is some kind of mashup between vlc's remote control app and Moovida and this MPod app, so I could have a centralized media center with a truly universal remote control. Apps work on the iPod Touch too...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I personally find the networking aspects of Pulse to be quite handy .
I have mpd running on my file server , streaming to a PulseAudio server on my media center ( Ubuntu Jaunty ) .
I also have it stream to my desktop.Using the nifty iPhone app MPod , I can control my playlist from the palm of my hand , in a fashion that beats a universal remote all hollow , since I can actually see the playlist I 'm queuing , instead of having to squint at the screen ( yes , I have a small display , do n't laugh ) or get in position to view the screen .
And there 's nothing like being able to switch tracks while you 're on the can ( there 's a joke in there somewhere , but I ca n't quite find it ) .I hope to one day figure out some sort of motion sensing or proximity detection mechanism to selectively enable/disable mpd outputs so that I can be listening to music on my sound system , and when I leave the room and into my office I can pick up my headphones , and the same playlist will be playing there automatically .
Sort of like motion controlled lights , except it 's sound.I 'd also really like to see is some kind of mashup between vlc 's remote control app and Moovida and this MPod app , so I could have a centralized media center with a truly universal remote control .
Apps work on the iPod Touch too.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I personally find the networking aspects of Pulse to be quite handy.
I have mpd running on my file server, streaming to a PulseAudio server on my media center (Ubuntu Jaunty).
I also have it stream to my desktop.Using the nifty iPhone app MPod, I can control my playlist from the palm of my hand, in a fashion that beats a universal remote all hollow, since I can actually see the playlist I'm queuing, instead of having to squint at the screen (yes, I have a small display, don't laugh) or get in position to view the screen.
And there's nothing like being able to switch tracks while you're on the can (there's a joke in there somewhere, but I can't quite find it).I hope to one day figure out some sort of motion sensing or proximity detection mechanism to selectively enable/disable mpd outputs so that I can be listening to music on my sound system, and when I leave the room and into my office I can pick up my headphones, and the same playlist will be playing there automatically.
Sort of like motion controlled lights, except it's sound.I'd also really like to see is some kind of mashup between vlc's remote control app and Moovida and this MPod app, so I could have a centralized media center with a truly universal remote control.
Apps work on the iPod Touch too...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795175</id>
	<title>If I wanted to use unstable, buggy audio...</title>
	<author>otis wildflower</author>
	<datestamp>1255971720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...  I woulda stuck with aRTs.</p><p>Why can't anyone get this as right as *shudder* Windows?</p><p>Dare I dream of Mac audio?</p><p>Heck, why not just have a mixing driver for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp that doesn't crash or drop out?  That's probably what 90\%+ of linux desktop users really want, and for the audio nerds let them deal with JACK et al on their own time..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... I woulda stuck with aRTs.Why ca n't anyone get this as right as * shudder * Windows ? Dare I dream of Mac audio ? Heck , why not just have a mixing driver for /dev/dsp that does n't crash or drop out ?
That 's probably what 90 \ % + of linux desktop users really want , and for the audio nerds let them deal with JACK et al on their own time. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...  I woulda stuck with aRTs.Why can't anyone get this as right as *shudder* Windows?Dare I dream of Mac audio?Heck, why not just have a mixing driver for /dev/dsp that doesn't crash or drop out?
That's probably what 90\%+ of linux desktop users really want, and for the audio nerds let them deal with JACK et al on their own time..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792535</id>
	<title>Re:Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255959180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...any better ideas?</p></div><p>Go out. Have a couple of beers. Then switch to tequila.</p><p>My advice for all computer-related problems. The ones you remember the next morning are worth solving. The others<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Well, you'll have forgotten about them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...any better ideas ? Go out .
Have a couple of beers .
Then switch to tequila.My advice for all computer-related problems .
The ones you remember the next morning are worth solving .
The others ... Well , you 'll have forgotten about them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...any better ideas?Go out.
Have a couple of beers.
Then switch to tequila.My advice for all computer-related problems.
The ones you remember the next morning are worth solving.
The others ... Well, you'll have forgotten about them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801115</id>
	<title>PulseAudio sucks!!!</title>
	<author>cuby</author>
	<datestamp>1255951620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Ubuntu 8.10 I had to install several add ons to control it and VLC sound was really broken.
In Ubuntu 9.04 I had to remove it in order to listen something...
Now in 9.10 I have sound, but I still don't have it over HDMI.
PulseAudio and linux audio in general is a disgrace. It is in times like this I miss normalization and standards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Ubuntu 8.10 I had to install several add ons to control it and VLC sound was really broken .
In Ubuntu 9.04 I had to remove it in order to listen something.. . Now in 9.10 I have sound , but I still do n't have it over HDMI .
PulseAudio and linux audio in general is a disgrace .
It is in times like this I miss normalization and standards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Ubuntu 8.10 I had to install several add ons to control it and VLC sound was really broken.
In Ubuntu 9.04 I had to remove it in order to listen something...
Now in 9.10 I have sound, but I still don't have it over HDMI.
PulseAudio and linux audio in general is a disgrace.
It is in times like this I miss normalization and standards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792683</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255960260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unbelievably, after that entire post full of insults and put-downs, you haven't even made a single technical point.</p><p>Sometimes I wish we could go back to the slashdot 10 years ago where we actually had meaningful technical discussions, rather than pointless subjective rants.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unbelievably , after that entire post full of insults and put-downs , you have n't even made a single technical point.Sometimes I wish we could go back to the slashdot 10 years ago where we actually had meaningful technical discussions , rather than pointless subjective rants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unbelievably, after that entire post full of insults and put-downs, you haven't even made a single technical point.Sometimes I wish we could go back to the slashdot 10 years ago where we actually had meaningful technical discussions, rather than pointless subjective rants.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791937</id>
	<title>At last!</title>
	<author>digitig</author>
	<datestamp>1255953720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications</p></div><p>Linux is finally learning from Microsoft!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applicationsLinux is finally learning from Microsoft !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applicationsLinux is finally learning from Microsoft!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29824979</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>cynyr</author>
	<datestamp>1256147340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just looked into setting up pulse on Gentoo, Arch, and LFS... It's a freeking nightmare. Nowhere is it mentioned what needs to be done to have 2 users on the same system have sounds played at the same time out of the same sink. It seems like you need to set the system-wide daemon up, but no "in event of a multi user desktop do foo". Why do i need to set up ALSA when i use pulse? ohh so apps that don't have pulse support can talk ALSA. and what about all of the problems with Wine and Pulse? To me the biggest advantage of pulse would be per app volume control. Now what would be even better is if i could say set up a reference sound to a min and max volume, and then never touch a volume slider again because the system would just normalize my audio for me.<br> <br>
So lets see hours of setting up pulse to get per volume sliders(and hoping it works with wine) or stick with ALSA and have everything "just work".... hard choice that one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just looked into setting up pulse on Gentoo , Arch , and LFS... It 's a freeking nightmare .
Nowhere is it mentioned what needs to be done to have 2 users on the same system have sounds played at the same time out of the same sink .
It seems like you need to set the system-wide daemon up , but no " in event of a multi user desktop do foo " .
Why do i need to set up ALSA when i use pulse ?
ohh so apps that do n't have pulse support can talk ALSA .
and what about all of the problems with Wine and Pulse ?
To me the biggest advantage of pulse would be per app volume control .
Now what would be even better is if i could say set up a reference sound to a min and max volume , and then never touch a volume slider again because the system would just normalize my audio for me .
So lets see hours of setting up pulse to get per volume sliders ( and hoping it works with wine ) or stick with ALSA and have everything " just work " .... hard choice that one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just looked into setting up pulse on Gentoo, Arch, and LFS... It's a freeking nightmare.
Nowhere is it mentioned what needs to be done to have 2 users on the same system have sounds played at the same time out of the same sink.
It seems like you need to set the system-wide daemon up, but no "in event of a multi user desktop do foo".
Why do i need to set up ALSA when i use pulse?
ohh so apps that don't have pulse support can talk ALSA.
and what about all of the problems with Wine and Pulse?
To me the biggest advantage of pulse would be per app volume control.
Now what would be even better is if i could say set up a reference sound to a min and max volume, and then never touch a volume slider again because the system would just normalize my audio for me.
So lets see hours of setting up pulse to get per volume sliders(and hoping it works with wine) or stick with ALSA and have everything "just work".... hard choice that one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29819493</id>
	<title>Re:Why do I care where the bugs are?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256060580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So what's the benefit of PulseAudio again?</i></p><p>Much better battery life for notebooks and other portable devices:</p><p><a href="http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/pulse-glitch-free.html" title="0pointer.de" rel="nofollow">http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/pulse-glitch-free.html</a> [0pointer.de]</p><p>Seamlessly handling hotplugged audio devices.</p><p>Smoothly handling sharing of audio hardware when doing fast user switching.</p><p>Providing software mixing and sample rate conversion for modern motherboard audio devices that very well might support only a single stream of audio at 48000 Hertz and 24-bit samples.</p><p>PulseAudio on Linux makes sense for exactly the same reasons Apple added a userspace sound daemon in OS X and Microsoft added a userspace sound dameon in Vista/Windows 7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what 's the benefit of PulseAudio again ? Much better battery life for notebooks and other portable devices : http : //0pointer.de/blog/projects/pulse-glitch-free.html [ 0pointer.de ] Seamlessly handling hotplugged audio devices.Smoothly handling sharing of audio hardware when doing fast user switching.Providing software mixing and sample rate conversion for modern motherboard audio devices that very well might support only a single stream of audio at 48000 Hertz and 24-bit samples.PulseAudio on Linux makes sense for exactly the same reasons Apple added a userspace sound daemon in OS X and Microsoft added a userspace sound dameon in Vista/Windows 7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what's the benefit of PulseAudio again?Much better battery life for notebooks and other portable devices:http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/pulse-glitch-free.html [0pointer.de]Seamlessly handling hotplugged audio devices.Smoothly handling sharing of audio hardware when doing fast user switching.Providing software mixing and sample rate conversion for modern motherboard audio devices that very well might support only a single stream of audio at 48000 Hertz and 24-bit samples.PulseAudio on Linux makes sense for exactly the same reasons Apple added a userspace sound daemon in OS X and Microsoft added a userspace sound dameon in Vista/Windows 7.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792363</id>
	<title>PulseAudio is broken</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255958040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've had three systems with audio problems. Two Ubuntu-based (8.04, 9.04), a third OpenSuSE-based. All with PulseAudio. All had oddities- ranging from the sound working only during X session startup/shutdown (and not in-between), through to the audio skipping, repeatedly, when changing the current desktop. These were on reasonably decent machines, by the way. Machines that should gobble up and spit this data so fast that it barely dents CPU usage.</p><p>In each case, disabling PulseAudio and using, well, anything else, caused the problem to go away. OSS, ALSA, didn't matter, they both worked. Sometimes it was easy to remove PulseAudio, and sometimes it took a bit of work. Ubuntu 9.04 was a challenge. No, scratch that, it was a fight.</p><p>I look around, I see horror stories and widespread problems with PulseAudio.</p><p>I see claims that it works, if you configure it "properly". You know, I heard the same vague defence regarding Windows' instability. I didn't believe it for Windows either.</p><p>I've heard that PulseAudio has a great set of features. However, I have no interest in digging into what these features might be. The core feature that I want above all else isn't supported by PulseAudio. That feature?</p><p>Playing seamless audio.</p><p>PulseAudio can't even get that right. Stutters and skips are the norm, audio systems that worked previously no longer do, and the backers of this abomination are in abject denial about it. There are widespread complaints about it across multiple applications and multiple operating systems, and still it "isn't configured properly". You can't be serious. Complaints about PulseAudio are not really shared by the majority of technical people? Oh, yes they are.</p><p>If you want to provide a reasonable sound system, a *core* focus has to be on providing a working sound system. Get the core functionality right, then move onto features. Stability, correctness. Get the basics right. Also understand that API users may stuff things up, and falling over and dying is not the correct thing to do. The infrastructure needs to be resilient, not fragile.</p><p>PulseAudio did *not* do this. Any of this.</p><p>The order of the day seems to be to blame everything *but* PulseAudio. The apps are broken, the drivers are broken, the operating system maintainers didn't integrate it properly, it's not configured properly for the user's machine, the people complaining wouldn't be complaining if they were more technical, a lot of distros have adopted it so it must be good. Did I miss anything here? This has been the argument thus far.</p><p>I'm going to be different. I'm not going to blame the developers, the applications, the users, the knowledge of the users, the operating system developers, or anyone else. I'm going to blame the one at fault, the *cause* of these problems. The one thing in common with this incredible list of problems.</p><p>PulseAudio is completely and utterly broken- in design, in implementation, and in application. It is horrendous, shameful, and embarrassing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had three systems with audio problems .
Two Ubuntu-based ( 8.04 , 9.04 ) , a third OpenSuSE-based .
All with PulseAudio .
All had oddities- ranging from the sound working only during X session startup/shutdown ( and not in-between ) , through to the audio skipping , repeatedly , when changing the current desktop .
These were on reasonably decent machines , by the way .
Machines that should gobble up and spit this data so fast that it barely dents CPU usage.In each case , disabling PulseAudio and using , well , anything else , caused the problem to go away .
OSS , ALSA , did n't matter , they both worked .
Sometimes it was easy to remove PulseAudio , and sometimes it took a bit of work .
Ubuntu 9.04 was a challenge .
No , scratch that , it was a fight.I look around , I see horror stories and widespread problems with PulseAudio.I see claims that it works , if you configure it " properly " .
You know , I heard the same vague defence regarding Windows ' instability .
I did n't believe it for Windows either.I 've heard that PulseAudio has a great set of features .
However , I have no interest in digging into what these features might be .
The core feature that I want above all else is n't supported by PulseAudio .
That feature ? Playing seamless audio.PulseAudio ca n't even get that right .
Stutters and skips are the norm , audio systems that worked previously no longer do , and the backers of this abomination are in abject denial about it .
There are widespread complaints about it across multiple applications and multiple operating systems , and still it " is n't configured properly " .
You ca n't be serious .
Complaints about PulseAudio are not really shared by the majority of technical people ?
Oh , yes they are.If you want to provide a reasonable sound system , a * core * focus has to be on providing a working sound system .
Get the core functionality right , then move onto features .
Stability , correctness .
Get the basics right .
Also understand that API users may stuff things up , and falling over and dying is not the correct thing to do .
The infrastructure needs to be resilient , not fragile.PulseAudio did * not * do this .
Any of this.The order of the day seems to be to blame everything * but * PulseAudio .
The apps are broken , the drivers are broken , the operating system maintainers did n't integrate it properly , it 's not configured properly for the user 's machine , the people complaining would n't be complaining if they were more technical , a lot of distros have adopted it so it must be good .
Did I miss anything here ?
This has been the argument thus far.I 'm going to be different .
I 'm not going to blame the developers , the applications , the users , the knowledge of the users , the operating system developers , or anyone else .
I 'm going to blame the one at fault , the * cause * of these problems .
The one thing in common with this incredible list of problems.PulseAudio is completely and utterly broken- in design , in implementation , and in application .
It is horrendous , shameful , and embarrassing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had three systems with audio problems.
Two Ubuntu-based (8.04, 9.04), a third OpenSuSE-based.
All with PulseAudio.
All had oddities- ranging from the sound working only during X session startup/shutdown (and not in-between), through to the audio skipping, repeatedly, when changing the current desktop.
These were on reasonably decent machines, by the way.
Machines that should gobble up and spit this data so fast that it barely dents CPU usage.In each case, disabling PulseAudio and using, well, anything else, caused the problem to go away.
OSS, ALSA, didn't matter, they both worked.
Sometimes it was easy to remove PulseAudio, and sometimes it took a bit of work.
Ubuntu 9.04 was a challenge.
No, scratch that, it was a fight.I look around, I see horror stories and widespread problems with PulseAudio.I see claims that it works, if you configure it "properly".
You know, I heard the same vague defence regarding Windows' instability.
I didn't believe it for Windows either.I've heard that PulseAudio has a great set of features.
However, I have no interest in digging into what these features might be.
The core feature that I want above all else isn't supported by PulseAudio.
That feature?Playing seamless audio.PulseAudio can't even get that right.
Stutters and skips are the norm, audio systems that worked previously no longer do, and the backers of this abomination are in abject denial about it.
There are widespread complaints about it across multiple applications and multiple operating systems, and still it "isn't configured properly".
You can't be serious.
Complaints about PulseAudio are not really shared by the majority of technical people?
Oh, yes they are.If you want to provide a reasonable sound system, a *core* focus has to be on providing a working sound system.
Get the core functionality right, then move onto features.
Stability, correctness.
Get the basics right.
Also understand that API users may stuff things up, and falling over and dying is not the correct thing to do.
The infrastructure needs to be resilient, not fragile.PulseAudio did *not* do this.
Any of this.The order of the day seems to be to blame everything *but* PulseAudio.
The apps are broken, the drivers are broken, the operating system maintainers didn't integrate it properly, it's not configured properly for the user's machine, the people complaining wouldn't be complaining if they were more technical, a lot of distros have adopted it so it must be good.
Did I miss anything here?
This has been the argument thus far.I'm going to be different.
I'm not going to blame the developers, the applications, the users, the knowledge of the users, the operating system developers, or anyone else.
I'm going to blame the one at fault, the *cause* of these problems.
The one thing in common with this incredible list of problems.PulseAudio is completely and utterly broken- in design, in implementation, and in application.
It is horrendous, shameful, and embarrassing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796391</id>
	<title>this is one sad thread.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255976520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here we are, taking about playing sounds....
<br>
<br>
and the conversation goes from sound server choices to distros, to complex sound server software, buggy software, and then people with bad attitudes, and then goes <b>all the way down</b> to kernel latencies, real-time software, complex interfaces/APIs and multithreaded programming!
<br>
<br>
SAD!
<br>
<br>
Developer <b>or</b> user, I can go to my Windows or OSX box and merrily play video, synced with my sound and no problems, or I can play my internet radio and surf heavily with no problems. And write software to do audio mixing/fades with zero problems... with hardly any pre-configuration.
<br>
<br>
If I need to know a complex API, how the kernel works with real-time needs and have apps that constantly break my audio subsystem... What does that say about the state of Linux audio? Sorry to sound like a broken record, but it sounds pretty messed up to me as a 'developer lightweight'. The way Linux sound is being handled really helps bring it down a full notch compared to Windows and OSX and that's bad since Audio and Video are pretty much the things that can put Linux on top as a F/OSS offering, otherwise, it will always be a niche thing that corporations fork to create something that does work (Android and OSX for example).
<br>
<br>
At least video playback is getting <i>better</i>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here we are , taking about playing sounds... . and the conversation goes from sound server choices to distros , to complex sound server software , buggy software , and then people with bad attitudes , and then goes all the way down to kernel latencies , real-time software , complex interfaces/APIs and multithreaded programming !
SAD ! Developer or user , I can go to my Windows or OSX box and merrily play video , synced with my sound and no problems , or I can play my internet radio and surf heavily with no problems .
And write software to do audio mixing/fades with zero problems... with hardly any pre-configuration .
If I need to know a complex API , how the kernel works with real-time needs and have apps that constantly break my audio subsystem... What does that say about the state of Linux audio ?
Sorry to sound like a broken record , but it sounds pretty messed up to me as a 'developer lightweight' .
The way Linux sound is being handled really helps bring it down a full notch compared to Windows and OSX and that 's bad since Audio and Video are pretty much the things that can put Linux on top as a F/OSS offering , otherwise , it will always be a niche thing that corporations fork to create something that does work ( Android and OSX for example ) .
At least video playback is getting better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here we are, taking about playing sounds....


and the conversation goes from sound server choices to distros, to complex sound server software, buggy software, and then people with bad attitudes, and then goes all the way down to kernel latencies, real-time software, complex interfaces/APIs and multithreaded programming!
SAD!


Developer or user, I can go to my Windows or OSX box and merrily play video, synced with my sound and no problems, or I can play my internet radio and surf heavily with no problems.
And write software to do audio mixing/fades with zero problems... with hardly any pre-configuration.
If I need to know a complex API, how the kernel works with real-time needs and have apps that constantly break my audio subsystem... What does that say about the state of Linux audio?
Sorry to sound like a broken record, but it sounds pretty messed up to me as a 'developer lightweight'.
The way Linux sound is being handled really helps bring it down a full notch compared to Windows and OSX and that's bad since Audio and Video are pretty much the things that can put Linux on top as a F/OSS offering, otherwise, it will always be a niche thing that corporations fork to create something that does work (Android and OSX for example).
At least video playback is getting better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794831</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>Sillygates</author>
	<datestamp>1255970220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right before all the distributions started switching to PulseAudio, I remember thinking about how alsa was becoming stable (and "the" audio standard), and I wasn't seeing anyone with sound issues anymore.<br> <br>
Granted, alsa alone isn't as versatile as pulseaudio, but there is value in sticking to a 'pretty good' solution, even if it might not be the best.<br> <br>
An interesting side note on audio APIs: <a href="http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/linuxaudio.png" title="adobe.com">http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/linuxaudio.png</a> [adobe.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right before all the distributions started switching to PulseAudio , I remember thinking about how alsa was becoming stable ( and " the " audio standard ) , and I was n't seeing anyone with sound issues anymore .
Granted , alsa alone is n't as versatile as pulseaudio , but there is value in sticking to a 'pretty good ' solution , even if it might not be the best .
An interesting side note on audio APIs : http : //blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/linuxaudio.png [ adobe.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right before all the distributions started switching to PulseAudio, I remember thinking about how alsa was becoming stable (and "the" audio standard), and I wasn't seeing anyone with sound issues anymore.
Granted, alsa alone isn't as versatile as pulseaudio, but there is value in sticking to a 'pretty good' solution, even if it might not be the best.
An interesting side note on audio APIs: http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/linuxaudio.png [adobe.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792305</id>
	<title>Where is the protocol?</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1255957500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Programs (especially daemons and services) that communicate with other programs (especially over pipes, streams, and network connections) should have a protocol.  The protocol should be designed and standardized (even if a one person effort) and the implementation designed around that (and around whatever else it is involved with).  Many bugs I have seen in programs are ones where the program failed to correctly implement the protocol.  But many more bugs I have seen in programs are ones where the program is also creating the protocol at the same time, and the protocol is whatever happens to come out of the program.  You can tell when you have one of these bad boys when the author(s) say to "read the source" when asking about the protocol.  So, where is the protocol<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... documentation (it's not so much the answer, but how this gets answered, that provides the clues to many issues).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Programs ( especially daemons and services ) that communicate with other programs ( especially over pipes , streams , and network connections ) should have a protocol .
The protocol should be designed and standardized ( even if a one person effort ) and the implementation designed around that ( and around whatever else it is involved with ) .
Many bugs I have seen in programs are ones where the program failed to correctly implement the protocol .
But many more bugs I have seen in programs are ones where the program is also creating the protocol at the same time , and the protocol is whatever happens to come out of the program .
You can tell when you have one of these bad boys when the author ( s ) say to " read the source " when asking about the protocol .
So , where is the protocol ... documentation ( it 's not so much the answer , but how this gets answered , that provides the clues to many issues ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Programs (especially daemons and services) that communicate with other programs (especially over pipes, streams, and network connections) should have a protocol.
The protocol should be designed and standardized (even if a one person effort) and the implementation designed around that (and around whatever else it is involved with).
Many bugs I have seen in programs are ones where the program failed to correctly implement the protocol.
But many more bugs I have seen in programs are ones where the program is also creating the protocol at the same time, and the protocol is whatever happens to come out of the program.
You can tell when you have one of these bad boys when the author(s) say to "read the source" when asking about the protocol.
So, where is the protocol ... documentation (it's not so much the answer, but how this gets answered, that provides the clues to many issues).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29806737</id>
	<title>A provisional apology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256048280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Truthfully, I'm now wishing I hadn't been so profane in this thread.  Some of the Pulse supporters who've spoken here, come across as being genuinely well-intentioned people; they just apparently haven't experienced the problems we have.  Colin Guthrie primarily comes to mind here, which is why I haven't attacked him.</p><p>The other problem, I realise now, with coming in here and swearing and nerd raging my head off, is that it just leaves Pulse's advocates feeling even more justified and sure of themselves.  Steveha responded with a fairly long post about how my original statement to him was subjective and entirely baseless, and what a child I was for engaging in so much profane ad hominem.</p><p>As I think someone else said though, what many of you don't realise is, that for the first half dozen to a dozen times, a lot of us genuinely do try to be civil.</p><p>The profanity only really kicks in due to extreme frustration, after we've tried so many times to explain the problem, and we're still just met with the same responses.  Denial, bogus rationalisation, and various forms of ad hominem directed at us, simply because we're saying things which, because you want to think that everything is fine, you don't want to hear.</p><p>I don't really want to engage in profane or otherwise hateful behaviour, and I realise that I shouldn't.  Being angry, aggressive, and hateful just ends up making me feel ashamed of myself later, and probably doesn't leave the people I behave that way towards, feeling terribly good themselves.  All I really want is to see problems solved, and most of all for the culture of denial to be reformed; and that isn't happening.</p><p>The tendency of Linux developers to stick their fingers in their ears and yell, "la la la I can't hear you!" when they're confronted with unfavourable feedback, is not going to help them.  The thing which primarily antagonised me about Steveha's original post is that it seemed as though he was telling people to just shut up and accept how gloriously awesome Pulse supposedly was, in the face of the number of reports in this very thread (and elsewhere) about the degree of problems that people genuinely are experiencing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Truthfully , I 'm now wishing I had n't been so profane in this thread .
Some of the Pulse supporters who 've spoken here , come across as being genuinely well-intentioned people ; they just apparently have n't experienced the problems we have .
Colin Guthrie primarily comes to mind here , which is why I have n't attacked him.The other problem , I realise now , with coming in here and swearing and nerd raging my head off , is that it just leaves Pulse 's advocates feeling even more justified and sure of themselves .
Steveha responded with a fairly long post about how my original statement to him was subjective and entirely baseless , and what a child I was for engaging in so much profane ad hominem.As I think someone else said though , what many of you do n't realise is , that for the first half dozen to a dozen times , a lot of us genuinely do try to be civil.The profanity only really kicks in due to extreme frustration , after we 've tried so many times to explain the problem , and we 're still just met with the same responses .
Denial , bogus rationalisation , and various forms of ad hominem directed at us , simply because we 're saying things which , because you want to think that everything is fine , you do n't want to hear.I do n't really want to engage in profane or otherwise hateful behaviour , and I realise that I should n't .
Being angry , aggressive , and hateful just ends up making me feel ashamed of myself later , and probably does n't leave the people I behave that way towards , feeling terribly good themselves .
All I really want is to see problems solved , and most of all for the culture of denial to be reformed ; and that is n't happening.The tendency of Linux developers to stick their fingers in their ears and yell , " la la la I ca n't hear you !
" when they 're confronted with unfavourable feedback , is not going to help them .
The thing which primarily antagonised me about Steveha 's original post is that it seemed as though he was telling people to just shut up and accept how gloriously awesome Pulse supposedly was , in the face of the number of reports in this very thread ( and elsewhere ) about the degree of problems that people genuinely are experiencing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Truthfully, I'm now wishing I hadn't been so profane in this thread.
Some of the Pulse supporters who've spoken here, come across as being genuinely well-intentioned people; they just apparently haven't experienced the problems we have.
Colin Guthrie primarily comes to mind here, which is why I haven't attacked him.The other problem, I realise now, with coming in here and swearing and nerd raging my head off, is that it just leaves Pulse's advocates feeling even more justified and sure of themselves.
Steveha responded with a fairly long post about how my original statement to him was subjective and entirely baseless, and what a child I was for engaging in so much profane ad hominem.As I think someone else said though, what many of you don't realise is, that for the first half dozen to a dozen times, a lot of us genuinely do try to be civil.The profanity only really kicks in due to extreme frustration, after we've tried so many times to explain the problem, and we're still just met with the same responses.
Denial, bogus rationalisation, and various forms of ad hominem directed at us, simply because we're saying things which, because you want to think that everything is fine, you don't want to hear.I don't really want to engage in profane or otherwise hateful behaviour, and I realise that I shouldn't.
Being angry, aggressive, and hateful just ends up making me feel ashamed of myself later, and probably doesn't leave the people I behave that way towards, feeling terribly good themselves.
All I really want is to see problems solved, and most of all for the culture of denial to be reformed; and that isn't happening.The tendency of Linux developers to stick their fingers in their ears and yell, "la la la I can't hear you!
" when they're confronted with unfavourable feedback, is not going to help them.
The thing which primarily antagonised me about Steveha's original post is that it seemed as though he was telling people to just shut up and accept how gloriously awesome Pulse supposedly was, in the face of the number of reports in this very thread (and elsewhere) about the degree of problems that people genuinely are experiencing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795091</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255971480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It will be the standard if it stops sucking, otherwise.  Kiss it goodbye, the hordes will choose what works for them (OSS4 for me).  I could give a shit less about network based audio.  If you can't make my recording studio work without latency and hissing, you're worthless to me.  I don't care if that's "ignorant in the extreme" either.  My choices are purely pragmatic.  I'll happily toil in ignorance if it is productive.</p><p>Pulse Audio does not meet my needs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It will be the standard if it stops sucking , otherwise .
Kiss it goodbye , the hordes will choose what works for them ( OSS4 for me ) .
I could give a shit less about network based audio .
If you ca n't make my recording studio work without latency and hissing , you 're worthless to me .
I do n't care if that 's " ignorant in the extreme " either .
My choices are purely pragmatic .
I 'll happily toil in ignorance if it is productive.Pulse Audio does not meet my needs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It will be the standard if it stops sucking, otherwise.
Kiss it goodbye, the hordes will choose what works for them (OSS4 for me).
I could give a shit less about network based audio.
If you can't make my recording studio work without latency and hissing, you're worthless to me.
I don't care if that's "ignorant in the extreme" either.
My choices are purely pragmatic.
I'll happily toil in ignorance if it is productive.Pulse Audio does not meet my needs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792041</id>
	<title>Re:Too many choices....</title>
	<author>yanagasawa</author>
	<datestamp>1255954920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to reply. I've been using Linux Audio for years making music. I rarely have to do any setup even after a system upgrade. If you use Jack and applications that support it - of which there are many, it's stable as a rock.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to reply .
I 've been using Linux Audio for years making music .
I rarely have to do any setup even after a system upgrade .
If you use Jack and applications that support it - of which there are many , it 's stable as a rock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to reply.
I've been using Linux Audio for years making music.
I rarely have to do any setup even after a system upgrade.
If you use Jack and applications that support it - of which there are many, it's stable as a rock.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1255953060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should be using OSS4.  I put up with the Pulse idiosyncracies until my virtual machines spazzed out.  Started researching my options, and found that Open Sound was moving past the deprecated OSS3, which wasn't much better than Pulse.</p><p>Since I've compiled and installed Open Sound, I have no more sound problems, period.  Everything works the way it's supposed to.</p><p>If Pulse and Alsa get their shit together, fine.  If not, I'm a devoted OSS fan.  Before anyone runs off to experiment, be warned - you will probably have to spend a few minutes purging Alsa from your system.  There is no co-existence of the two, at least not on Ubuntu.  If you're not a Linux guru, plan on following a how-to, and plan on spending a couple hours getting it right.</p><p><a href="http://www.opensound.com/" title="opensound.com">http://www.opensound.com/</a> [opensound.com]<br><a href="https://help.ubuntu.com/community/OpenSound" title="ubuntu.com">https://help.ubuntu.com/community/OpenSound</a> [ubuntu.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should be using OSS4 .
I put up with the Pulse idiosyncracies until my virtual machines spazzed out .
Started researching my options , and found that Open Sound was moving past the deprecated OSS3 , which was n't much better than Pulse.Since I 've compiled and installed Open Sound , I have no more sound problems , period .
Everything works the way it 's supposed to.If Pulse and Alsa get their shit together , fine .
If not , I 'm a devoted OSS fan .
Before anyone runs off to experiment , be warned - you will probably have to spend a few minutes purging Alsa from your system .
There is no co-existence of the two , at least not on Ubuntu .
If you 're not a Linux guru , plan on following a how-to , and plan on spending a couple hours getting it right.http : //www.opensound.com/ [ opensound.com ] https : //help.ubuntu.com/community/OpenSound [ ubuntu.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should be using OSS4.
I put up with the Pulse idiosyncracies until my virtual machines spazzed out.
Started researching my options, and found that Open Sound was moving past the deprecated OSS3, which wasn't much better than Pulse.Since I've compiled and installed Open Sound, I have no more sound problems, period.
Everything works the way it's supposed to.If Pulse and Alsa get their shit together, fine.
If not, I'm a devoted OSS fan.
Before anyone runs off to experiment, be warned - you will probably have to spend a few minutes purging Alsa from your system.
There is no co-existence of the two, at least not on Ubuntu.
If you're not a Linux guru, plan on following a how-to, and plan on spending a couple hours getting it right.http://www.opensound.com/ [opensound.com]https://help.ubuntu.com/community/OpenSound [ubuntu.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791545</id>
	<title>realtime</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255949040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the *true* way-to-go is to use a real-time kernel... that's the only way which will free us of those irritating hick-ups in the sound pipeline. perhaps even audiophiles will be able to use it then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the * true * way-to-go is to use a real-time kernel... that 's the only way which will free us of those irritating hick-ups in the sound pipeline .
perhaps even audiophiles will be able to use it then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the *true* way-to-go is to use a real-time kernel... that's the only way which will free us of those irritating hick-ups in the sound pipeline.
perhaps even audiophiles will be able to use it then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305</id>
	<title>Why do I care where the bugs are?</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1255945980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While Poettering admits PulseAudio itself is not bug-free, he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications.</p></div><p>Well, the way I see it, I can either use alsa and have (as far as I can tell) no bugs, or I can use PulseAudio and have more features and more bugs.</p><p>That might not be PulseAudio's fault, but it still means that if I use PulseAudio I will have a buggy sound system.  Why do I want that?  Why do I want it even if it's only buggy until all the applications get fixed?</p><p>Also, the promise of networked sound is kinda... meh...  maybe I'd be happy if all my laptop sound got moved to my desktop box (which is connected to my stereo) <em>automatically</em> whenever my laptop is connected to my home access point (and, conversely, my desktop's sound automatically gets routed to my laptop whenever my laptop does an ssh home and is not around my home access point).  But as far as I can tell, this is a bitch to set up, and I'm really not inclined to go clicking around some unintuitive menu system to set my sound up right every time I leave home or go back.</p><p>So what's the benefit of PulseAudio again?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While Poettering admits PulseAudio itself is not bug-free , he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications.Well , the way I see it , I can either use alsa and have ( as far as I can tell ) no bugs , or I can use PulseAudio and have more features and more bugs.That might not be PulseAudio 's fault , but it still means that if I use PulseAudio I will have a buggy sound system .
Why do I want that ?
Why do I want it even if it 's only buggy until all the applications get fixed ? Also , the promise of networked sound is kinda... meh... maybe I 'd be happy if all my laptop sound got moved to my desktop box ( which is connected to my stereo ) automatically whenever my laptop is connected to my home access point ( and , conversely , my desktop 's sound automatically gets routed to my laptop whenever my laptop does an ssh home and is not around my home access point ) .
But as far as I can tell , this is a bitch to set up , and I 'm really not inclined to go clicking around some unintuitive menu system to set my sound up right every time I leave home or go back.So what 's the benefit of PulseAudio again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While Poettering admits PulseAudio itself is not bug-free, he believes the majority of issues are being triggered by misbehaving drivers or applications.Well, the way I see it, I can either use alsa and have (as far as I can tell) no bugs, or I can use PulseAudio and have more features and more bugs.That might not be PulseAudio's fault, but it still means that if I use PulseAudio I will have a buggy sound system.
Why do I want that?
Why do I want it even if it's only buggy until all the applications get fixed?Also, the promise of networked sound is kinda... meh...  maybe I'd be happy if all my laptop sound got moved to my desktop box (which is connected to my stereo) automatically whenever my laptop is connected to my home access point (and, conversely, my desktop's sound automatically gets routed to my laptop whenever my laptop does an ssh home and is not around my home access point).
But as far as I can tell, this is a bitch to set up, and I'm really not inclined to go clicking around some unintuitive menu system to set my sound up right every time I leave home or go back.So what's the benefit of PulseAudio again?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802805</id>
	<title>Re:All you really need to know</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255961640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so your modest proposal is that Linux stop 'aping Windows' as you put it and start aping FreeBSD instead?</p><p>What would be the point of that? FreeBSD is doing a good job of being FreeBSD. You like it, go use it and stop ear-bashing. I really don't know why people like you *make* posts like this. Do you really think it's the way to change anything? Do you honestly think Fedora developers or Ubuntu developers or anyone else is going to read a load of random vitriol on a comment thread somewhere and go 'oh my god, we've been doing it wrong all along! This guy knows the way and the light!"</p><p>I mean, honestly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so your modest proposal is that Linux stop 'aping Windows ' as you put it and start aping FreeBSD instead ? What would be the point of that ?
FreeBSD is doing a good job of being FreeBSD .
You like it , go use it and stop ear-bashing .
I really do n't know why people like you * make * posts like this .
Do you really think it 's the way to change anything ?
Do you honestly think Fedora developers or Ubuntu developers or anyone else is going to read a load of random vitriol on a comment thread somewhere and go 'oh my god , we 've been doing it wrong all along !
This guy knows the way and the light !
" I mean , honestly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so your modest proposal is that Linux stop 'aping Windows' as you put it and start aping FreeBSD instead?What would be the point of that?
FreeBSD is doing a good job of being FreeBSD.
You like it, go use it and stop ear-bashing.
I really don't know why people like you *make* posts like this.
Do you really think it's the way to change anything?
Do you honestly think Fedora developers or Ubuntu developers or anyone else is going to read a load of random vitriol on a comment thread somewhere and go 'oh my god, we've been doing it wrong all along!
This guy knows the way and the light!
"I mean, honestly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801971</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</id>
	<title>Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255952340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've looked at GNOME, I've looked at ALSA, (indeed, Ubuntu in particular in general terms) I've looked at the bloated instability of Compiz, I've looked at FreeBSD by comparison, (which I use on a daily basis) and at some of OpenBSD's source...and I've come to an important realisation.</p><p>When it comes to both design philosophy and code quality, Linux developers suck; and I'm talking black hole level, here.  The BSDs leave Linux so far behind that it isn't funny.</p><p>What is even worse than the poor code quality, is the level of denial.  The GNOME developers in particular have been told on numerous occasions what an abomination their baby is, yet they continue to insist on defending it, rather than actually listening to the feedback they are given, and trying to improve.</p><p>The single main problem is what I called the Starbucks generation; self-righteous, latte-sipping yuppie CS graduates, who as said in another post, worship C++ and various hell-spawned forms of RPC, and use such to code bloated monoliths of a magnitude that would give Microsoft nightmares.</p><p>They think they know better than the 30 years of UNIX experience that has come before them, including the very authors of the initial operating system itself.</p><p>Although I haven't used Pulse, I have used ALSA, and I've used enough other Linux software to know that the Pulse author most likely shouldn't be defending himself; but should be humbly acknowledging that his software is terrible, and appealing to the community for help and insight into how he can do better.</p><p>He can start by reading <a href="http://catb.org/esr/writings/taoup/html/index.html" title="catb.org" rel="nofollow">this</a> [catb.org], and gaining a real appreciation of the system he is writing for.</p><p>There are a lot of programmers in the Linux community who badly need some humility.  They need to study the designers and authors of early UNIX; they need to learn how those people thought, and they need to emulate said designers' thinking and behaviour.</p><p>Above all, more than anything else, there needs to be a return to implementation, rather than interface, simplicity.  As priorities, faddishness, popularity, and most of all, the end user, need to die.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've looked at GNOME , I 've looked at ALSA , ( indeed , Ubuntu in particular in general terms ) I 've looked at the bloated instability of Compiz , I 've looked at FreeBSD by comparison , ( which I use on a daily basis ) and at some of OpenBSD 's source...and I 've come to an important realisation.When it comes to both design philosophy and code quality , Linux developers suck ; and I 'm talking black hole level , here .
The BSDs leave Linux so far behind that it is n't funny.What is even worse than the poor code quality , is the level of denial .
The GNOME developers in particular have been told on numerous occasions what an abomination their baby is , yet they continue to insist on defending it , rather than actually listening to the feedback they are given , and trying to improve.The single main problem is what I called the Starbucks generation ; self-righteous , latte-sipping yuppie CS graduates , who as said in another post , worship C + + and various hell-spawned forms of RPC , and use such to code bloated monoliths of a magnitude that would give Microsoft nightmares.They think they know better than the 30 years of UNIX experience that has come before them , including the very authors of the initial operating system itself.Although I have n't used Pulse , I have used ALSA , and I 've used enough other Linux software to know that the Pulse author most likely should n't be defending himself ; but should be humbly acknowledging that his software is terrible , and appealing to the community for help and insight into how he can do better.He can start by reading this [ catb.org ] , and gaining a real appreciation of the system he is writing for.There are a lot of programmers in the Linux community who badly need some humility .
They need to study the designers and authors of early UNIX ; they need to learn how those people thought , and they need to emulate said designers ' thinking and behaviour.Above all , more than anything else , there needs to be a return to implementation , rather than interface , simplicity .
As priorities , faddishness , popularity , and most of all , the end user , need to die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've looked at GNOME, I've looked at ALSA, (indeed, Ubuntu in particular in general terms) I've looked at the bloated instability of Compiz, I've looked at FreeBSD by comparison, (which I use on a daily basis) and at some of OpenBSD's source...and I've come to an important realisation.When it comes to both design philosophy and code quality, Linux developers suck; and I'm talking black hole level, here.
The BSDs leave Linux so far behind that it isn't funny.What is even worse than the poor code quality, is the level of denial.
The GNOME developers in particular have been told on numerous occasions what an abomination their baby is, yet they continue to insist on defending it, rather than actually listening to the feedback they are given, and trying to improve.The single main problem is what I called the Starbucks generation; self-righteous, latte-sipping yuppie CS graduates, who as said in another post, worship C++ and various hell-spawned forms of RPC, and use such to code bloated monoliths of a magnitude that would give Microsoft nightmares.They think they know better than the 30 years of UNIX experience that has come before them, including the very authors of the initial operating system itself.Although I haven't used Pulse, I have used ALSA, and I've used enough other Linux software to know that the Pulse author most likely shouldn't be defending himself; but should be humbly acknowledging that his software is terrible, and appealing to the community for help and insight into how he can do better.He can start by reading this [catb.org], and gaining a real appreciation of the system he is writing for.There are a lot of programmers in the Linux community who badly need some humility.
They need to study the designers and authors of early UNIX; they need to learn how those people thought, and they need to emulate said designers' thinking and behaviour.Above all, more than anything else, there needs to be a return to implementation, rather than interface, simplicity.
As priorities, faddishness, popularity, and most of all, the end user, need to die.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792075</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255955340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen Brother!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen Brother !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen Brother!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791877</id>
	<title>Re:Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>Clarious</author>
	<datestamp>1255953060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Uninstall PulseAudio = uninstall entire frigging GNOME desktop. I kept trying to tell it "no, I just want ALSA playback" in sound settings.</p></div><p>No, it won't uninstall whole GNOME desktop, that is just meta package for ubuntu-desktop, so you can uninstall it without any problem.<br>
&nbsp; Well, not really, if you install any audio apps that have pulseaudio output (like MPD) you will have to reinstall it again. In that case try changing alsa setting, pulseaudio takes alsa output by default, you can change that by set alsa output device to hw device (you will lose the ability to have multi programs to output at the same time that way). Or the better way is to fix<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/asound.conf and make a dmix device (google for more information). Good luck!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uninstall PulseAudio = uninstall entire frigging GNOME desktop .
I kept trying to tell it " no , I just want ALSA playback " in sound settings.No , it wo n't uninstall whole GNOME desktop , that is just meta package for ubuntu-desktop , so you can uninstall it without any problem .
  Well , not really , if you install any audio apps that have pulseaudio output ( like MPD ) you will have to reinstall it again .
In that case try changing alsa setting , pulseaudio takes alsa output by default , you can change that by set alsa output device to hw device ( you will lose the ability to have multi programs to output at the same time that way ) .
Or the better way is to fix /etc/asound.conf and make a dmix device ( google for more information ) .
Good luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uninstall PulseAudio = uninstall entire frigging GNOME desktop.
I kept trying to tell it "no, I just want ALSA playback" in sound settings.No, it won't uninstall whole GNOME desktop, that is just meta package for ubuntu-desktop, so you can uninstall it without any problem.
  Well, not really, if you install any audio apps that have pulseaudio output (like MPD) you will have to reinstall it again.
In that case try changing alsa setting, pulseaudio takes alsa output by default, you can change that by set alsa output device to hw device (you will lose the ability to have multi programs to output at the same time that way).
Or the better way is to fix /etc/asound.conf and make a dmix device (google for more information).
Good luck!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793211</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Lemming Mark</author>
	<datestamp>1255963140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not entirely fair to take GNOME and Compiz as examples as Linux software - they're cross-platform AFAIK so they probably run on BSD too.  And they're very much high level applications code, some of which is either rather large or rather new.  What are you using as examples of BSD code?  The kernel?  The BSD libc and userspace utilities?  You'd always hope that core OS code is better written than application-level code, so if they're higher quality it's not entirely surprising, more reassuring.</p><p>If you compare the equivalent components in GNU/Linux and BSD then that would be interesting and a bit more fair IMO.  Many people seem to think BSD still wins in that quality comparison but it would be interesting to see whether this is so much the case these days....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not entirely fair to take GNOME and Compiz as examples as Linux software - they 're cross-platform AFAIK so they probably run on BSD too .
And they 're very much high level applications code , some of which is either rather large or rather new .
What are you using as examples of BSD code ?
The kernel ?
The BSD libc and userspace utilities ?
You 'd always hope that core OS code is better written than application-level code , so if they 're higher quality it 's not entirely surprising , more reassuring.If you compare the equivalent components in GNU/Linux and BSD then that would be interesting and a bit more fair IMO .
Many people seem to think BSD still wins in that quality comparison but it would be interesting to see whether this is so much the case these days... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not entirely fair to take GNOME and Compiz as examples as Linux software - they're cross-platform AFAIK so they probably run on BSD too.
And they're very much high level applications code, some of which is either rather large or rather new.
What are you using as examples of BSD code?
The kernel?
The BSD libc and userspace utilities?
You'd always hope that core OS code is better written than application-level code, so if they're higher quality it's not entirely surprising, more reassuring.If you compare the equivalent components in GNU/Linux and BSD then that would be interesting and a bit more fair IMO.
Many people seem to think BSD still wins in that quality comparison but it would be interesting to see whether this is so much the case these days....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791453</id>
	<title>It may be buggy...</title>
	<author>AlgorithMan</author>
	<datestamp>1255947660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It may be buggy (and by now I deactivate it on every machine that I administrate) but in the long run, I think we <b>NEED</b> something like PulseAudio and it really IS a good idea, because that is what you need if you want audio-forwarding for remote-sessions (like the X-Forwarding in SSH)</htmltext>
<tokenext>It may be buggy ( and by now I deactivate it on every machine that I administrate ) but in the long run , I think we NEED something like PulseAudio and it really IS a good idea , because that is what you need if you want audio-forwarding for remote-sessions ( like the X-Forwarding in SSH )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It may be buggy (and by now I deactivate it on every machine that I administrate) but in the long run, I think we NEED something like PulseAudio and it really IS a good idea, because that is what you need if you want audio-forwarding for remote-sessions (like the X-Forwarding in SSH)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792507</id>
	<title>This is why I switched back to Windows</title>
	<author>occamboy</author>
	<datestamp>1255959000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had Ubuntu running on our main home computer for more than a year.  There were definitely some annoyances, but things were tolerable.  Until I upgraded Ubuntu (I forget which version) and sound was broken hard - I spent hours fixing it, but got calls from home every few days asking me to "help fix the sound. it's broken again".  Finally, I gave up and switched back to Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had Ubuntu running on our main home computer for more than a year .
There were definitely some annoyances , but things were tolerable .
Until I upgraded Ubuntu ( I forget which version ) and sound was broken hard - I spent hours fixing it , but got calls from home every few days asking me to " help fix the sound .
it 's broken again " .
Finally , I gave up and switched back to Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had Ubuntu running on our main home computer for more than a year.
There were definitely some annoyances, but things were tolerable.
Until I upgraded Ubuntu (I forget which version) and sound was broken hard - I spent hours fixing it, but got calls from home every few days asking me to "help fix the sound.
it's broken again".
Finally, I gave up and switched back to Windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799147</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Yunzil</author>
	<datestamp>1255943040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>As priorities, faddishness, popularity, and most of all, <b>the end user</b>, need to die.</i></p><p>Perhaps you should consider a different career.  If you're not coding for the end user, you're just masturbating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As priorities , faddishness , popularity , and most of all , the end user , need to die.Perhaps you should consider a different career .
If you 're not coding for the end user , you 're just masturbating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As priorities, faddishness, popularity, and most of all, the end user, need to die.Perhaps you should consider a different career.
If you're not coding for the end user, you're just masturbating.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793659</id>
	<title>Am I the only one who has had no issues with......</title>
	<author>spockrock</author>
	<datestamp>1255965180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>pulseaudio??  I installed it before it was the default sound daemon in ubuntu and have had very minor issues, the only issues experienced were with flash, which was quickly resolved and networked audio over wifi, which seemed stutter but over Ethernet sound was perfect.</htmltext>
<tokenext>pulseaudio ? ?
I installed it before it was the default sound daemon in ubuntu and have had very minor issues , the only issues experienced were with flash , which was quickly resolved and networked audio over wifi , which seemed stutter but over Ethernet sound was perfect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pulseaudio??
I installed it before it was the default sound daemon in ubuntu and have had very minor issues, the only issues experienced were with flash, which was quickly resolved and networked audio over wifi, which seemed stutter but over Ethernet sound was perfect.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792221</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>hamanu</author>
	<datestamp>1255956720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually I have oss4 for hdaudio, and alsa for usb audio working together on debian. It is was a royal bitch tho. I run this script instead of oss soundon/soundoff</p><p>#!/bin/bash<br>set -x</p><p>if [ ! -d<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/oss ]<br>then<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; soundoff<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; soundon<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; mv<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel/oss<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/oss<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; depmod -a<br>fi</p><p>rmmod oss\_hdaudio<br>rmmod osscore<br>modprobe osscore vmix\_loopdevs=1 &amp;&amp;<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<br>modprobe oss\_hdaudio &amp;&amp;<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/sbin/ossdetect -d &amp;&amp;<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<br>sh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/lib/oss/etc/legacy\_devices &amp;&amp;<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/sbin/ossdevlinks -v<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/sbin/savemixer -L -v<br>sleep 1 &amp;&amp;<br>modprobe snd\_usb\_audio</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I have oss4 for hdaudio , and alsa for usb audio working together on debian .
It is was a royal bitch tho .
I run this script instead of oss soundon/soundoff # ! /bin/bashset -xif [ !
-d /lib/modules/ $ ( uname -r ) /oss ] then                 soundoff                 soundon                 mv /lib/modules/ $ ( uname -r ) /kernel/oss /lib/modules/ $ ( uname -r ) /oss                 depmod -afirmmod oss \ _hdaudiormmod osscoremodprobe osscore vmix \ _loopdevs = 1 &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp;modprobe oss \ _hdaudio &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/ossdetect -d &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp;sh /usr/lib/oss/etc/legacy \ _devices &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/ossdevlinks -vsleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/savemixer -L -vsleep 1 &amp;&amp;modprobe snd \ _usb \ _audio</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I have oss4 for hdaudio, and alsa for usb audio working together on debian.
It is was a royal bitch tho.
I run this script instead of oss soundon/soundoff#!/bin/bashset -xif [ !
-d /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/oss ]then
                soundoff
                soundon
                mv /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel/oss /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/oss
                depmod -afirmmod oss\_hdaudiormmod osscoremodprobe osscore vmix\_loopdevs=1 &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp;modprobe oss\_hdaudio &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/ossdetect -d &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp;sh /usr/lib/oss/etc/legacy\_devices &amp;&amp;sleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/ossdevlinks -vsleep 1 &amp;&amp; /usr/sbin/savemixer -L -vsleep 1 &amp;&amp;modprobe snd\_usb\_audio</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793055</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista Defense!</title>
	<author>chrb</author>
	<datestamp>1255962420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I never thought I'd see a Linux advocate use the Vista Defense! It's the drivers, it's the software, it's something, but it's not my code!</p> </div><p>Not quite. He actually wrote:</p><p><i>It's not my intention to shift the blame around though. PA and the other layers of our stack should not be viewed as independent parts. If PA uses a new or previously unused feature of the drivers then we need to fix the drivers at the same time.</i></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I never thought I 'd see a Linux advocate use the Vista Defense !
It 's the drivers , it 's the software , it 's something , but it 's not my code !
Not quite .
He actually wrote : It 's not my intention to shift the blame around though .
PA and the other layers of our stack should not be viewed as independent parts .
If PA uses a new or previously unused feature of the drivers then we need to fix the drivers at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never thought I'd see a Linux advocate use the Vista Defense!
It's the drivers, it's the software, it's something, but it's not my code!
Not quite.
He actually wrote:It's not my intention to shift the blame around though.
PA and the other layers of our stack should not be viewed as independent parts.
If PA uses a new or previously unused feature of the drivers then we need to fix the drivers at the same time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791573</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792865</id>
	<title>linux guy doesn't care about non-technical users?</title>
	<author>Overunderrated</author>
	<datestamp>1255961400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Newsflash!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Newsflash !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Newsflash!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802633</id>
	<title>JACK</title>
	<author>BrendaEM</author>
	<datestamp>1255960320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Should have went with JACK audio server.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should have went with JACK audio server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Should have went with JACK audio server.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792517</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255959060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have somewhat of a point but it's mired in bullshit.</p><blockquote><div><p>The single main problem is what I called the Starbucks generation; self-righteous, latte-sipping yuppie CS graduates, who as said in another post, worship C++ and various hell-spawned forms of RPC, and use such to code bloated monoliths of a magnitude that would give Microsoft nightmares.</p></div></blockquote><p>It's interesting you claim that, as most of the god awful code I've seen seems to come from self-trainees. I also laugh at your jab at C++, since you talk about bloat I can only assume that you are asserting that the devs should be using the holy C89 language which only proves you know jackshit since C++ is no higher from the hardware than C and can even be smaller and faster (by making it easier to eliminate duplication) under some circumstances. Remote Procedure Call is another 'WTF?' claim &mdash; you know Unix is very big on these things called Pipes, right? What the hell do you think those are? The tech may be being used wrongly (using a hammer to nail in a screw) but a blanket assertion of uselessness is horsecrap.</p><blockquote><div><p>Above all, more than anything else, there needs to be a return to implementation, rather than interface, simplicity. As priorities, faddishness, popularity, and most of all, the end user, need to die.</p></div></blockquote><p>Wow, the dev shouldn't care about the end user, huh? The end user should be happy with a 50 page menu and a screen full of unlabelled buttons, any of which could crash their system? Nice to know that you don't actually work in the industry since you'd be unemployable with that attitude.<br>News flash genius, software exists <em>for the purpose</em> of providing an interface between <strong>the user</strong> and <strong>the hardware</strong>, to enable the user to command the hardware to do something useful for them. I think you need to reevaluate your world view since you seem to be a mile off the ground.</p><p>That said, PulseAudio is just the latest version of ALSA and ESD, it sucks just as hard because the morons who keep coming up with this crap don't realise that you have to simplify the system as you add new layers, not expose even more bullshit complexity on top of the existing bullshit complexity, hell, it doesn't even eliminate the necessity of competing framework things like JACK [Now what? PulseAudio + JACK on ALSA with OpenAL with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...]. (Phonon is a good example of doing it right by simplifying the crap that is Xine and Gstreamer instead of making it yet more complicated [different area though]).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have somewhat of a point but it 's mired in bullshit.The single main problem is what I called the Starbucks generation ; self-righteous , latte-sipping yuppie CS graduates , who as said in another post , worship C + + and various hell-spawned forms of RPC , and use such to code bloated monoliths of a magnitude that would give Microsoft nightmares.It 's interesting you claim that , as most of the god awful code I 've seen seems to come from self-trainees .
I also laugh at your jab at C + + , since you talk about bloat I can only assume that you are asserting that the devs should be using the holy C89 language which only proves you know jackshit since C + + is no higher from the hardware than C and can even be smaller and faster ( by making it easier to eliminate duplication ) under some circumstances .
Remote Procedure Call is another 'WTF ?
' claim    you know Unix is very big on these things called Pipes , right ?
What the hell do you think those are ?
The tech may be being used wrongly ( using a hammer to nail in a screw ) but a blanket assertion of uselessness is horsecrap.Above all , more than anything else , there needs to be a return to implementation , rather than interface , simplicity .
As priorities , faddishness , popularity , and most of all , the end user , need to die.Wow , the dev should n't care about the end user , huh ?
The end user should be happy with a 50 page menu and a screen full of unlabelled buttons , any of which could crash their system ?
Nice to know that you do n't actually work in the industry since you 'd be unemployable with that attitude.News flash genius , software exists for the purpose of providing an interface between the user and the hardware , to enable the user to command the hardware to do something useful for them .
I think you need to reevaluate your world view since you seem to be a mile off the ground.That said , PulseAudio is just the latest version of ALSA and ESD , it sucks just as hard because the morons who keep coming up with this crap do n't realise that you have to simplify the system as you add new layers , not expose even more bullshit complexity on top of the existing bullshit complexity , hell , it does n't even eliminate the necessity of competing framework things like JACK [ Now what ?
PulseAudio + JACK on ALSA with OpenAL with ... ] .
( Phonon is a good example of doing it right by simplifying the crap that is Xine and Gstreamer instead of making it yet more complicated [ different area though ] ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have somewhat of a point but it's mired in bullshit.The single main problem is what I called the Starbucks generation; self-righteous, latte-sipping yuppie CS graduates, who as said in another post, worship C++ and various hell-spawned forms of RPC, and use such to code bloated monoliths of a magnitude that would give Microsoft nightmares.It's interesting you claim that, as most of the god awful code I've seen seems to come from self-trainees.
I also laugh at your jab at C++, since you talk about bloat I can only assume that you are asserting that the devs should be using the holy C89 language which only proves you know jackshit since C++ is no higher from the hardware than C and can even be smaller and faster (by making it easier to eliminate duplication) under some circumstances.
Remote Procedure Call is another 'WTF?
' claim — you know Unix is very big on these things called Pipes, right?
What the hell do you think those are?
The tech may be being used wrongly (using a hammer to nail in a screw) but a blanket assertion of uselessness is horsecrap.Above all, more than anything else, there needs to be a return to implementation, rather than interface, simplicity.
As priorities, faddishness, popularity, and most of all, the end user, need to die.Wow, the dev shouldn't care about the end user, huh?
The end user should be happy with a 50 page menu and a screen full of unlabelled buttons, any of which could crash their system?
Nice to know that you don't actually work in the industry since you'd be unemployable with that attitude.News flash genius, software exists for the purpose of providing an interface between the user and the hardware, to enable the user to command the hardware to do something useful for them.
I think you need to reevaluate your world view since you seem to be a mile off the ground.That said, PulseAudio is just the latest version of ALSA and ESD, it sucks just as hard because the morons who keep coming up with this crap don't realise that you have to simplify the system as you add new layers, not expose even more bullshit complexity on top of the existing bullshit complexity, hell, it doesn't even eliminate the necessity of competing framework things like JACK [Now what?
PulseAudio + JACK on ALSA with OpenAL with ...].
(Phonon is a good example of doing it right by simplifying the crap that is Xine and Gstreamer instead of making it yet more complicated [different area though]).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792189</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255956420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Latency is Good. If you can pump 20 seconds worth of audio into a buffer and then switch off until you're woken up 19.5 seconds later then this is great for power consumption.</p></div><p>That may be the case for music listening, but for music making, 20 milliseconds is barely usable</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Latency is Good .
If you can pump 20 seconds worth of audio into a buffer and then switch off until you 're woken up 19.5 seconds later then this is great for power consumption.That may be the case for music listening , but for music making , 20 milliseconds is barely usable</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Latency is Good.
If you can pump 20 seconds worth of audio into a buffer and then switch off until you're woken up 19.5 seconds later then this is great for power consumption.That may be the case for music listening, but for music making, 20 milliseconds is barely usable
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796133</id>
	<title>Re:GStreamer?</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255975680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Whatever happened to GStreamer?"</p><p>er, it's there and in active use by zillions of applications across multiple problems. but it lives at a higher level of the stack. gstreamer *outputs* to PulseAudio. (or, y'know, ALSA, if PA isn't there.) gstreamer wasn't designed to do the stuff PA does, that's not its job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Whatever happened to GStreamer ?
" er , it 's there and in active use by zillions of applications across multiple problems .
but it lives at a higher level of the stack .
gstreamer * outputs * to PulseAudio .
( or , y'know , ALSA , if PA is n't there .
) gstreamer was n't designed to do the stuff PA does , that 's not its job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Whatever happened to GStreamer?
"er, it's there and in active use by zillions of applications across multiple problems.
but it lives at a higher level of the stack.
gstreamer *outputs* to PulseAudio.
(or, y'know, ALSA, if PA isn't there.
) gstreamer wasn't designed to do the stuff PA does, that's not its job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792569</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797015</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255978740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"PulseAudio reimplementing ALSA to look like ALSA is just plain silly"</p><p>What the \_hell\_ are you talking about?</p><p>"Talking about each new version of the kernel and PulseAudio to fix issues now after all these years when sound and even ALSA for many people have started to work is laughable. History, and the Linux desktop world's inability to learn from the past, is against PulseAudio but Lennart seems determined to bludgeon it in."</p><p>I take it you're working hard on contributing all the things that PulseAudio is doing to ALSA, then?</p><p>That's the point that annoys me the post about this whole discussion - comment thread trolls who will bang on and on about how PA is a terrible idea and everything should be done in ALSA are ten a penny, yet people willing to contribute actual code to ALSA are rarer than unicorn shit. ALSA was effectively dormant for a decade - with barely enough contributors to write basic drivers for new devices, never mind implementing important new features - and when someone shows up with an actual plan to address the situation, all you can do is whine about how he's doing it all wrong. Then quit whining and do it 'right', and if your solution's a good one, it will be adopted. Development isn't a democracy. Whining about how things should be done differently is \_not helping\_.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" PulseAudio reimplementing ALSA to look like ALSA is just plain silly " What the \ _hell \ _ are you talking about ?
" Talking about each new version of the kernel and PulseAudio to fix issues now after all these years when sound and even ALSA for many people have started to work is laughable .
History , and the Linux desktop world 's inability to learn from the past , is against PulseAudio but Lennart seems determined to bludgeon it in .
" I take it you 're working hard on contributing all the things that PulseAudio is doing to ALSA , then ? That 's the point that annoys me the post about this whole discussion - comment thread trolls who will bang on and on about how PA is a terrible idea and everything should be done in ALSA are ten a penny , yet people willing to contribute actual code to ALSA are rarer than unicorn shit .
ALSA was effectively dormant for a decade - with barely enough contributors to write basic drivers for new devices , never mind implementing important new features - and when someone shows up with an actual plan to address the situation , all you can do is whine about how he 's doing it all wrong .
Then quit whining and do it 'right ' , and if your solution 's a good one , it will be adopted .
Development is n't a democracy .
Whining about how things should be done differently is \ _not helping \ _ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"PulseAudio reimplementing ALSA to look like ALSA is just plain silly"What the \_hell\_ are you talking about?
"Talking about each new version of the kernel and PulseAudio to fix issues now after all these years when sound and even ALSA for many people have started to work is laughable.
History, and the Linux desktop world's inability to learn from the past, is against PulseAudio but Lennart seems determined to bludgeon it in.
"I take it you're working hard on contributing all the things that PulseAudio is doing to ALSA, then?That's the point that annoys me the post about this whole discussion - comment thread trolls who will bang on and on about how PA is a terrible idea and everything should be done in ALSA are ten a penny, yet people willing to contribute actual code to ALSA are rarer than unicorn shit.
ALSA was effectively dormant for a decade - with barely enough contributors to write basic drivers for new devices, never mind implementing important new features - and when someone shows up with an actual plan to address the situation, all you can do is whine about how he's doing it all wrong.
Then quit whining and do it 'right', and if your solution's a good one, it will be adopted.
Development isn't a democracy.
Whining about how things should be done differently is \_not helping\_.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793601</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793483</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1255964340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't disagree with that, but the reality is that it's possible to execute a DoS against the Linux kernel, even accidentally, and degrade system performance... So why not pulseaudio? Also, if you follow PerfectSetup and stay away from the most retarded applications, you will likely never have one problem with pulse, while it gracefully allows you to pipe your audio around the house at will. Some people don't care; let them eat ALSA... suckers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't disagree with that , but the reality is that it 's possible to execute a DoS against the Linux kernel , even accidentally , and degrade system performance... So why not pulseaudio ?
Also , if you follow PerfectSetup and stay away from the most retarded applications , you will likely never have one problem with pulse , while it gracefully allows you to pipe your audio around the house at will .
Some people do n't care ; let them eat ALSA... suckers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't disagree with that, but the reality is that it's possible to execute a DoS against the Linux kernel, even accidentally, and degrade system performance... So why not pulseaudio?
Also, if you follow PerfectSetup and stay away from the most retarded applications, you will likely never have one problem with pulse, while it gracefully allows you to pipe your audio around the house at will.
Some people don't care; let them eat ALSA... suckers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792199</id>
	<title>Another Pulse anecdote</title>
	<author>jjustus</author>
	<datestamp>1255956540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
I installed Ubuntu 9.04 on my new AMD64 laptop and tried to play some music. Aqualung (my preferred player) did not work properly with Pulse's ALSA emulation. For example, switching tracks caused a delay of several seconds. Next I tried to switch to Audacious, but it also behaved weirdly, and the sound quality was horrible. I also think I had problems with other applications.

Next, I got rid of pulseaudio and suddenly everything worked 100\%. Just reading this thread shows that this is not an uncommon experience.

Conclusion: Pulseaudio is not ready to be installed by default on desktop systems.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I installed Ubuntu 9.04 on my new AMD64 laptop and tried to play some music .
Aqualung ( my preferred player ) did not work properly with Pulse 's ALSA emulation .
For example , switching tracks caused a delay of several seconds .
Next I tried to switch to Audacious , but it also behaved weirdly , and the sound quality was horrible .
I also think I had problems with other applications .
Next , I got rid of pulseaudio and suddenly everything worked 100 \ % .
Just reading this thread shows that this is not an uncommon experience .
Conclusion : Pulseaudio is not ready to be installed by default on desktop systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I installed Ubuntu 9.04 on my new AMD64 laptop and tried to play some music.
Aqualung (my preferred player) did not work properly with Pulse's ALSA emulation.
For example, switching tracks caused a delay of several seconds.
Next I tried to switch to Audacious, but it also behaved weirdly, and the sound quality was horrible.
I also think I had problems with other applications.
Next, I got rid of pulseaudio and suddenly everything worked 100\%.
Just reading this thread shows that this is not an uncommon experience.
Conclusion: Pulseaudio is not ready to be installed by default on desktop systems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792689</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>turing\_m</author>
	<datestamp>1255960260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As priorities, faddishness, popularity, <b>and most of all, the end user</b>, need to die.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Are you serious? Faddishness, I agree with. Popularity - popularity is something worth considering. Popularity implies community, and with a large community chances are most elements of a given problem have already been coded by someone else. Consider Perl and CPAN - a good reason to use Perl. But popularity is not enough to make me choose MySQL over PostgreSQL for instance.
<br> <br>
Lastly - the end user as a priority needs to die? That really depends on who you are writing the software for. If it's an operating system and you want it to compete with a Windows or OSX on some level, considering the end user is unavoidable. A vastly larger feature set and complexity than say, OpenBSD, is also unavoidable. Lack of time to audit the code and remove bugs to the degree that OpenBSD has done is also unavoidable. Maybe this goes some way to explaining the quality of the code and the size of the user base of both operating systems.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As priorities , faddishness , popularity , and most of all , the end user , need to die .
Are you serious ?
Faddishness , I agree with .
Popularity - popularity is something worth considering .
Popularity implies community , and with a large community chances are most elements of a given problem have already been coded by someone else .
Consider Perl and CPAN - a good reason to use Perl .
But popularity is not enough to make me choose MySQL over PostgreSQL for instance .
Lastly - the end user as a priority needs to die ?
That really depends on who you are writing the software for .
If it 's an operating system and you want it to compete with a Windows or OSX on some level , considering the end user is unavoidable .
A vastly larger feature set and complexity than say , OpenBSD , is also unavoidable .
Lack of time to audit the code and remove bugs to the degree that OpenBSD has done is also unavoidable .
Maybe this goes some way to explaining the quality of the code and the size of the user base of both operating systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As priorities, faddishness, popularity, and most of all, the end user, need to die.
Are you serious?
Faddishness, I agree with.
Popularity - popularity is something worth considering.
Popularity implies community, and with a large community chances are most elements of a given problem have already been coded by someone else.
Consider Perl and CPAN - a good reason to use Perl.
But popularity is not enough to make me choose MySQL over PostgreSQL for instance.
Lastly - the end user as a priority needs to die?
That really depends on who you are writing the software for.
If it's an operating system and you want it to compete with a Windows or OSX on some level, considering the end user is unavoidable.
A vastly larger feature set and complexity than say, OpenBSD, is also unavoidable.
Lack of time to audit the code and remove bugs to the degree that OpenBSD has done is also unavoidable.
Maybe this goes some way to explaining the quality of the code and the size of the user base of both operating systems.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800877</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1255950240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What most people quite often fail to realise is that Latency is Good.</p></div></blockquote><p>In some situations, but hardly all. PulseAudio needs to stop billing itself as a jack-of-all-trades solution to audio on Linux. Based on what I've seen, it's only helpful for use cases that few average users are likely to presently encounter. It may become the basis for a large number of really cool things in the future, but right now it's doing more harm than good by shipping by default on the majority of Linux distributions.</p><p>Here's a useless anecdote: For months I was trying to get a decent music production system set up on Linux and it was an unmitigated disaster. No distribution had the correct mix of drivers, sound servers, and applications that would make everything just work. I should point out that PulseAudio was enabled by default on all of them, and PulseAudio had to be manually disabled on all of them just to get any sound moving through the system at all.</p><p>When I can play a chord on my MIDI keyboard and have it played, mixed, processed, and output through the speakers in less than 20ms with PulseAudio in the chain, give me a call.</p><blockquote><div><p>Ubuntu has gotten much better since then, the people involved are engaging with us upstream and a really good people to work with</p></div></blockquote><p>I take it you haven't yet read <a href="http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/pa-in-ubuntu.html" title="0pointer.de">Lennart Poettering's blog post</a> [0pointer.de] today. In it, he basically says that Ubuntu is repeating the same kind of bonehead mistakes with packaging PA in Karmic that they've done with ever other Ubuntu release so far: "Not good, Ubuntu, really not good! And I'll get all the complaints for this f**up again. Thanks!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What most people quite often fail to realise is that Latency is Good.In some situations , but hardly all .
PulseAudio needs to stop billing itself as a jack-of-all-trades solution to audio on Linux .
Based on what I 've seen , it 's only helpful for use cases that few average users are likely to presently encounter .
It may become the basis for a large number of really cool things in the future , but right now it 's doing more harm than good by shipping by default on the majority of Linux distributions.Here 's a useless anecdote : For months I was trying to get a decent music production system set up on Linux and it was an unmitigated disaster .
No distribution had the correct mix of drivers , sound servers , and applications that would make everything just work .
I should point out that PulseAudio was enabled by default on all of them , and PulseAudio had to be manually disabled on all of them just to get any sound moving through the system at all.When I can play a chord on my MIDI keyboard and have it played , mixed , processed , and output through the speakers in less than 20ms with PulseAudio in the chain , give me a call.Ubuntu has gotten much better since then , the people involved are engaging with us upstream and a really good people to work withI take it you have n't yet read Lennart Poettering 's blog post [ 0pointer.de ] today .
In it , he basically says that Ubuntu is repeating the same kind of bonehead mistakes with packaging PA in Karmic that they 've done with ever other Ubuntu release so far : " Not good , Ubuntu , really not good !
And I 'll get all the complaints for this f * * up again .
Thanks ! "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What most people quite often fail to realise is that Latency is Good.In some situations, but hardly all.
PulseAudio needs to stop billing itself as a jack-of-all-trades solution to audio on Linux.
Based on what I've seen, it's only helpful for use cases that few average users are likely to presently encounter.
It may become the basis for a large number of really cool things in the future, but right now it's doing more harm than good by shipping by default on the majority of Linux distributions.Here's a useless anecdote: For months I was trying to get a decent music production system set up on Linux and it was an unmitigated disaster.
No distribution had the correct mix of drivers, sound servers, and applications that would make everything just work.
I should point out that PulseAudio was enabled by default on all of them, and PulseAudio had to be manually disabled on all of them just to get any sound moving through the system at all.When I can play a chord on my MIDI keyboard and have it played, mixed, processed, and output through the speakers in less than 20ms with PulseAudio in the chain, give me a call.Ubuntu has gotten much better since then, the people involved are engaging with us upstream and a really good people to work withI take it you haven't yet read Lennart Poettering's blog post [0pointer.de] today.
In it, he basically says that Ubuntu is repeating the same kind of bonehead mistakes with packaging PA in Karmic that they've done with ever other Ubuntu release so far: "Not good, Ubuntu, really not good!
And I'll get all the complaints for this f**up again.
Thanks!"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795959</id>
	<title>Ubunters are stupid to get it right, who's smart?</title>
	<author>alukin</author>
	<datestamp>1255974720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, Lenart says that Ubuntu guys are so stupid that can not get PA right in 3 consequential releases. Who's smart to get it right? I spent a week trying get it right on Ubuntu 8.04, then on Fedora 10 and found only one solution. Get rig of PA and be happy.</p><p>I use recoding tools, MIDI tools and other music soft and PA drives me just crazy because it can not allow normal work of jackd.</p><p>So if Ubuntu guys are stupid, Fedora guys are stupid, and I am stupid, the only smart guy is Lennart. Let's make him a President of USA!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , Lenart says that Ubuntu guys are so stupid that can not get PA right in 3 consequential releases .
Who 's smart to get it right ?
I spent a week trying get it right on Ubuntu 8.04 , then on Fedora 10 and found only one solution .
Get rig of PA and be happy.I use recoding tools , MIDI tools and other music soft and PA drives me just crazy because it can not allow normal work of jackd.So if Ubuntu guys are stupid , Fedora guys are stupid , and I am stupid , the only smart guy is Lennart .
Let 's make him a President of USA !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, Lenart says that Ubuntu guys are so stupid that can not get PA right in 3 consequential releases.
Who's smart to get it right?
I spent a week trying get it right on Ubuntu 8.04, then on Fedora 10 and found only one solution.
Get rig of PA and be happy.I use recoding tools, MIDI tools and other music soft and PA drives me just crazy because it can not allow normal work of jackd.So if Ubuntu guys are stupid, Fedora guys are stupid, and I am stupid, the only smart guy is Lennart.
Let's make him a President of USA!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259</id>
	<title>This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255945380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Firrrrrsssst P Po Po sssst</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firrrrrsssst P Po Po sssst</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firrrrrsssst P Po Po sssst</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795945</id>
	<title>Fuckin Hell</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255974660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>cat &gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp</p><p>DONE</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>cat &gt; /dev/dspDONE</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cat &gt; /dev/dspDONE</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795521</id>
	<title>Re:Too many choices....</title>
	<author>allquixotic</author>
	<datestamp>1255972920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem in this thread seems to be "I want to install ANY audio-using application and have it Just Work (tm)". This is a more pragmatic wish that has nothing to do with the theoretical arguments about the One True API that have been raging for years.</p><p>From my perspective, there is no One True API. As long as multiple audio APIs exist, applications that use them will too. This is a fact of life. To accommodate this, we have several choices:</p><p>1. Parts of the sound stack can natively support legacy APIs, allowing us to seamlessly move from the old to new. Example: PulseAudio supports ESD API.<br>2. Parts of the sound stack can forward audio from one layer to another, be it from the "old" to the "new" or vice versa. Example: ALSA forwards to PulseAudio using libasound\_module\_pcm\_pulse; PulseAudio forwards to JACK using module-jack-{sink,source}.<br>3. A direct route is neither here nor there, but a multi-hop route is still feasible (example: OSS Proxy -&gt; PulseAudio -&gt; ALSA).</p><p>I go through a significant amount of theorizing to argue why it is desirable to have such a configuration, and then make an attempt at actually defining and explaining how to setup such a configuration, on my blog: <a href="http://tiyukquellmalz.org/blogs/blog5.php/2009/08/23/dreaming-of-universal-audio-stacks" title="tiyukquellmalz.org" rel="nofollow">http://tiyukquellmalz.org/blogs/blog5.php/2009/08/23/dreaming-of-universal-audio-stacks</a> [tiyukquellmalz.org]</p><p>I just want to add that I am neither pro-PulseAudio nor anti-PulseAudio. There are applications that use the PulseAudio API particularly well -- for instance, Gstreamer and Skype 2.1 Beta. For these apps, PulseAudio works very well, so I see no reason to exclude PulseAudio from my sound stack. As long as it is useful, I will include it as part of my sound stack. \_Part Of\_. The other parts are designed to take care of audio APIs and use cases that PulseAudio alone cannot handle. Unless Lennart wants to implement every last audio API under the sun natively in Pulseaudio as a module, just as he did with ESD, then I don't think I will ever arrive at a situation where PulseAudio -&gt; ALSA is the full extent of my sound stack -- especially not while popular apps out there still use APIs of JACK, OSS, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem in this thread seems to be " I want to install ANY audio-using application and have it Just Work ( tm ) " .
This is a more pragmatic wish that has nothing to do with the theoretical arguments about the One True API that have been raging for years.From my perspective , there is no One True API .
As long as multiple audio APIs exist , applications that use them will too .
This is a fact of life .
To accommodate this , we have several choices : 1 .
Parts of the sound stack can natively support legacy APIs , allowing us to seamlessly move from the old to new .
Example : PulseAudio supports ESD API.2 .
Parts of the sound stack can forward audio from one layer to another , be it from the " old " to the " new " or vice versa .
Example : ALSA forwards to PulseAudio using libasound \ _module \ _pcm \ _pulse ; PulseAudio forwards to JACK using module-jack- { sink,source } .3 .
A direct route is neither here nor there , but a multi-hop route is still feasible ( example : OSS Proxy - &gt; PulseAudio - &gt; ALSA ) .I go through a significant amount of theorizing to argue why it is desirable to have such a configuration , and then make an attempt at actually defining and explaining how to setup such a configuration , on my blog : http : //tiyukquellmalz.org/blogs/blog5.php/2009/08/23/dreaming-of-universal-audio-stacks [ tiyukquellmalz.org ] I just want to add that I am neither pro-PulseAudio nor anti-PulseAudio .
There are applications that use the PulseAudio API particularly well -- for instance , Gstreamer and Skype 2.1 Beta .
For these apps , PulseAudio works very well , so I see no reason to exclude PulseAudio from my sound stack .
As long as it is useful , I will include it as part of my sound stack .
\ _Part Of \ _ .
The other parts are designed to take care of audio APIs and use cases that PulseAudio alone can not handle .
Unless Lennart wants to implement every last audio API under the sun natively in Pulseaudio as a module , just as he did with ESD , then I do n't think I will ever arrive at a situation where PulseAudio - &gt; ALSA is the full extent of my sound stack -- especially not while popular apps out there still use APIs of JACK , OSS , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem in this thread seems to be "I want to install ANY audio-using application and have it Just Work (tm)".
This is a more pragmatic wish that has nothing to do with the theoretical arguments about the One True API that have been raging for years.From my perspective, there is no One True API.
As long as multiple audio APIs exist, applications that use them will too.
This is a fact of life.
To accommodate this, we have several choices:1.
Parts of the sound stack can natively support legacy APIs, allowing us to seamlessly move from the old to new.
Example: PulseAudio supports ESD API.2.
Parts of the sound stack can forward audio from one layer to another, be it from the "old" to the "new" or vice versa.
Example: ALSA forwards to PulseAudio using libasound\_module\_pcm\_pulse; PulseAudio forwards to JACK using module-jack-{sink,source}.3.
A direct route is neither here nor there, but a multi-hop route is still feasible (example: OSS Proxy -&gt; PulseAudio -&gt; ALSA).I go through a significant amount of theorizing to argue why it is desirable to have such a configuration, and then make an attempt at actually defining and explaining how to setup such a configuration, on my blog: http://tiyukquellmalz.org/blogs/blog5.php/2009/08/23/dreaming-of-universal-audio-stacks [tiyukquellmalz.org]I just want to add that I am neither pro-PulseAudio nor anti-PulseAudio.
There are applications that use the PulseAudio API particularly well -- for instance, Gstreamer and Skype 2.1 Beta.
For these apps, PulseAudio works very well, so I see no reason to exclude PulseAudio from my sound stack.
As long as it is useful, I will include it as part of my sound stack.
\_Part Of\_.
The other parts are designed to take care of audio APIs and use cases that PulseAudio alone cannot handle.
Unless Lennart wants to implement every last audio API under the sun natively in Pulseaudio as a module, just as he did with ESD, then I don't think I will ever arrive at a situation where PulseAudio -&gt; ALSA is the full extent of my sound stack -- especially not while popular apps out there still use APIs of JACK, OSS, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791391</id>
	<title>The uninformed must improve their deficit...</title>
	<author>Syniurge</author>
	<datestamp>1255946940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>here: <a href="http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/" title="guthr.ie" rel="nofollow">http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/</a> [guthr.ie]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>here : http : //colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/ [ guthr.ie ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>here: http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/ [guthr.ie]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791425</id>
	<title>Creeping featuritis</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255947360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have 2 sound cards and Pulseaudio has only given me great frustration. Not that Alsa is much better, but at least I hear something from the speakers. While I respect the work of the developers, they should probably get to the stage where everything works as intended with minimal features and then start adding complexity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have 2 sound cards and Pulseaudio has only given me great frustration .
Not that Alsa is much better , but at least I hear something from the speakers .
While I respect the work of the developers , they should probably get to the stage where everything works as intended with minimal features and then start adding complexity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have 2 sound cards and Pulseaudio has only given me great frustration.
Not that Alsa is much better, but at least I hear something from the speakers.
While I respect the work of the developers, they should probably get to the stage where everything works as intended with minimal features and then start adding complexity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792277</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>Tei</author>
	<datestamp>1255957200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A application sould not break the OS. That was  MR. GENERAL FAULT windows 3.1 commander<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>But PulseAudio is not application. Could be, I am speculating... that PA has to manage direct access to hardware that is poorly designed, so It could crash (maybe even the entire computer) because this poor hardware design? I don't know, I am just asking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A application sould not break the OS .
That was MR. GENERAL FAULT windows 3.1 commander : - ) But PulseAudio is not application .
Could be , I am speculating... that PA has to manage direct access to hardware that is poorly designed , so It could crash ( maybe even the entire computer ) because this poor hardware design ?
I do n't know , I am just asking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A application sould not break the OS.
That was  MR. GENERAL FAULT windows 3.1 commander :-)But PulseAudio is not application.
Could be, I am speculating... that PA has to manage direct access to hardware that is poorly designed, so It could crash (maybe even the entire computer) because this poor hardware design?
I don't know, I am just asking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791481</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>Jason Pollock</author>
	<datestamp>1255948200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Precisely.  PulseAudio cost me a week of effort in building my media playing machine.  An entire week of trying to figure out why XBMC and Boxee wouldn't talk to the sound card.</p><p>As soon as I got rid of PulseAudio?  It started working.</p><p>When an API is supposedly compatible with something it is replacing, it is the \_API's\_ fault when an application stops working, not the application.  We already had this argument with EXT4.</p><p>PulseAudio - not ready for prime time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Precisely .
PulseAudio cost me a week of effort in building my media playing machine .
An entire week of trying to figure out why XBMC and Boxee would n't talk to the sound card.As soon as I got rid of PulseAudio ?
It started working.When an API is supposedly compatible with something it is replacing , it is the \ _API 's \ _ fault when an application stops working , not the application .
We already had this argument with EXT4.PulseAudio - not ready for prime time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Precisely.
PulseAudio cost me a week of effort in building my media playing machine.
An entire week of trying to figure out why XBMC and Boxee wouldn't talk to the sound card.As soon as I got rid of PulseAudio?
It started working.When an API is supposedly compatible with something it is replacing, it is the \_API's\_ fault when an application stops working, not the application.
We already had this argument with EXT4.PulseAudio - not ready for prime time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791449</id>
	<title>Re:Why is OSS no longer in the kernel?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255947660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As I recall, there were various free OSS drivers in the kernel, but for others you had to buy the commercial version, not a happy state of affairs. Add to that the API was becoming more limiting and not reflecting some capabilities of current hardware. So we get the new, shiny, ALSA. Linux only, but the momentum was there. Everyone loves a re-write of something fun. Unfortunately its APIs suck donkey ass (technical term) and is generally a pain to set up right. Oh, you want to configure your asoundrc to have dmix work for your hw:3:2 device. And don't forget to load the modules in the right order or your default card will be your onboard video's HDMI port. Argh.</p><p>By having OSS API compatability it managed to get accepted. The new OSS API is mostly an extension, except for the mixer - which is a shame, but hey, modern hardware is very wacky. Inputs can become outputs, dozens of switches, etc. Hmm, makes you wonder how windows manages to still show you the CD, Wave/PCM, and master volume though.. Note: OSS is basically the product of one bloke, who at last glance was still trying to get paid for his work. Surprised some distro doesn't just hire him. And no, that's not me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As I recall , there were various free OSS drivers in the kernel , but for others you had to buy the commercial version , not a happy state of affairs .
Add to that the API was becoming more limiting and not reflecting some capabilities of current hardware .
So we get the new , shiny , ALSA .
Linux only , but the momentum was there .
Everyone loves a re-write of something fun .
Unfortunately its APIs suck donkey ass ( technical term ) and is generally a pain to set up right .
Oh , you want to configure your asoundrc to have dmix work for your hw : 3 : 2 device .
And do n't forget to load the modules in the right order or your default card will be your onboard video 's HDMI port .
Argh.By having OSS API compatability it managed to get accepted .
The new OSS API is mostly an extension , except for the mixer - which is a shame , but hey , modern hardware is very wacky .
Inputs can become outputs , dozens of switches , etc .
Hmm , makes you wonder how windows manages to still show you the CD , Wave/PCM , and master volume though.. Note : OSS is basically the product of one bloke , who at last glance was still trying to get paid for his work .
Surprised some distro does n't just hire him .
And no , that 's not me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I recall, there were various free OSS drivers in the kernel, but for others you had to buy the commercial version, not a happy state of affairs.
Add to that the API was becoming more limiting and not reflecting some capabilities of current hardware.
So we get the new, shiny, ALSA.
Linux only, but the momentum was there.
Everyone loves a re-write of something fun.
Unfortunately its APIs suck donkey ass (technical term) and is generally a pain to set up right.
Oh, you want to configure your asoundrc to have dmix work for your hw:3:2 device.
And don't forget to load the modules in the right order or your default card will be your onboard video's HDMI port.
Argh.By having OSS API compatability it managed to get accepted.
The new OSS API is mostly an extension, except for the mixer - which is a shame, but hey, modern hardware is very wacky.
Inputs can become outputs, dozens of switches, etc.
Hmm, makes you wonder how windows manages to still show you the CD, Wave/PCM, and master volume though.. Note: OSS is basically the product of one bloke, who at last glance was still trying to get paid for his work.
Surprised some distro doesn't just hire him.
And no, that's not me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791335</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796005</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255974900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wha?? How do you know that? It doesn't say in the article that Lady Gaga uses Linux</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wha ? ?
How do you know that ?
It does n't say in the article that Lady Gaga uses Linux</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wha??
How do you know that?
It doesn't say in the article that Lady Gaga uses Linux</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795715</id>
	<title>Re:Pulse Audio is a nightmare.</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255973700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We need one Audio driver frame work: ALSA. We need one game abstraction layer. SDL."</p><p>Good thing PA isn't an audio driver framework or a game abstraction layer then, really, isn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We need one Audio driver frame work : ALSA .
We need one game abstraction layer .
SDL. " Good thing PA is n't an audio driver framework or a game abstraction layer then , really , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We need one Audio driver frame work: ALSA.
We need one game abstraction layer.
SDL."Good thing PA isn't an audio driver framework or a game abstraction layer then, really, isn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791767</id>
	<title>Re:Too many choices....</title>
	<author>complete loony</author>
	<datestamp>1255951920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even in windows 7 the sound interface sucks. I have a separate headphone and speakers audio device. But with the window sound api, each application needs to provide it's own configuration interface to choose which device the sound comes out of. And most applications don't bother to provide one and just use the default device making it impossible to select where the output goes individually.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even in windows 7 the sound interface sucks .
I have a separate headphone and speakers audio device .
But with the window sound api , each application needs to provide it 's own configuration interface to choose which device the sound comes out of .
And most applications do n't bother to provide one and just use the default device making it impossible to select where the output goes individually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even in windows 7 the sound interface sucks.
I have a separate headphone and speakers audio device.
But with the window sound api, each application needs to provide it's own configuration interface to choose which device the sound comes out of.
And most applications don't bother to provide one and just use the default device making it impossible to select where the output goes individually.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794235</id>
	<title>Re:Programming in general, is a lost art for Linux</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1255967400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>+10^6</p><p>I am almost quitting Linux to BSD because of their non-sense API. Gnome is the worst pile of crap I have ever seen. It override every single configuration you can do. (e.g., no keyboard setting linked to the tty, gnome does it all)</p><p>Network-manager is RIDICULOUS. Where is the ifconfig front-end to configure the wifi they use in some BSDs ?</p><p>PA is yet another software crap to do sound. Shitty latency, shitty API, shitty configuration, shitty driver. Whys the HELL are people packing that ?</p><p>I am really waiting for when they will remember the unix philosophy. one problem, one tool. one tool, one problem. KISS. and write a clear man page.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>+ 10 ^ 6I am almost quitting Linux to BSD because of their non-sense API .
Gnome is the worst pile of crap I have ever seen .
It override every single configuration you can do .
( e.g. , no keyboard setting linked to the tty , gnome does it all ) Network-manager is RIDICULOUS .
Where is the ifconfig front-end to configure the wifi they use in some BSDs ? PA is yet another software crap to do sound .
Shitty latency , shitty API , shitty configuration , shitty driver .
Whys the HELL are people packing that ? I am really waiting for when they will remember the unix philosophy .
one problem , one tool .
one tool , one problem .
KISS. and write a clear man page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>+10^6I am almost quitting Linux to BSD because of their non-sense API.
Gnome is the worst pile of crap I have ever seen.
It override every single configuration you can do.
(e.g., no keyboard setting linked to the tty, gnome does it all)Network-manager is RIDICULOUS.
Where is the ifconfig front-end to configure the wifi they use in some BSDs ?PA is yet another software crap to do sound.
Shitty latency, shitty API, shitty configuration, shitty driver.
Whys the HELL are people packing that ?I am really waiting for when they will remember the unix philosophy.
one problem, one tool.
one tool, one problem.
KISS. and write a clear man page.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794099</id>
	<title>Flexibility vs the common case</title>
	<author>nostriluu</author>
	<datestamp>1255966920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Pulse Audio's flexibility sounds cool. But I just want my 5.1 audio setup to work. It doesn't. Right now it's completely broken, audio skips and I have to use low level programs to get surround sound. The audio system should just pass the raw stream through to my very capable receiver. When I try to use PA to do this, the receiver shuts down. I've spent hours trying to configure this through random "guides." I'm technical but I've grown very tired of tweaking, I want a distro that just works for a very common case - multimedia.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pulse Audio 's flexibility sounds cool .
But I just want my 5.1 audio setup to work .
It does n't .
Right now it 's completely broken , audio skips and I have to use low level programs to get surround sound .
The audio system should just pass the raw stream through to my very capable receiver .
When I try to use PA to do this , the receiver shuts down .
I 've spent hours trying to configure this through random " guides .
" I 'm technical but I 've grown very tired of tweaking , I want a distro that just works for a very common case - multimedia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Pulse Audio's flexibility sounds cool.
But I just want my 5.1 audio setup to work.
It doesn't.
Right now it's completely broken, audio skips and I have to use low level programs to get surround sound.
The audio system should just pass the raw stream through to my very capable receiver.
When I try to use PA to do this, the receiver shuts down.
I've spent hours trying to configure this through random "guides.
" I'm technical but I've grown very tired of tweaking, I want a distro that just works for a very common case - multimedia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791367</id>
	<title>My bug reports were ignored!</title>
	<author>HRbnjR</author>
	<datestamp>1255946760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it is an absolute disaster, and outlined all the problems I had with it under Fedora 11 at <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=506213" title="redhat.com">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=506213</a> [redhat.com] and was totally ignored.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it is an absolute disaster , and outlined all the problems I had with it under Fedora 11 at https : //bugzilla.redhat.com/show \ _bug.cgi ? id = 506213 [ redhat.com ] and was totally ignored .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it is an absolute disaster, and outlined all the problems I had with it under Fedora 11 at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=506213 [redhat.com] and was totally ignored.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795101</id>
	<title>Re:Way not to get the point: why users are angry</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1255971480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't care whether problems are caused by the kernel, a driver, an application, the phase of the moon, or whatever. The thing is, if some "trivial" piece of hardware which has been part of mostly every computer since about 1990, still *does not fucking work* correctly today, I don't give a rat's ass whose fault that is.</p></div><p>Then keep the complains to yourself, and don't waste developers' time with your pointless bitching until you're at *least* able to determine that you're bitching at the right developer.</p><p>Acrobat Reader may suck big donkey balls, but if I went to complain to Microsoft about it that'd only be a waste of time for them *and* me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care whether problems are caused by the kernel , a driver , an application , the phase of the moon , or whatever .
The thing is , if some " trivial " piece of hardware which has been part of mostly every computer since about 1990 , still * does not fucking work * correctly today , I do n't give a rat 's ass whose fault that is.Then keep the complains to yourself , and do n't waste developers ' time with your pointless bitching until you 're at * least * able to determine that you 're bitching at the right developer.Acrobat Reader may suck big donkey balls , but if I went to complain to Microsoft about it that 'd only be a waste of time for them * and * me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care whether problems are caused by the kernel, a driver, an application, the phase of the moon, or whatever.
The thing is, if some "trivial" piece of hardware which has been part of mostly every computer since about 1990, still *does not fucking work* correctly today, I don't give a rat's ass whose fault that is.Then keep the complains to yourself, and don't waste developers' time with your pointless bitching until you're at *least* able to determine that you're bitching at the right developer.Acrobat Reader may suck big donkey balls, but if I went to complain to Microsoft about it that'd only be a waste of time for them *and* me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792569</id>
	<title>GStreamer?</title>
	<author>Doc Ruby</author>
	<datestamp>1255959540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whatever happened to GStreamer? I thought that "circuit/pipeline" model for building audio systems would make it easy for developers, and foster a whole new generation of interfacing audio to apps, and people to each other by audio. Where did that catchy future go?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever happened to GStreamer ?
I thought that " circuit/pipeline " model for building audio systems would make it easy for developers , and foster a whole new generation of interfacing audio to apps , and people to each other by audio .
Where did that catchy future go ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever happened to GStreamer?
I thought that "circuit/pipeline" model for building audio systems would make it easy for developers, and foster a whole new generation of interfacing audio to apps, and people to each other by audio.
Where did that catchy future go?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795647</id>
	<title>Fedora Core 9 and Pulse</title>
	<author>OFnow</author>
	<datestamp>1255973460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For months every FC9 update  would break sound (and there<br>was at least one update that broke sound every week). Either I could not listen to<br>YouTube sound or Skype would stop working. Or both.  For a long time Pulse was<br>de-installed. Then I had to install it. Then I had to futz with controls (sometimes<br>system controls, sometimes things in an application).<br>Some weeks I could not get sound working till the next update.</p><p>Why is it such a nightmare?</p><p>Sure it is the distro's fault..   So? It's been really bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For months every FC9 update would break sound ( and therewas at least one update that broke sound every week ) .
Either I could not listen toYouTube sound or Skype would stop working .
Or both .
For a long time Pulse wasde-installed .
Then I had to install it .
Then I had to futz with controls ( sometimessystem controls , sometimes things in an application ) .Some weeks I could not get sound working till the next update.Why is it such a nightmare ? Sure it is the distro 's fault.. So ? It 's been really bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For months every FC9 update  would break sound (and therewas at least one update that broke sound every week).
Either I could not listen toYouTube sound or Skype would stop working.
Or both.
For a long time Pulse wasde-installed.
Then I had to install it.
Then I had to futz with controls (sometimessystem controls, sometimes things in an application).Some weeks I could not get sound working till the next update.Why is it such a nightmare?Sure it is the distro's fault..   So? It's been really bad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</id>
	<title>Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio isn't</title>
	<author>colin\_s\_guthrie</author>
	<datestamp>1255950300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I knew as soon as I read the headline here that this article would be jumped on by numerous "alsa is fine on it's own", "Why not OSS" and "PulseAudio is buggy blah blah" type posts but I didn't think that even the general slashdot hordes were that ignorant about what the hell PA is all about. I was sorely mistaken.</p><p>PulseAudio is very little to do about "networked audio" which everyone and their dog seems to use as an example to reason "I do not need networked audio, therefore I do not need pulseaudio". It's just ignorance in the extreme.</p><p>PulseAudio as an architecture is fast becoming the defacto standard on Linux, companies such as Intel, Nokia and Palm are putting significant resources into PA just now.</p><p>OSSv4 or older flavours simply does not have the API to deal with a modern linux desktop, plain and simple. We can maybe get some of the more userspace stuff such as bluetooth or airtunes support (the support for which I added to PA myself) using some kind of CUSE support but that's only just landed in the kernel just now, and it really wouldn't be a proper solution (and guess what? it would need a daemon running anyway!!)</p><p>As a PA developer and supporter, I've written up various articles explaining what PA is all about before and posted similar comments to mailing lists etc.<br>You can read some of them here:<br><a href="http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/" title="guthr.ie" rel="nofollow">http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/</a> [guthr.ie]<br>and<br><a href="http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.amarok.devel/15356" title="gmane.org" rel="nofollow">http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.amarok.devel/15356</a> [gmane.org]</p><p>I'll outline some of these things here to save you killing my poor server!</p><p>More and more audio device *are* network based. Apple Airport Express devices are pretty popular these days. I have two bluetooth headsets and my hifi system also support bluetooth connections and my Playstation 3 supports uPNP. So lots of things relating to network Audio are popping up (which is nothing to do with pulse-&gt;pulse network connections which is arguably a toy, even if I do personally use it a lot!). I don't think these should be ignored. PulseAudio supports all of these devices right now (although I've not had time to try the uPNP stuff on my PS3 specifically so don't quote me on that!)</p><p>In addition, rights access and management is a big issue. Today any modern linux desktop uses console kit to keep track of user sessions. When you switch from one user to another, console-kit ensures that the currently "active" user session is set to inactive, and it triggers udev callouts to remove the currently active users ACL on the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/snd/* nodes. (I seriously hope no one adds their user to the "audio" group these days!). This allows a new user to log in and get access to the sound hardware because they are now the "active" user. Switching between the two sessions triggers these ACL rewrites. Something has to manage this in applications so that they don't just bail out with EPERM errors. The sound has to go to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null automatically without the application being aware of what is going on. Perhaps it can cork/uncork applications that listen for such signals so that music is paused etc. This is something that cannot be done without some kind of userspace daemon handling things.</p><p>Then on to power consumption. What most people quite often fail to realise is that Latency is Good. If you can pump 20 seconds worth of audio into a buffer and then switch off until you're woken up 19.5 seconds later then this is great for power consumption. You need to disable hardware interrupts and use kernel level timing constructs to deal with this, and automatically reduce your wakeup time on the event of an underrun to reduce the likelihood of a future underrun occurring. You also have to have accurate timing information reported such that a/v applications can handle things like lipsyncing etc. (and remember that hoping for a low latency audio output is no way to get lipsync! If the audio output device is network based (bluetooth headphones etc.) the time delay from audio pumped into the buffer to when it's heard can be much increased and this needs to be handled gracefully!). On embedded systems and laptops, power consumption is very important which is one of the reasons why there is so much interest in PA from the likes of Intel and Nokia just now. Now, I admit that this mechanism did uncover many problems in the alsa driver layer. These problems have largely been resolved now, but many people seem to project these issues as pulseaudio problems which is unfair. For more information on latency see <a href="http://pulseaudio.org/wiki/LatencyControl" title="pulseaudio.org" rel="nofollow">http://pulseaudio.org/wiki/LatencyControl</a> [pulseaudio.org]  and for more information about the timer based scheduling see here <a href="http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/pulse-glitch-free.html" title="0pointer.de" rel="nofollow">http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/pulse-glitch-free.html</a> [0pointer.de] I strongly recommend you read both.</p><p>Then of course there is the mixer. Everyone knows the ALSA mixer controls are insane. They make no sense to almost everyone and vary wildly from hardware to hardware. Pulseaudio does a very good job at rationalising this and while it's impossible to get this 100\% right, it's coping admirably just now, while pushing for sanity upstream in ALSA. PulseAudio development really has pushed the ALSA development, both in terms of the kernel-level drivers (see previous paragraph) and the userspace API.</p><p>Then there is the whole concept of thin-clients. This is where native PA netowrk support goes beyond the "toy" label I gave it above. In this scenario it's rather important. Right now if I ssh to another machine on my network and run Amarok there, I hear the sound on my local speakers. This works by piggy backing connection and athentication information into the X11 root window which is SSH knows how to forward. Arguably this is not ideal as it needs a direct network return path and open ports etc. The correct solution is to abstract the X11 forwarding foo in ssh and implement a PA forwarding option too. This will come in time. I've written a bit about how this kind of thing works here:<br><a href="http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-is-confusing-defuzzing-part-2-pulseaudio/" title="guthr.ie" rel="nofollow">http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-is-confusing-defuzzing-part-2-pulseaudio/</a> [guthr.ie]</p><p>As for those who have had poor experience with PA, I have to say that a lot of this criticism is due in no small part to the distros. I package for Mandriva and I care about user experience and made sure that when we adopted PA several release ago that I configured and setup the vast majority of audio applications to work OOTB with PA just fine. I also ensured that it is very easy to turn PA off if you don't want it. This seems to be something I've seen people complain about recently: "I have to use PA because my distro breaks if I remove it!". Well, you shouldn't remove it (due to linked library problems) but there is absolutely no reason why you cannot disable it. If you can't, then this is a distro problem pure and simple. Complain to your distro or switch to one that does it properly. The power is yours.</p><p>Now I don't like to get involved distro wars, but Ubuntu has had a very poor track record with PA. They introduced it in an LTS release with very little though or due care and attention. This has harmed opinion of PA considerably. Ubuntu has gotten much better since then, the people involved are engaging with us upstream and a really good people to work with, but first impressions are hard to shake. I hope all the Ubuntu users and especially the Kubuntu users (I don't think phonon or kde runtime was patched in Kubuntu like I did to make it work sensibly, albeit with a crippled UI if (and only if!) the user is using PA, but correct me if I'm wrong) who formed their opinions of PA back then will give PA a second chance on a well integrated setup.</p><p>So while many people may have had bad experience of PA, it doesn't mean the idea or architecture are flawed. You've probably being using a distro that doesn't care to integrate PA properly or are in the unfortunate case that your ALSA drivers have not been tested properly with the bits of the API that pulseaudio exploits. If PA didn't expose this, some other ALSA client would, so stop crying about it and fix the problem where it lies.</p><p>And one final statement, many users have pointed out that the applications causing PA to crash. Of course that is not acceptable. Never should an app be able to crash PA, but if an app is doing things incorrectly it should be fixed. These two things are mutually exclusive so please don't read anything into comments that suggest that crashing bugs should be fixed in the applications doing the crashing and not in PA itself. We fix crashing bugs whenever we come across them, for example the new Skype beta exposed an assertion that should have been handled differently which we duely patched and backported to the stable branch within a day or two of being notified *and* helped the Skype developers fix their problem too. That is what is meant by fixing the applications. It does not mean that crashing bugs are ignored.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I knew as soon as I read the headline here that this article would be jumped on by numerous " alsa is fine on it 's own " , " Why not OSS " and " PulseAudio is buggy blah blah " type posts but I did n't think that even the general slashdot hordes were that ignorant about what the hell PA is all about .
I was sorely mistaken.PulseAudio is very little to do about " networked audio " which everyone and their dog seems to use as an example to reason " I do not need networked audio , therefore I do not need pulseaudio " .
It 's just ignorance in the extreme.PulseAudio as an architecture is fast becoming the defacto standard on Linux , companies such as Intel , Nokia and Palm are putting significant resources into PA just now.OSSv4 or older flavours simply does not have the API to deal with a modern linux desktop , plain and simple .
We can maybe get some of the more userspace stuff such as bluetooth or airtunes support ( the support for which I added to PA myself ) using some kind of CUSE support but that 's only just landed in the kernel just now , and it really would n't be a proper solution ( and guess what ?
it would need a daemon running anyway ! !
) As a PA developer and supporter , I 've written up various articles explaining what PA is all about before and posted similar comments to mailing lists etc.You can read some of them here : http : //colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/ [ guthr.ie ] andhttp : //thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.amarok.devel/15356 [ gmane.org ] I 'll outline some of these things here to save you killing my poor server ! More and more audio device * are * network based .
Apple Airport Express devices are pretty popular these days .
I have two bluetooth headsets and my hifi system also support bluetooth connections and my Playstation 3 supports uPNP .
So lots of things relating to network Audio are popping up ( which is nothing to do with pulse- &gt; pulse network connections which is arguably a toy , even if I do personally use it a lot ! ) .
I do n't think these should be ignored .
PulseAudio supports all of these devices right now ( although I 've not had time to try the uPNP stuff on my PS3 specifically so do n't quote me on that !
) In addition , rights access and management is a big issue .
Today any modern linux desktop uses console kit to keep track of user sessions .
When you switch from one user to another , console-kit ensures that the currently " active " user session is set to inactive , and it triggers udev callouts to remove the currently active users ACL on the /dev/snd/ * nodes .
( I seriously hope no one adds their user to the " audio " group these days ! ) .
This allows a new user to log in and get access to the sound hardware because they are now the " active " user .
Switching between the two sessions triggers these ACL rewrites .
Something has to manage this in applications so that they do n't just bail out with EPERM errors .
The sound has to go to /dev/null automatically without the application being aware of what is going on .
Perhaps it can cork/uncork applications that listen for such signals so that music is paused etc .
This is something that can not be done without some kind of userspace daemon handling things.Then on to power consumption .
What most people quite often fail to realise is that Latency is Good .
If you can pump 20 seconds worth of audio into a buffer and then switch off until you 're woken up 19.5 seconds later then this is great for power consumption .
You need to disable hardware interrupts and use kernel level timing constructs to deal with this , and automatically reduce your wakeup time on the event of an underrun to reduce the likelihood of a future underrun occurring .
You also have to have accurate timing information reported such that a/v applications can handle things like lipsyncing etc .
( and remember that hoping for a low latency audio output is no way to get lipsync !
If the audio output device is network based ( bluetooth headphones etc .
) the time delay from audio pumped into the buffer to when it 's heard can be much increased and this needs to be handled gracefully ! ) .
On embedded systems and laptops , power consumption is very important which is one of the reasons why there is so much interest in PA from the likes of Intel and Nokia just now .
Now , I admit that this mechanism did uncover many problems in the alsa driver layer .
These problems have largely been resolved now , but many people seem to project these issues as pulseaudio problems which is unfair .
For more information on latency see http : //pulseaudio.org/wiki/LatencyControl [ pulseaudio.org ] and for more information about the timer based scheduling see here http : //0pointer.de/blog/projects/pulse-glitch-free.html [ 0pointer.de ] I strongly recommend you read both.Then of course there is the mixer .
Everyone knows the ALSA mixer controls are insane .
They make no sense to almost everyone and vary wildly from hardware to hardware .
Pulseaudio does a very good job at rationalising this and while it 's impossible to get this 100 \ % right , it 's coping admirably just now , while pushing for sanity upstream in ALSA .
PulseAudio development really has pushed the ALSA development , both in terms of the kernel-level drivers ( see previous paragraph ) and the userspace API.Then there is the whole concept of thin-clients .
This is where native PA netowrk support goes beyond the " toy " label I gave it above .
In this scenario it 's rather important .
Right now if I ssh to another machine on my network and run Amarok there , I hear the sound on my local speakers .
This works by piggy backing connection and athentication information into the X11 root window which is SSH knows how to forward .
Arguably this is not ideal as it needs a direct network return path and open ports etc .
The correct solution is to abstract the X11 forwarding foo in ssh and implement a PA forwarding option too .
This will come in time .
I 've written a bit about how this kind of thing works here : http : //colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-is-confusing-defuzzing-part-2-pulseaudio/ [ guthr.ie ] As for those who have had poor experience with PA , I have to say that a lot of this criticism is due in no small part to the distros .
I package for Mandriva and I care about user experience and made sure that when we adopted PA several release ago that I configured and setup the vast majority of audio applications to work OOTB with PA just fine .
I also ensured that it is very easy to turn PA off if you do n't want it .
This seems to be something I 've seen people complain about recently : " I have to use PA because my distro breaks if I remove it ! " .
Well , you should n't remove it ( due to linked library problems ) but there is absolutely no reason why you can not disable it .
If you ca n't , then this is a distro problem pure and simple .
Complain to your distro or switch to one that does it properly .
The power is yours.Now I do n't like to get involved distro wars , but Ubuntu has had a very poor track record with PA. They introduced it in an LTS release with very little though or due care and attention .
This has harmed opinion of PA considerably .
Ubuntu has gotten much better since then , the people involved are engaging with us upstream and a really good people to work with , but first impressions are hard to shake .
I hope all the Ubuntu users and especially the Kubuntu users ( I do n't think phonon or kde runtime was patched in Kubuntu like I did to make it work sensibly , albeit with a crippled UI if ( and only if !
) the user is using PA , but correct me if I 'm wrong ) who formed their opinions of PA back then will give PA a second chance on a well integrated setup.So while many people may have had bad experience of PA , it does n't mean the idea or architecture are flawed .
You 've probably being using a distro that does n't care to integrate PA properly or are in the unfortunate case that your ALSA drivers have not been tested properly with the bits of the API that pulseaudio exploits .
If PA did n't expose this , some other ALSA client would , so stop crying about it and fix the problem where it lies.And one final statement , many users have pointed out that the applications causing PA to crash .
Of course that is not acceptable .
Never should an app be able to crash PA , but if an app is doing things incorrectly it should be fixed .
These two things are mutually exclusive so please do n't read anything into comments that suggest that crashing bugs should be fixed in the applications doing the crashing and not in PA itself .
We fix crashing bugs whenever we come across them , for example the new Skype beta exposed an assertion that should have been handled differently which we duely patched and backported to the stable branch within a day or two of being notified * and * helped the Skype developers fix their problem too .
That is what is meant by fixing the applications .
It does not mean that crashing bugs are ignored .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I knew as soon as I read the headline here that this article would be jumped on by numerous "alsa is fine on it's own", "Why not OSS" and "PulseAudio is buggy blah blah" type posts but I didn't think that even the general slashdot hordes were that ignorant about what the hell PA is all about.
I was sorely mistaken.PulseAudio is very little to do about "networked audio" which everyone and their dog seems to use as an example to reason "I do not need networked audio, therefore I do not need pulseaudio".
It's just ignorance in the extreme.PulseAudio as an architecture is fast becoming the defacto standard on Linux, companies such as Intel, Nokia and Palm are putting significant resources into PA just now.OSSv4 or older flavours simply does not have the API to deal with a modern linux desktop, plain and simple.
We can maybe get some of the more userspace stuff such as bluetooth or airtunes support (the support for which I added to PA myself) using some kind of CUSE support but that's only just landed in the kernel just now, and it really wouldn't be a proper solution (and guess what?
it would need a daemon running anyway!!
)As a PA developer and supporter, I've written up various articles explaining what PA is all about before and posted similar comments to mailing lists etc.You can read some of them here:http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/ [guthr.ie]andhttp://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.amarok.devel/15356 [gmane.org]I'll outline some of these things here to save you killing my poor server!More and more audio device *are* network based.
Apple Airport Express devices are pretty popular these days.
I have two bluetooth headsets and my hifi system also support bluetooth connections and my Playstation 3 supports uPNP.
So lots of things relating to network Audio are popping up (which is nothing to do with pulse-&gt;pulse network connections which is arguably a toy, even if I do personally use it a lot!).
I don't think these should be ignored.
PulseAudio supports all of these devices right now (although I've not had time to try the uPNP stuff on my PS3 specifically so don't quote me on that!
)In addition, rights access and management is a big issue.
Today any modern linux desktop uses console kit to keep track of user sessions.
When you switch from one user to another, console-kit ensures that the currently "active" user session is set to inactive, and it triggers udev callouts to remove the currently active users ACL on the /dev/snd/* nodes.
(I seriously hope no one adds their user to the "audio" group these days!).
This allows a new user to log in and get access to the sound hardware because they are now the "active" user.
Switching between the two sessions triggers these ACL rewrites.
Something has to manage this in applications so that they don't just bail out with EPERM errors.
The sound has to go to /dev/null automatically without the application being aware of what is going on.
Perhaps it can cork/uncork applications that listen for such signals so that music is paused etc.
This is something that cannot be done without some kind of userspace daemon handling things.Then on to power consumption.
What most people quite often fail to realise is that Latency is Good.
If you can pump 20 seconds worth of audio into a buffer and then switch off until you're woken up 19.5 seconds later then this is great for power consumption.
You need to disable hardware interrupts and use kernel level timing constructs to deal with this, and automatically reduce your wakeup time on the event of an underrun to reduce the likelihood of a future underrun occurring.
You also have to have accurate timing information reported such that a/v applications can handle things like lipsyncing etc.
(and remember that hoping for a low latency audio output is no way to get lipsync!
If the audio output device is network based (bluetooth headphones etc.
) the time delay from audio pumped into the buffer to when it's heard can be much increased and this needs to be handled gracefully!).
On embedded systems and laptops, power consumption is very important which is one of the reasons why there is so much interest in PA from the likes of Intel and Nokia just now.
Now, I admit that this mechanism did uncover many problems in the alsa driver layer.
These problems have largely been resolved now, but many people seem to project these issues as pulseaudio problems which is unfair.
For more information on latency see http://pulseaudio.org/wiki/LatencyControl [pulseaudio.org]  and for more information about the timer based scheduling see here http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/pulse-glitch-free.html [0pointer.de] I strongly recommend you read both.Then of course there is the mixer.
Everyone knows the ALSA mixer controls are insane.
They make no sense to almost everyone and vary wildly from hardware to hardware.
Pulseaudio does a very good job at rationalising this and while it's impossible to get this 100\% right, it's coping admirably just now, while pushing for sanity upstream in ALSA.
PulseAudio development really has pushed the ALSA development, both in terms of the kernel-level drivers (see previous paragraph) and the userspace API.Then there is the whole concept of thin-clients.
This is where native PA netowrk support goes beyond the "toy" label I gave it above.
In this scenario it's rather important.
Right now if I ssh to another machine on my network and run Amarok there, I hear the sound on my local speakers.
This works by piggy backing connection and athentication information into the X11 root window which is SSH knows how to forward.
Arguably this is not ideal as it needs a direct network return path and open ports etc.
The correct solution is to abstract the X11 forwarding foo in ssh and implement a PA forwarding option too.
This will come in time.
I've written a bit about how this kind of thing works here:http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-is-confusing-defuzzing-part-2-pulseaudio/ [guthr.ie]As for those who have had poor experience with PA, I have to say that a lot of this criticism is due in no small part to the distros.
I package for Mandriva and I care about user experience and made sure that when we adopted PA several release ago that I configured and setup the vast majority of audio applications to work OOTB with PA just fine.
I also ensured that it is very easy to turn PA off if you don't want it.
This seems to be something I've seen people complain about recently: "I have to use PA because my distro breaks if I remove it!".
Well, you shouldn't remove it (due to linked library problems) but there is absolutely no reason why you cannot disable it.
If you can't, then this is a distro problem pure and simple.
Complain to your distro or switch to one that does it properly.
The power is yours.Now I don't like to get involved distro wars, but Ubuntu has had a very poor track record with PA. They introduced it in an LTS release with very little though or due care and attention.
This has harmed opinion of PA considerably.
Ubuntu has gotten much better since then, the people involved are engaging with us upstream and a really good people to work with, but first impressions are hard to shake.
I hope all the Ubuntu users and especially the Kubuntu users (I don't think phonon or kde runtime was patched in Kubuntu like I did to make it work sensibly, albeit with a crippled UI if (and only if!
) the user is using PA, but correct me if I'm wrong) who formed their opinions of PA back then will give PA a second chance on a well integrated setup.So while many people may have had bad experience of PA, it doesn't mean the idea or architecture are flawed.
You've probably being using a distro that doesn't care to integrate PA properly or are in the unfortunate case that your ALSA drivers have not been tested properly with the bits of the API that pulseaudio exploits.
If PA didn't expose this, some other ALSA client would, so stop crying about it and fix the problem where it lies.And one final statement, many users have pointed out that the applications causing PA to crash.
Of course that is not acceptable.
Never should an app be able to crash PA, but if an app is doing things incorrectly it should be fixed.
These two things are mutually exclusive so please don't read anything into comments that suggest that crashing bugs should be fixed in the applications doing the crashing and not in PA itself.
We fix crashing bugs whenever we come across them, for example the new Skype beta exposed an assertion that should have been handled differently which we duely patched and backported to the stable branch within a day or two of being notified *and* helped the Skype developers fix their problem too.
That is what is meant by fixing the applications.
It does not mean that crashing bugs are ignored.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29812043</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>ksheff</author>
	<datestamp>1256066880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>except when it breaks use cases that just worked for years.  The following 'feature' was quite annoying.  I'll have to try this out at home.  I sort of got it working, but it wasn't what was outlined here (I have NFI how, actually) - too bad it took 3 months to get a real answer.  <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=505676" title="redhat.com" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=505676</a> [redhat.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>except when it breaks use cases that just worked for years .
The following 'feature ' was quite annoying .
I 'll have to try this out at home .
I sort of got it working , but it was n't what was outlined here ( I have NFI how , actually ) - too bad it took 3 months to get a real answer .
https : //bugzilla.redhat.com/show \ _bug.cgi ? id = 505676 [ redhat.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>except when it breaks use cases that just worked for years.
The following 'feature' was quite annoying.
I'll have to try this out at home.
I sort of got it working, but it wasn't what was outlined here (I have NFI how, actually) - too bad it took 3 months to get a real answer.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=505676 [redhat.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792301</id>
	<title>I've never had a working Pulse installation</title>
	<author>aussersterne</author>
	<datestamp>1255957440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>with Fedora, multiple versions, multiple different machines and sound hardware families. Sometimes I thought it was working, but then I would find some critical aspect of sound that didn't work or an upgrade would break it a day or two later and sound would disappear. Even those moments when it was partially working, sound was always out of sync and choppy and consumed heavy CPU resources.</p><p>I always de-install the damned thing, and then suddenly sound works perfectly. It's like an extra component that's insanely complex and designed especially to BREAK sound in Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>with Fedora , multiple versions , multiple different machines and sound hardware families .
Sometimes I thought it was working , but then I would find some critical aspect of sound that did n't work or an upgrade would break it a day or two later and sound would disappear .
Even those moments when it was partially working , sound was always out of sync and choppy and consumed heavy CPU resources.I always de-install the damned thing , and then suddenly sound works perfectly .
It 's like an extra component that 's insanely complex and designed especially to BREAK sound in Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>with Fedora, multiple versions, multiple different machines and sound hardware families.
Sometimes I thought it was working, but then I would find some critical aspect of sound that didn't work or an upgrade would break it a day or two later and sound would disappear.
Even those moments when it was partially working, sound was always out of sync and choppy and consumed heavy CPU resources.I always de-install the damned thing, and then suddenly sound works perfectly.
It's like an extra component that's insanely complex and designed especially to BREAK sound in Linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793807</id>
	<title>Are they deaf!?</title>
	<author>ThePhilips</author>
	<datestamp>1255965720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and says such complaints and criticisms about PulseAudio in some Internet forums are not really shared by the vast majority of technical people.</p> </div><p> I see. That clears the confusion to me. PulseAudio was never tested by people who can hear. And the quoted "technical people" are most likely simply deaf.

</p><p> Because even on most $5 "Made in China" speaker one can hear the cr*p coming from PulseAudio and even jitter of ALSA. Yes, $5 "Made in China" speakers improved that much in past years. And the PulseAudio creators must be really deaf to not to hear all the sh*t PulseAudio does to sound.

</p><p> P.S. OR they test it exclusively with YouTube. That might be another explanation.

</p><p> P.P.S. And do not get me started on PulseAudio configuration nightmares... (They blatantly discarded lessons of ESD/Artsd fiasco.) Configuration tools are simply dysfunctional and just as before trivial task of switching from one sounds card to another is a <i>chore</i> involving config editing on command line and couple of reboots.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... and says such complaints and criticisms about PulseAudio in some Internet forums are not really shared by the vast majority of technical people .
I see .
That clears the confusion to me .
PulseAudio was never tested by people who can hear .
And the quoted " technical people " are most likely simply deaf .
Because even on most $ 5 " Made in China " speaker one can hear the cr * p coming from PulseAudio and even jitter of ALSA .
Yes , $ 5 " Made in China " speakers improved that much in past years .
And the PulseAudio creators must be really deaf to not to hear all the sh * t PulseAudio does to sound .
P.S. OR they test it exclusively with YouTube .
That might be another explanation .
P.P.S. And do not get me started on PulseAudio configuration nightmares... ( They blatantly discarded lessons of ESD/Artsd fiasco .
) Configuration tools are simply dysfunctional and just as before trivial task of switching from one sounds card to another is a chore involving config editing on command line and couple of reboots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... and says such complaints and criticisms about PulseAudio in some Internet forums are not really shared by the vast majority of technical people.
I see.
That clears the confusion to me.
PulseAudio was never tested by people who can hear.
And the quoted "technical people" are most likely simply deaf.
Because even on most $5 "Made in China" speaker one can hear the cr*p coming from PulseAudio and even jitter of ALSA.
Yes, $5 "Made in China" speakers improved that much in past years.
And the PulseAudio creators must be really deaf to not to hear all the sh*t PulseAudio does to sound.
P.S. OR they test it exclusively with YouTube.
That might be another explanation.
P.P.S. And do not get me started on PulseAudio configuration nightmares... (They blatantly discarded lessons of ESD/Artsd fiasco.
) Configuration tools are simply dysfunctional and just as before trivial task of switching from one sounds card to another is a chore involving config editing on command line and couple of reboots.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801971</id>
	<title>Re:All you really need to know</title>
	<author>petrus4</author>
	<datestamp>1255956300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>PulseAudio isn't perfect, but the basic ideas behind it are sound, which is why the whole Linux world is adopting it.</p></div><p>I call BS, here.</p><p>Things don't get adopted by Linux distributions because they're technically sound; they get adopted if, for whatever other reason, they become the fad flavour of the month.</p><p>I tried for nearly two months to use Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex; audio was dying constantly, and I was having kernel panics randomly from the video card drivers as well.  Then there was the nightmare when I made the mistake of trying to use another window manager beside GNOME.</p><p>Linux in technical terms is crap, currently, and I'm fed up with the denial.  I'm using FreeBSD, and have been since January; I wanted to use Linux, but aside from maybe Slack, Arch, and LFS, none of the major distributions are usable without giving me endless problems.  It's either package management, or hardware drivers, or the DE is fused with everything else and can't be removed, etc...it's hell.</p><p>Stop claiming things are fine when they're not.  Stop writing propogandist garbage like this, where you're basically just trying to force people to hold their noses and drink the Kool Aid, when they're telling you in droves that real problems exist.</p><p>The denial needs to stop, and the problems need to be acknowledged and fixed.</p><p>*  We need a sound daemon that doesn't try and have a heap of other features which hardly anyone ever needs, but that just plays audio.  <b>THAT'S ALL IT NEEDS TO DO.</b>  No client/server crap.  No being able to play files while changing the sound card.  None of that shit.  All it needs to do is <b>play audio files.</b></p><p>*  GNOME needs to be scrapped entirely, and replaced with something that isn't committed to simply reproducing all of Windows' design mistakes.  We need a window manager that is genuinely designed according to the UNIX philosophy.  That means dotfiles for configuration, not a centralised registry which just bogs everything down.  It also means use of the pre-existing sockets system for IPC; NOT abominations like XML-RPC.  It also means something which is genuinely modular, not where if you install any one single piece, you then HAVE to install all of the rest.</p><p>*  Init/Upstart both need to be scrapped, and replaced with FreeBSD's init system.  It is simple, clear, sane, and WORKS.</p><p>*  Ubuntu's insane mess for kernel module loading also needs to be annihilated as well, and the standard module loading programs need to be used.</p><p>*  This is something which I know will never happen, because Canonical are too stupid and delusional, but if they truly were intelligent, they would drop Debian as a base.  They need to use something cleaner, like Slack, Arch, or LFS, and they could then save a lot more work for themselves by adopting pkgsrc (which is being maintained by NetBSD) as their package management system.  Ports systems are a <b>lot</b> more robust than dkpg/apt, and I don't want to hear the contrary from the usual Debian fanboys, either.  <b>YOU ARE WRONG,</b> and Ubuntu's upgrade routine trashing systems is the proof.  For ONCE, sit down, shut the hell up, and <b>accept it.</b></p><p>If you really mean any of the talk that you keep endlessly engaging in about wanting to be competitive, Linux community, then fucking lift your game.</p><p>The first step to doing that is ending the denial, once and for all.  The second is to cease mindlessly aping Windows, and establish your own identity; ideally one based on the very UNIX design principles that you've been so enthusiastically throwing away.</p><p>Let's see how many of the Generation Y, amateur, snot nosed brats I get making a response to this post; people like the idiot who wrote the post that I'm replying to, here.  People who think that everything with Linux is just fine, and who continue churning out bloated, inefficient, unstable crap, because they don't know how to do everything else, yet still see themselves as an avatar of Neo inside their own heads.</p><p>Mod me down, instead of refuting me, as well.  Use every lame Slashdot trick in the book for posts you don't agree with.</p><p>This is the truth, Linux developers.  You might not like it, but you need to fucking hear it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>PulseAudio is n't perfect , but the basic ideas behind it are sound , which is why the whole Linux world is adopting it.I call BS , here.Things do n't get adopted by Linux distributions because they 're technically sound ; they get adopted if , for whatever other reason , they become the fad flavour of the month.I tried for nearly two months to use Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex ; audio was dying constantly , and I was having kernel panics randomly from the video card drivers as well .
Then there was the nightmare when I made the mistake of trying to use another window manager beside GNOME.Linux in technical terms is crap , currently , and I 'm fed up with the denial .
I 'm using FreeBSD , and have been since January ; I wanted to use Linux , but aside from maybe Slack , Arch , and LFS , none of the major distributions are usable without giving me endless problems .
It 's either package management , or hardware drivers , or the DE is fused with everything else and ca n't be removed , etc...it 's hell.Stop claiming things are fine when they 're not .
Stop writing propogandist garbage like this , where you 're basically just trying to force people to hold their noses and drink the Kool Aid , when they 're telling you in droves that real problems exist.The denial needs to stop , and the problems need to be acknowledged and fixed .
* We need a sound daemon that does n't try and have a heap of other features which hardly anyone ever needs , but that just plays audio .
THAT 'S ALL IT NEEDS TO DO .
No client/server crap .
No being able to play files while changing the sound card .
None of that shit .
All it needs to do is play audio files .
* GNOME needs to be scrapped entirely , and replaced with something that is n't committed to simply reproducing all of Windows ' design mistakes .
We need a window manager that is genuinely designed according to the UNIX philosophy .
That means dotfiles for configuration , not a centralised registry which just bogs everything down .
It also means use of the pre-existing sockets system for IPC ; NOT abominations like XML-RPC .
It also means something which is genuinely modular , not where if you install any one single piece , you then HAVE to install all of the rest .
* Init/Upstart both need to be scrapped , and replaced with FreeBSD 's init system .
It is simple , clear , sane , and WORKS .
* Ubuntu 's insane mess for kernel module loading also needs to be annihilated as well , and the standard module loading programs need to be used .
* This is something which I know will never happen , because Canonical are too stupid and delusional , but if they truly were intelligent , they would drop Debian as a base .
They need to use something cleaner , like Slack , Arch , or LFS , and they could then save a lot more work for themselves by adopting pkgsrc ( which is being maintained by NetBSD ) as their package management system .
Ports systems are a lot more robust than dkpg/apt , and I do n't want to hear the contrary from the usual Debian fanboys , either .
YOU ARE WRONG , and Ubuntu 's upgrade routine trashing systems is the proof .
For ONCE , sit down , shut the hell up , and accept it.If you really mean any of the talk that you keep endlessly engaging in about wanting to be competitive , Linux community , then fucking lift your game.The first step to doing that is ending the denial , once and for all .
The second is to cease mindlessly aping Windows , and establish your own identity ; ideally one based on the very UNIX design principles that you 've been so enthusiastically throwing away.Let 's see how many of the Generation Y , amateur , snot nosed brats I get making a response to this post ; people like the idiot who wrote the post that I 'm replying to , here .
People who think that everything with Linux is just fine , and who continue churning out bloated , inefficient , unstable crap , because they do n't know how to do everything else , yet still see themselves as an avatar of Neo inside their own heads.Mod me down , instead of refuting me , as well .
Use every lame Slashdot trick in the book for posts you do n't agree with.This is the truth , Linux developers .
You might not like it , but you need to fucking hear it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PulseAudio isn't perfect, but the basic ideas behind it are sound, which is why the whole Linux world is adopting it.I call BS, here.Things don't get adopted by Linux distributions because they're technically sound; they get adopted if, for whatever other reason, they become the fad flavour of the month.I tried for nearly two months to use Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex; audio was dying constantly, and I was having kernel panics randomly from the video card drivers as well.
Then there was the nightmare when I made the mistake of trying to use another window manager beside GNOME.Linux in technical terms is crap, currently, and I'm fed up with the denial.
I'm using FreeBSD, and have been since January; I wanted to use Linux, but aside from maybe Slack, Arch, and LFS, none of the major distributions are usable without giving me endless problems.
It's either package management, or hardware drivers, or the DE is fused with everything else and can't be removed, etc...it's hell.Stop claiming things are fine when they're not.
Stop writing propogandist garbage like this, where you're basically just trying to force people to hold their noses and drink the Kool Aid, when they're telling you in droves that real problems exist.The denial needs to stop, and the problems need to be acknowledged and fixed.
*  We need a sound daemon that doesn't try and have a heap of other features which hardly anyone ever needs, but that just plays audio.
THAT'S ALL IT NEEDS TO DO.
No client/server crap.
No being able to play files while changing the sound card.
None of that shit.
All it needs to do is play audio files.
*  GNOME needs to be scrapped entirely, and replaced with something that isn't committed to simply reproducing all of Windows' design mistakes.
We need a window manager that is genuinely designed according to the UNIX philosophy.
That means dotfiles for configuration, not a centralised registry which just bogs everything down.
It also means use of the pre-existing sockets system for IPC; NOT abominations like XML-RPC.
It also means something which is genuinely modular, not where if you install any one single piece, you then HAVE to install all of the rest.
*  Init/Upstart both need to be scrapped, and replaced with FreeBSD's init system.
It is simple, clear, sane, and WORKS.
*  Ubuntu's insane mess for kernel module loading also needs to be annihilated as well, and the standard module loading programs need to be used.
*  This is something which I know will never happen, because Canonical are too stupid and delusional, but if they truly were intelligent, they would drop Debian as a base.
They need to use something cleaner, like Slack, Arch, or LFS, and they could then save a lot more work for themselves by adopting pkgsrc (which is being maintained by NetBSD) as their package management system.
Ports systems are a lot more robust than dkpg/apt, and I don't want to hear the contrary from the usual Debian fanboys, either.
YOU ARE WRONG, and Ubuntu's upgrade routine trashing systems is the proof.
For ONCE, sit down, shut the hell up, and accept it.If you really mean any of the talk that you keep endlessly engaging in about wanting to be competitive, Linux community, then fucking lift your game.The first step to doing that is ending the denial, once and for all.
The second is to cease mindlessly aping Windows, and establish your own identity; ideally one based on the very UNIX design principles that you've been so enthusiastically throwing away.Let's see how many of the Generation Y, amateur, snot nosed brats I get making a response to this post; people like the idiot who wrote the post that I'm replying to, here.
People who think that everything with Linux is just fine, and who continue churning out bloated, inefficient, unstable crap, because they don't know how to do everything else, yet still see themselves as an avatar of Neo inside their own heads.Mod me down, instead of refuting me, as well.
Use every lame Slashdot trick in the book for posts you don't agree with.This is the truth, Linux developers.
You might not like it, but you need to fucking hear it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792019</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Engeekneer</author>
	<datestamp>1255954680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now taking the time to explain it this well and in length, would deserve the mod points I don't have. You'll have to do with a thank you post.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now taking the time to explain it this well and in length , would deserve the mod points I do n't have .
You 'll have to do with a thank you post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now taking the time to explain it this well and in length, would deserve the mod points I don't have.
You'll have to do with a thank you post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796021</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>tom17</author>
	<datestamp>1255974960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>PulseAudio supports all of these devices right now (although I've not had time to try the uPNP stuff on my PS3 specifically so don't quote me on that!)</p></div><p>
I'd like to try this out. I did a brief search for PA streaming via UPnP to a PS3 but didn't find anything. Could you point me in the right direction?
</p><p>
Thanks,
</p><p>
Tom...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>PulseAudio supports all of these devices right now ( although I 've not had time to try the uPNP stuff on my PS3 specifically so do n't quote me on that !
) I 'd like to try this out .
I did a brief search for PA streaming via UPnP to a PS3 but did n't find anything .
Could you point me in the right direction ?
Thanks , Tom.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PulseAudio supports all of these devices right now (although I've not had time to try the uPNP stuff on my PS3 specifically so don't quote me on that!
)
I'd like to try this out.
I did a brief search for PA streaming via UPnP to a PS3 but didn't find anything.
Could you point me in the right direction?
Thanks,

Tom...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791863</id>
	<title>You inIsensitive clo8d?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255953000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">persoNal rivalries prima donnas to</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>persoNal rivalries prima donnas to [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>persoNal rivalries prima donnas to [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801327</id>
	<title>You guys won't read Russian forums anyway, so...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255952760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hello, this is Linus Torvalds, and I pronounce PulseAudio as Pu.psh.sAddia...u..psh..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello , this is Linus Torvalds , and I pronounce PulseAudio as Pu.psh.sAddia...u..psh. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello, this is Linus Torvalds, and I pronounce PulseAudio as Pu.psh.sAddia...u..psh..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796721</id>
	<title>Re:This is why we have Macs</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1255977720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny, I know a lot of professional musicians and they're all on Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny , I know a lot of professional musicians and they 're all on Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny, I know a lot of professional musicians and they're all on Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794693</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Buelldozer</author>
	<datestamp>1255969560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Very nice but...</p><p>I shouldn't have to spend hours flailing around trying to get audio working in the year 2009. I have yet to get PA to work correctly on any hardware and on some systems I haven't been able to get it working at all.</p><p>It's ludicrous. All the finger pointing in the world won't change the fact that with Kubuntu and ALSA my audio worked out of the box almost every time. With Kubuntu and PA it's never worked correctly if at all.</p><p>Frankly it's as bad, or worse, than getting an ATI video card to work correctly.</p><p>Between video and audio I gave up on K/Ubuntu. It just wasn't worth the headaches.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very nice but...I should n't have to spend hours flailing around trying to get audio working in the year 2009 .
I have yet to get PA to work correctly on any hardware and on some systems I have n't been able to get it working at all.It 's ludicrous .
All the finger pointing in the world wo n't change the fact that with Kubuntu and ALSA my audio worked out of the box almost every time .
With Kubuntu and PA it 's never worked correctly if at all.Frankly it 's as bad , or worse , than getting an ATI video card to work correctly.Between video and audio I gave up on K/Ubuntu .
It just was n't worth the headaches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very nice but...I shouldn't have to spend hours flailing around trying to get audio working in the year 2009.
I have yet to get PA to work correctly on any hardware and on some systems I haven't been able to get it working at all.It's ludicrous.
All the finger pointing in the world won't change the fact that with Kubuntu and ALSA my audio worked out of the box almost every time.
With Kubuntu and PA it's never worked correctly if at all.Frankly it's as bad, or worse, than getting an ATI video card to work correctly.Between video and audio I gave up on K/Ubuntu.
It just wasn't worth the headaches.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801231</id>
	<title>Re:Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>bersl2</author>
	<datestamp>1255952340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Heh, I've got the inverse problem: I use Slackware and I've had to insert PulseAudio manually for quite some time, although with the upgrade to Slack 13 I just said "Fuck it" and installed GNOME SlackBuild, which has a build of a recent-enough version. Works well enough if you give it high priority and/or real-time capabilities. I've had to patch the source myself to make the damn thing understand file capabilities so that it could obtain that without suid root, PAM, PolicyKit, or dirty hacks using sudo. I'm trying to figure out whether the GSB's installation of PolicyKit will help me this time.</p><p>I feel that PulseAudio is too GNOME-centric. The example GUI tools he provides tend to require the latest and greatest version of GTK+2, which inevitably meant that I would end up having to build newer versions of everything down to glib2. I'd love to have something curses-based like alsamixer. (In fact, after adding to the preceding paragraph, I think there are more requirements on GNOME from many pieces of desktop software than there should be.)</p><p>The audio server itself taxes the ALSA drivers very much. I've had problems with my card that uses the cs46xx ALSA driver where the DSP (I think) on the card gets stuck and I lose the recording device or have a stuck playback that only goes away after a reboot (and only a cold boot will fix the recording device problem when it happens).</p><p>Though I should probably mention the caveat that the machine is overclocked (hey, it saved me hundreds of dollars).</p><p>I'm not sure how to reduce the requirement on PulseAudio for the other desktops. Maybe the pulse libraries should be dynamically loaded by every program that needs to do so. Configuring PulseAudio sure is less arcane than the black magic that is (used to be?) configuring ALSA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh , I 've got the inverse problem : I use Slackware and I 've had to insert PulseAudio manually for quite some time , although with the upgrade to Slack 13 I just said " Fuck it " and installed GNOME SlackBuild , which has a build of a recent-enough version .
Works well enough if you give it high priority and/or real-time capabilities .
I 've had to patch the source myself to make the damn thing understand file capabilities so that it could obtain that without suid root , PAM , PolicyKit , or dirty hacks using sudo .
I 'm trying to figure out whether the GSB 's installation of PolicyKit will help me this time.I feel that PulseAudio is too GNOME-centric .
The example GUI tools he provides tend to require the latest and greatest version of GTK + 2 , which inevitably meant that I would end up having to build newer versions of everything down to glib2 .
I 'd love to have something curses-based like alsamixer .
( In fact , after adding to the preceding paragraph , I think there are more requirements on GNOME from many pieces of desktop software than there should be .
) The audio server itself taxes the ALSA drivers very much .
I 've had problems with my card that uses the cs46xx ALSA driver where the DSP ( I think ) on the card gets stuck and I lose the recording device or have a stuck playback that only goes away after a reboot ( and only a cold boot will fix the recording device problem when it happens ) .Though I should probably mention the caveat that the machine is overclocked ( hey , it saved me hundreds of dollars ) .I 'm not sure how to reduce the requirement on PulseAudio for the other desktops .
Maybe the pulse libraries should be dynamically loaded by every program that needs to do so .
Configuring PulseAudio sure is less arcane than the black magic that is ( used to be ?
) configuring ALSA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh, I've got the inverse problem: I use Slackware and I've had to insert PulseAudio manually for quite some time, although with the upgrade to Slack 13 I just said "Fuck it" and installed GNOME SlackBuild, which has a build of a recent-enough version.
Works well enough if you give it high priority and/or real-time capabilities.
I've had to patch the source myself to make the damn thing understand file capabilities so that it could obtain that without suid root, PAM, PolicyKit, or dirty hacks using sudo.
I'm trying to figure out whether the GSB's installation of PolicyKit will help me this time.I feel that PulseAudio is too GNOME-centric.
The example GUI tools he provides tend to require the latest and greatest version of GTK+2, which inevitably meant that I would end up having to build newer versions of everything down to glib2.
I'd love to have something curses-based like alsamixer.
(In fact, after adding to the preceding paragraph, I think there are more requirements on GNOME from many pieces of desktop software than there should be.
)The audio server itself taxes the ALSA drivers very much.
I've had problems with my card that uses the cs46xx ALSA driver where the DSP (I think) on the card gets stuck and I lose the recording device or have a stuck playback that only goes away after a reboot (and only a cold boot will fix the recording device problem when it happens).Though I should probably mention the caveat that the machine is overclocked (hey, it saved me hundreds of dollars).I'm not sure how to reduce the requirement on PulseAudio for the other desktops.
Maybe the pulse libraries should be dynamically loaded by every program that needs to do so.
Configuring PulseAudio sure is less arcane than the black magic that is (used to be?
) configuring ALSA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792029</id>
	<title>Re:10 years ago, sound DID work reliably in Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255954740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And.. I should get off your lawn.. right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And.. I should get off your lawn.. right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And.. I should get off your lawn.. right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797675</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>vivaelamor</author>
	<datestamp>1255981380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am unsure where plain ALSA is failing that OSS4 isn't except in limited cases, perhaps where a device is further ahead in support? I hope you submitted details of your problems to the ALSA devs.</p><p>With regards to Pulseaudio, it uses the hardware in a different way to the OSS4 and ALSA APIs which is why you are unlikely to see a lot of the long term benefits of Pulseaudio ever crop up in OSS4 or plain ALSA. Because of the way Pulseaudio uses the sound hardware (a way that does make sense in the long term strategy of making audio perfect in all use cases with one system), issues crop up that didn't before such as drivers providing <a href="http://pulseaudio.org/ticket/435#comment:6" title="pulseaudio.org">bad timing information</a> [pulseaudio.org], which you can see only matters if the audio system wants to be more efficient rather than settling for just working. <a href="http://pulseaudio.org/wiki/BrokenSoundDrivers" title="pulseaudio.org">There is a page summarising known bad drivers and what can be done about them</a> [pulseaudio.org].</p><p>My impression of most of the negative posts is that people are unhappy using a system that has not been thoroughly tested. That is a fine sentiment but I worry that it is leading to a conclusion that Pulseaudio offers nothing worth the hassle which I can assure you is far from the truth if people truly want a system that compares (or beats into submission) that found on Windows and OSX. OSS4 does not offer such a system and shows little intention of ever doing so and ALSA needs these hurdles overcome for Pulseaudio to do so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am unsure where plain ALSA is failing that OSS4 is n't except in limited cases , perhaps where a device is further ahead in support ?
I hope you submitted details of your problems to the ALSA devs.With regards to Pulseaudio , it uses the hardware in a different way to the OSS4 and ALSA APIs which is why you are unlikely to see a lot of the long term benefits of Pulseaudio ever crop up in OSS4 or plain ALSA .
Because of the way Pulseaudio uses the sound hardware ( a way that does make sense in the long term strategy of making audio perfect in all use cases with one system ) , issues crop up that did n't before such as drivers providing bad timing information [ pulseaudio.org ] , which you can see only matters if the audio system wants to be more efficient rather than settling for just working .
There is a page summarising known bad drivers and what can be done about them [ pulseaudio.org ] .My impression of most of the negative posts is that people are unhappy using a system that has not been thoroughly tested .
That is a fine sentiment but I worry that it is leading to a conclusion that Pulseaudio offers nothing worth the hassle which I can assure you is far from the truth if people truly want a system that compares ( or beats into submission ) that found on Windows and OSX .
OSS4 does not offer such a system and shows little intention of ever doing so and ALSA needs these hurdles overcome for Pulseaudio to do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am unsure where plain ALSA is failing that OSS4 isn't except in limited cases, perhaps where a device is further ahead in support?
I hope you submitted details of your problems to the ALSA devs.With regards to Pulseaudio, it uses the hardware in a different way to the OSS4 and ALSA APIs which is why you are unlikely to see a lot of the long term benefits of Pulseaudio ever crop up in OSS4 or plain ALSA.
Because of the way Pulseaudio uses the sound hardware (a way that does make sense in the long term strategy of making audio perfect in all use cases with one system), issues crop up that didn't before such as drivers providing bad timing information [pulseaudio.org], which you can see only matters if the audio system wants to be more efficient rather than settling for just working.
There is a page summarising known bad drivers and what can be done about them [pulseaudio.org].My impression of most of the negative posts is that people are unhappy using a system that has not been thoroughly tested.
That is a fine sentiment but I worry that it is leading to a conclusion that Pulseaudio offers nothing worth the hassle which I can assure you is far from the truth if people truly want a system that compares (or beats into submission) that found on Windows and OSX.
OSS4 does not offer such a system and shows little intention of ever doing so and ALSA needs these hurdles overcome for Pulseaudio to do so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791887</id>
	<title>Re:Why do I care where the bugs are?</title>
	<author>Wonko the Sane</author>
	<datestamp>1255953240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So what's the benefit of PulseAudio again?</p></div></blockquote><p>Besides your regular set of speakers you also have a webcam with a microphone and a USB or Bluetooth headset and you want the inputs and outputs to get routed to the correct applications.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So what 's the benefit of PulseAudio again ? Besides your regular set of speakers you also have a webcam with a microphone and a USB or Bluetooth headset and you want the inputs and outputs to get routed to the correct applications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what's the benefit of PulseAudio again?Besides your regular set of speakers you also have a webcam with a microphone and a USB or Bluetooth headset and you want the inputs and outputs to get routed to the correct applications.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801085</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>defaria</author>
	<datestamp>1255951440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here's the deal. You've over-architected it! Way before you begin worrying about networking audio, UpNP, Bluetooth, and ACLs of who can play a sound where get the damn fucking thing to work in the first place! Ain't nobody ever died by having more than one sound come out at the same time. More often than not, due to all of this unmanaged complexity, the end user has no sound coming out at all. I still haven't managed to get my mic working. How how fucking hard is that?!? There's one plug, one microphone and it's plugged in. Why then can I not record anything with it? Why should there ever be any more than one selection for this fucking mic?!? Answer: There shouldn't be. It should just work. It isn't just working and it has been just working on other OSes for quite literally a decade or more.

Get the fucking basics working, down cold and (get this - a new word for you) RELIABILY FIRST!

There. I feel better now...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the deal .
You 've over-architected it !
Way before you begin worrying about networking audio , UpNP , Bluetooth , and ACLs of who can play a sound where get the damn fucking thing to work in the first place !
Ai n't nobody ever died by having more than one sound come out at the same time .
More often than not , due to all of this unmanaged complexity , the end user has no sound coming out at all .
I still have n't managed to get my mic working .
How how fucking hard is that ? ! ?
There 's one plug , one microphone and it 's plugged in .
Why then can I not record anything with it ?
Why should there ever be any more than one selection for this fucking mic ? ! ?
Answer : There should n't be .
It should just work .
It is n't just working and it has been just working on other OSes for quite literally a decade or more .
Get the fucking basics working , down cold and ( get this - a new word for you ) RELIABILY FIRST !
There. I feel better now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the deal.
You've over-architected it!
Way before you begin worrying about networking audio, UpNP, Bluetooth, and ACLs of who can play a sound where get the damn fucking thing to work in the first place!
Ain't nobody ever died by having more than one sound come out at the same time.
More often than not, due to all of this unmanaged complexity, the end user has no sound coming out at all.
I still haven't managed to get my mic working.
How how fucking hard is that?!?
There's one plug, one microphone and it's plugged in.
Why then can I not record anything with it?
Why should there ever be any more than one selection for this fucking mic?!?
Answer: There shouldn't be.
It should just work.
It isn't just working and it has been just working on other OSes for quite literally a decade or more.
Get the fucking basics working, down cold and (get this - a new word for you) RELIABILY FIRST!
There. I feel better now...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802883</id>
	<title>Re:All you really need to know</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255962300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's #11u-max form linsux, i want to commend you for telling the freetard/linux youth community what they need to hear but are too big of bitches to take it like a man! GO, PETRUS4, GO!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's # 11u-max form linsux , i want to commend you for telling the freetard/linux youth community what they need to hear but are too big of bitches to take it like a man !
GO , PETRUS4 , GO !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's #11u-max form linsux, i want to commend you for telling the freetard/linux youth community what they need to hear but are too big of bitches to take it like a man!
GO, PETRUS4, GO!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801971</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792503</id>
	<title>Re:My bug reports were ignored!</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1255959000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I looked at your bug report, and it was NOT ignored. You were asked to break it out into individual bugs and file them against the actual offending software.How can it be "totally ignored" when the primary developer engaged you in a conversation and suggested where the bugs should actually be filed (meanwhile indicating that one was fixed in a new release)? One project implementing crazy workarounds for bugs in another project is the road to madness.</p><p>Perhaps it was not responded to as you would prefer, but that's not the same as "totally ignored".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I looked at your bug report , and it was NOT ignored .
You were asked to break it out into individual bugs and file them against the actual offending software.How can it be " totally ignored " when the primary developer engaged you in a conversation and suggested where the bugs should actually be filed ( meanwhile indicating that one was fixed in a new release ) ?
One project implementing crazy workarounds for bugs in another project is the road to madness.Perhaps it was not responded to as you would prefer , but that 's not the same as " totally ignored " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I looked at your bug report, and it was NOT ignored.
You were asked to break it out into individual bugs and file them against the actual offending software.How can it be "totally ignored" when the primary developer engaged you in a conversation and suggested where the bugs should actually be filed (meanwhile indicating that one was fixed in a new release)?
One project implementing crazy workarounds for bugs in another project is the road to madness.Perhaps it was not responded to as you would prefer, but that's not the same as "totally ignored".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797779</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>colin\_s\_guthrie</author>
	<datestamp>1255981800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be honest, I've not looked much at this specifically (hence my original disclaimer!). I just know the support is there. You essentially just run paprefs and tick the right boxes and your devices should show up. I'll probably have a proper play with this sometime soon, so if you're interested, subscribe to my blog and I'll post something about it when I've got more info.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be honest , I 've not looked much at this specifically ( hence my original disclaimer ! ) .
I just know the support is there .
You essentially just run paprefs and tick the right boxes and your devices should show up .
I 'll probably have a proper play with this sometime soon , so if you 're interested , subscribe to my blog and I 'll post something about it when I 've got more info .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be honest, I've not looked much at this specifically (hence my original disclaimer!).
I just know the support is there.
You essentially just run paprefs and tick the right boxes and your devices should show up.
I'll probably have a proper play with this sometime soon, so if you're interested, subscribe to my blog and I'll post something about it when I've got more info.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797619</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255981140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"2. Pulse blameshifts all it's problems to apps and drivers. Ok, apps (open source ones anyway) will eventually get fixed. Drivers won't."</p><p>Saying the problem is in the kernel and it should be fixed there is not blame shifting, it is correctly identifying the problem.</p><p>A rather large hole is blown in your theory that drivers won't be fixed by the fact that they have been, are being, and will be fixed. Red Hat pays Jaroslav Kysela, and Novell pays Takashi Iwai, to do exactly this. Jaroslav, working together with Lennart, has fixed rather a lot of ALSA driver bugs that were exposed by PA already. They continue to work on fixing more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" 2 .
Pulse blameshifts all it 's problems to apps and drivers .
Ok , apps ( open source ones anyway ) will eventually get fixed .
Drivers wo n't .
" Saying the problem is in the kernel and it should be fixed there is not blame shifting , it is correctly identifying the problem.A rather large hole is blown in your theory that drivers wo n't be fixed by the fact that they have been , are being , and will be fixed .
Red Hat pays Jaroslav Kysela , and Novell pays Takashi Iwai , to do exactly this .
Jaroslav , working together with Lennart , has fixed rather a lot of ALSA driver bugs that were exposed by PA already .
They continue to work on fixing more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"2.
Pulse blameshifts all it's problems to apps and drivers.
Ok, apps (open source ones anyway) will eventually get fixed.
Drivers won't.
"Saying the problem is in the kernel and it should be fixed there is not blame shifting, it is correctly identifying the problem.A rather large hole is blown in your theory that drivers won't be fixed by the fact that they have been, are being, and will be fixed.
Red Hat pays Jaroslav Kysela, and Novell pays Takashi Iwai, to do exactly this.
Jaroslav, working together with Lennart, has fixed rather a lot of ALSA driver bugs that were exposed by PA already.
They continue to work on fixing more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792527</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>jelle</author>
	<datestamp>1255959120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right, good to see I'm not the only one that has found that pulseaudio (and arts and esound before that) creates more problems than it fixes, today.</p><p>Maybe those future features are cool, but I have not seen them work yet, and I don't want those features more than the headaches that pulseaudio gives today.</p><p>Compare video and 'compositing', and '3d effects'. Luckily, that works well for me now, but it didn't in the past, and still doesn't work (completely) for many people. When compositing or 3d effects don't work for your system, then either is has already been switched off automatically, or you can switch it off easily in the system settings (and even with a special three-finger salute (alt-shift-f12)), and you system will work as if compositing and 3d effect never existed. It never breaks video on your system.</p><p>That's the successful way of making such an invasive, and initially often broken, improvement in a service. Nobody got angry at compositing and 3d effects, except when they wanted it and couldn't use it because it didnt' work (well) on their system, but at least then their systems worked fine without it, they just didn't get the features it gave.</p><p>Some of the people who where experiencing problems with those feature were able to test with it and report problems/bugs in detail to the developers, and still be able use their systems in daily use after disabling the features, providing useful feedback to the developers, instead of providing hordes of angry, unhelpful, users that the developers needed to 'defend' themselves from.</p><p>That's how pulseaudio should be.</p><p>Pulseaudio today has no place in a distribution other than an optional addon for people who want it, or at the very least, it must be possible to completely and utterly disable it with a simple, easy to find, single checkbox in the sound configuration menu of the system settings program. In ubuntu, it is installed by default and is listed as required in the dependencies and build-deps of too many packages, which it shouldn't, because 'it breaks stuff'. And after you have it, it's a major pain to try to disable or uninstall.</p><p>I find that my audio works fine without pulseaudio, so why would I have to use a still buggy program under development that is messing around with my audio, using up memory, using CPU, adding latency, causing audio to be choppy sometimes, and most of all, making applications that try to use audio be silent or sometimes even hang. What is up with kde that every time I click on a pulldown menu, that it needs to call a pulseaudio function? (replace<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/bin/pulseaudio with a script that does 'sleep 5' and killall pulseaudio, and you'll see what I mean). Where else is there pulseaudio overhead that makes the desktop programs less responsive?</p><p>Perhaps pulseaudio itself is still buggy, but then it shouldn't be enabled by default and in so mamy package's required 'build dependencies', it should only be enabled for people who specifically choose it, and when building a package, it should not be listed in the build-deps.</p><p>Pehaps it can't be fixed without first changing thing elsewhere (kernel, sound drivers?), but then it's the same conclusion; It's still not ready for prime time. Fix what needs to be fixed first.</p><p>Perhaps it can't be fixed ever, then it should be removed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , good to see I 'm not the only one that has found that pulseaudio ( and arts and esound before that ) creates more problems than it fixes , today.Maybe those future features are cool , but I have not seen them work yet , and I do n't want those features more than the headaches that pulseaudio gives today.Compare video and 'compositing ' , and '3d effects' .
Luckily , that works well for me now , but it did n't in the past , and still does n't work ( completely ) for many people .
When compositing or 3d effects do n't work for your system , then either is has already been switched off automatically , or you can switch it off easily in the system settings ( and even with a special three-finger salute ( alt-shift-f12 ) ) , and you system will work as if compositing and 3d effect never existed .
It never breaks video on your system.That 's the successful way of making such an invasive , and initially often broken , improvement in a service .
Nobody got angry at compositing and 3d effects , except when they wanted it and could n't use it because it didnt ' work ( well ) on their system , but at least then their systems worked fine without it , they just did n't get the features it gave.Some of the people who where experiencing problems with those feature were able to test with it and report problems/bugs in detail to the developers , and still be able use their systems in daily use after disabling the features , providing useful feedback to the developers , instead of providing hordes of angry , unhelpful , users that the developers needed to 'defend ' themselves from.That 's how pulseaudio should be.Pulseaudio today has no place in a distribution other than an optional addon for people who want it , or at the very least , it must be possible to completely and utterly disable it with a simple , easy to find , single checkbox in the sound configuration menu of the system settings program .
In ubuntu , it is installed by default and is listed as required in the dependencies and build-deps of too many packages , which it should n't , because 'it breaks stuff' .
And after you have it , it 's a major pain to try to disable or uninstall.I find that my audio works fine without pulseaudio , so why would I have to use a still buggy program under development that is messing around with my audio , using up memory , using CPU , adding latency , causing audio to be choppy sometimes , and most of all , making applications that try to use audio be silent or sometimes even hang .
What is up with kde that every time I click on a pulldown menu , that it needs to call a pulseaudio function ?
( replace /usr/bin/pulseaudio with a script that does 'sleep 5 ' and killall pulseaudio , and you 'll see what I mean ) .
Where else is there pulseaudio overhead that makes the desktop programs less responsive ? Perhaps pulseaudio itself is still buggy , but then it should n't be enabled by default and in so mamy package 's required 'build dependencies ' , it should only be enabled for people who specifically choose it , and when building a package , it should not be listed in the build-deps.Pehaps it ca n't be fixed without first changing thing elsewhere ( kernel , sound drivers ?
) , but then it 's the same conclusion ; It 's still not ready for prime time .
Fix what needs to be fixed first.Perhaps it ca n't be fixed ever , then it should be removed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, good to see I'm not the only one that has found that pulseaudio (and arts and esound before that) creates more problems than it fixes, today.Maybe those future features are cool, but I have not seen them work yet, and I don't want those features more than the headaches that pulseaudio gives today.Compare video and 'compositing', and '3d effects'.
Luckily, that works well for me now, but it didn't in the past, and still doesn't work (completely) for many people.
When compositing or 3d effects don't work for your system, then either is has already been switched off automatically, or you can switch it off easily in the system settings (and even with a special three-finger salute (alt-shift-f12)), and you system will work as if compositing and 3d effect never existed.
It never breaks video on your system.That's the successful way of making such an invasive, and initially often broken, improvement in a service.
Nobody got angry at compositing and 3d effects, except when they wanted it and couldn't use it because it didnt' work (well) on their system, but at least then their systems worked fine without it, they just didn't get the features it gave.Some of the people who where experiencing problems with those feature were able to test with it and report problems/bugs in detail to the developers, and still be able use their systems in daily use after disabling the features, providing useful feedback to the developers, instead of providing hordes of angry, unhelpful, users that the developers needed to 'defend' themselves from.That's how pulseaudio should be.Pulseaudio today has no place in a distribution other than an optional addon for people who want it, or at the very least, it must be possible to completely and utterly disable it with a simple, easy to find, single checkbox in the sound configuration menu of the system settings program.
In ubuntu, it is installed by default and is listed as required in the dependencies and build-deps of too many packages, which it shouldn't, because 'it breaks stuff'.
And after you have it, it's a major pain to try to disable or uninstall.I find that my audio works fine without pulseaudio, so why would I have to use a still buggy program under development that is messing around with my audio, using up memory, using CPU, adding latency, causing audio to be choppy sometimes, and most of all, making applications that try to use audio be silent or sometimes even hang.
What is up with kde that every time I click on a pulldown menu, that it needs to call a pulseaudio function?
(replace /usr/bin/pulseaudio with a script that does 'sleep 5' and killall pulseaudio, and you'll see what I mean).
Where else is there pulseaudio overhead that makes the desktop programs less responsive?Perhaps pulseaudio itself is still buggy, but then it shouldn't be enabled by default and in so mamy package's required 'build dependencies', it should only be enabled for people who specifically choose it, and when building a package, it should not be listed in the build-deps.Pehaps it can't be fixed without first changing thing elsewhere (kernel, sound drivers?
), but then it's the same conclusion; It's still not ready for prime time.
Fix what needs to be fixed first.Perhaps it can't be fixed ever, then it should be removed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791481</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797039</id>
	<title>You lucky</title>
	<author>Mateo\_LeFou</author>
	<datestamp>1255978800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"As soon as I got rid of PulseAudio? It started working."</p><p>You lucky bastad!<br>As soon as *I* got rid of pulseaudio, my sounds stopped working entirely. And my wireless. Headscratcher there:<br><a href="http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1258063" title="ubuntuforums.org">http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1258063</a> [ubuntuforums.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" As soon as I got rid of PulseAudio ?
It started working .
" You lucky bastad ! As soon as * I * got rid of pulseaudio , my sounds stopped working entirely .
And my wireless .
Headscratcher there : http : //ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php ? t = 1258063 [ ubuntuforums.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"As soon as I got rid of PulseAudio?
It started working.
"You lucky bastad!As soon as *I* got rid of pulseaudio, my sounds stopped working entirely.
And my wireless.
Headscratcher there:http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1258063 [ubuntuforums.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791481</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794317</id>
	<title>Re:Why do I care where the bugs are?</title>
	<author>keithjr</author>
	<datestamp>1255967820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>But as far as I can tell, this is a bitch to set up, and I'm really not inclined to go clicking around some unintuitive menu system to set my sound up right every time I leave home or go back.</i> <br> <br>

Actually I just set this up yesterday with padevchooser.  It was remarkably intuitive once I had PA set up correctly.  The problem, of course, is that setting up PA in general is an awful experience that creates a boatload of issues with many apps.  Once it's up and stable, however, using it to pipe sound over the network seems to work like a charm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But as far as I can tell , this is a bitch to set up , and I 'm really not inclined to go clicking around some unintuitive menu system to set my sound up right every time I leave home or go back .
Actually I just set this up yesterday with padevchooser .
It was remarkably intuitive once I had PA set up correctly .
The problem , of course , is that setting up PA in general is an awful experience that creates a boatload of issues with many apps .
Once it 's up and stable , however , using it to pipe sound over the network seems to work like a charm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But as far as I can tell, this is a bitch to set up, and I'm really not inclined to go clicking around some unintuitive menu system to set my sound up right every time I leave home or go back.
Actually I just set this up yesterday with padevchooser.
It was remarkably intuitive once I had PA set up correctly.
The problem, of course, is that setting up PA in general is an awful experience that creates a boatload of issues with many apps.
Once it's up and stable, however, using it to pipe sound over the network seems to work like a charm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792241</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>pionzypher</author>
	<datestamp>1255956900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I hope all the Ubuntu users *snip* who formed their opinions of PA back then will give PA a second chance on a well integrated setup.</p></div><p> I'm sorry, but the problems aren't resolved.  I've been running karmic for about three weeks now and have experienced the same issues with PA that I had with earlier releases of Ubuntu. For example: flash in a web page can basically disable audio on the box. lsof shows firefox as the culprit and killing ff, followed by a full restart of PA &amp; Alsa will fix the issue temporarily.  If I something else is actively using sound (audacious for example), the issue doesn't seem to manifest. <br> <br> Removing pulse and using plain alsa/esd prevents the issue from occurring as well. This can be the fault of Ubuntu but the result is still the same:  I have fewer issues if I remove PA.  <br> <br>I suppose my point is this.  As a user, I don't care if the buffering is awesome.  I don't care if the framework supports modern desktop features.  I do care if my sound works without having to jump through hoops repeatedly.  I don't hate PA, and will continue to try it out with new releases.  But I will continue to remove it after having issues.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope all the Ubuntu users * snip * who formed their opinions of PA back then will give PA a second chance on a well integrated setup .
I 'm sorry , but the problems are n't resolved .
I 've been running karmic for about three weeks now and have experienced the same issues with PA that I had with earlier releases of Ubuntu .
For example : flash in a web page can basically disable audio on the box .
lsof shows firefox as the culprit and killing ff , followed by a full restart of PA &amp; Alsa will fix the issue temporarily .
If I something else is actively using sound ( audacious for example ) , the issue does n't seem to manifest .
Removing pulse and using plain alsa/esd prevents the issue from occurring as well .
This can be the fault of Ubuntu but the result is still the same : I have fewer issues if I remove PA. I suppose my point is this .
As a user , I do n't care if the buffering is awesome .
I do n't care if the framework supports modern desktop features .
I do care if my sound works without having to jump through hoops repeatedly .
I do n't hate PA , and will continue to try it out with new releases .
But I will continue to remove it after having issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope all the Ubuntu users *snip* who formed their opinions of PA back then will give PA a second chance on a well integrated setup.
I'm sorry, but the problems aren't resolved.
I've been running karmic for about three weeks now and have experienced the same issues with PA that I had with earlier releases of Ubuntu.
For example: flash in a web page can basically disable audio on the box.
lsof shows firefox as the culprit and killing ff, followed by a full restart of PA &amp; Alsa will fix the issue temporarily.
If I something else is actively using sound (audacious for example), the issue doesn't seem to manifest.
Removing pulse and using plain alsa/esd prevents the issue from occurring as well.
This can be the fault of Ubuntu but the result is still the same:  I have fewer issues if I remove PA.   I suppose my point is this.
As a user, I don't care if the buffering is awesome.
I don't care if the framework supports modern desktop features.
I do care if my sound works without having to jump through hoops repeatedly.
I don't hate PA, and will continue to try it out with new releases.
But I will continue to remove it after having issues.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791573</id>
	<title>The Vista Defense!</title>
	<author>Beelzebud</author>
	<datestamp>1255949400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I never thought I'd see a Linux advocate use the Vista Defense!   It's the drivers, it's the software, it's something, but it's not my code!
<br>
<br>
At least with Vista the problems with video drivers, and various other hardware devices was sorted out within a couple of months.   In Linux the way audio is handled is an absolute mess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I never thought I 'd see a Linux advocate use the Vista Defense !
It 's the drivers , it 's the software , it 's something , but it 's not my code !
At least with Vista the problems with video drivers , and various other hardware devices was sorted out within a couple of months .
In Linux the way audio is handled is an absolute mess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never thought I'd see a Linux advocate use the Vista Defense!
It's the drivers, it's the software, it's something, but it's not my code!
At least with Vista the problems with video drivers, and various other hardware devices was sorted out within a couple of months.
In Linux the way audio is handled is an absolute mess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792537</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>meow27</author>
	<datestamp>1255959180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>thats funny, because alsa and OSS give me that problem</htmltext>
<tokenext>thats funny , because alsa and OSS give me that problem</tokentext>
<sentencetext>thats funny, because alsa and OSS give me that problem</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795615</id>
	<title>Re:The Vista Defense!</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255973340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>right, because obviously it's completely pointless to identify where the problem lies before trying to fix it. Lennart's definitely saying 'the bug is in the kernel so let's not fix it', that's absolutely his position. It would make far more sense for us to say 'I don't CARE if the bug's in the kernel, go fix it in PulseAudio!' That would be a great way to write sensible and reliable software.</p><p>Or, wait, we could accurately identify when the bugs are in the kernel and then \_fix them in the freaking kernel\_, just like Lennart and Jaroslav (Red Hat's kernel audio developer) are doing. That would just be crazy, though. It'd never work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>right , because obviously it 's completely pointless to identify where the problem lies before trying to fix it .
Lennart 's definitely saying 'the bug is in the kernel so let 's not fix it ' , that 's absolutely his position .
It would make far more sense for us to say 'I do n't CARE if the bug 's in the kernel , go fix it in PulseAudio !
' That would be a great way to write sensible and reliable software.Or , wait , we could accurately identify when the bugs are in the kernel and then \ _fix them in the freaking kernel \ _ , just like Lennart and Jaroslav ( Red Hat 's kernel audio developer ) are doing .
That would just be crazy , though .
It 'd never work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>right, because obviously it's completely pointless to identify where the problem lies before trying to fix it.
Lennart's definitely saying 'the bug is in the kernel so let's not fix it', that's absolutely his position.
It would make far more sense for us to say 'I don't CARE if the bug's in the kernel, go fix it in PulseAudio!
' That would be a great way to write sensible and reliable software.Or, wait, we could accurately identify when the bugs are in the kernel and then \_fix them in the freaking kernel\_, just like Lennart and Jaroslav (Red Hat's kernel audio developer) are doing.
That would just be crazy, though.
It'd never work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791573</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791269</id>
	<title>Useless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255945440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The idea is great. PulseAudio is an excellent solution for networked audio and thin unix clients. Now the problem is the people and the distros installing it by default on a desktop where it is utterly useless. No matter how close to bug-free it is, it is an unneeded source of bugs in that case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The idea is great .
PulseAudio is an excellent solution for networked audio and thin unix clients .
Now the problem is the people and the distros installing it by default on a desktop where it is utterly useless .
No matter how close to bug-free it is , it is an unneeded source of bugs in that case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idea is great.
PulseAudio is an excellent solution for networked audio and thin unix clients.
Now the problem is the people and the distros installing it by default on a desktop where it is utterly useless.
No matter how close to bug-free it is, it is an unneeded source of bugs in that case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791689</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>phantomcircuit</author>
	<datestamp>1255951200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe that he was saying PulseAudio was calling low level ALSA apis that are not often used and as such many drivers have never actually been widely tested.  So PulseAudio is causing the drivers to crash.</p><p>I do not believe he was saying that an application connected to PulseAudio should not be able to crash PulseAudio.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe that he was saying PulseAudio was calling low level ALSA apis that are not often used and as such many drivers have never actually been widely tested .
So PulseAudio is causing the drivers to crash.I do not believe he was saying that an application connected to PulseAudio should not be able to crash PulseAudio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe that he was saying PulseAudio was calling low level ALSA apis that are not often used and as such many drivers have never actually been widely tested.
So PulseAudio is causing the drivers to crash.I do not believe he was saying that an application connected to PulseAudio should not be able to crash PulseAudio.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794551</id>
	<title>Re:Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>phision</author>
	<datestamp>1255968840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>--nodeps<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) <br>
try supplying the option of your package manager to ignore the dependancies and everything shall be fixed.<br> <br>

As for the article - I also got rid of pulseaudio, although it kinda worked for me. I just wanted to be sure, that no re-sampling/mixing/sw volume adjustment took place. All this processing distorts the stream, and the quality you get is lower than with the old "single-app-blocks-sound-card" OSS. When I play a movie or music I do NOT want any other sounds mixed in.<br>
The only use-case when I need mixing is when I play some music as a background and I want to hear my IM notifications. So, it will be best if I can switch easily (automatically?) between the two modes. Pulseaudio does not have this ability, that's why it is gone. I may try OSSv4 though...
<br> <br>
P.S. To windows fans - in windows it is even harder to guarantee undistorted output - the directsound driver will resample and mix everything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>--nodeps : ) try supplying the option of your package manager to ignore the dependancies and everything shall be fixed .
As for the article - I also got rid of pulseaudio , although it kinda worked for me .
I just wanted to be sure , that no re-sampling/mixing/sw volume adjustment took place .
All this processing distorts the stream , and the quality you get is lower than with the old " single-app-blocks-sound-card " OSS .
When I play a movie or music I do NOT want any other sounds mixed in .
The only use-case when I need mixing is when I play some music as a background and I want to hear my IM notifications .
So , it will be best if I can switch easily ( automatically ?
) between the two modes .
Pulseaudio does not have this ability , that 's why it is gone .
I may try OSSv4 though.. . P.S. To windows fans - in windows it is even harder to guarantee undistorted output - the directsound driver will resample and mix everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>--nodeps :) 
try supplying the option of your package manager to ignore the dependancies and everything shall be fixed.
As for the article - I also got rid of pulseaudio, although it kinda worked for me.
I just wanted to be sure, that no re-sampling/mixing/sw volume adjustment took place.
All this processing distorts the stream, and the quality you get is lower than with the old "single-app-blocks-sound-card" OSS.
When I play a movie or music I do NOT want any other sounds mixed in.
The only use-case when I need mixing is when I play some music as a background and I want to hear my IM notifications.
So, it will be best if I can switch easily (automatically?
) between the two modes.
Pulseaudio does not have this ability, that's why it is gone.
I may try OSSv4 though...
 
P.S. To windows fans - in windows it is even harder to guarantee undistorted output - the directsound driver will resample and mix everything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792033</id>
	<title>Am i reading this correctly?</title>
	<author>nimbius</author>
	<datestamp>1255954740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>so, because a chip manufacturer and a phone company decided to add pulse support, that means everyone is using it?  how about Mackey, or Elation?  companies that provide light and sound solutions for major venues?</htmltext>
<tokenext>so , because a chip manufacturer and a phone company decided to add pulse support , that means everyone is using it ?
how about Mackey , or Elation ?
companies that provide light and sound solutions for major venues ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so, because a chip manufacturer and a phone company decided to add pulse support, that means everyone is using it?
how about Mackey, or Elation?
companies that provide light and sound solutions for major venues?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795979</id>
	<title>Rediculously complex!</title>
	<author>guygo</author>
	<datestamp>1255974780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am not a novice at this stuff, but neither am I an expert by any means.  However, when I can't make heads-or-tails of all the config files it seems to take just to get sound working, it demonstrates to me why Windows is still leading the market.  It figures out what hardware it has and configures it, period.  Why is this so difficult for Linux developers to understand?  Not all of us have the time nor expertise to mess with all these layers of audio crap.  I just want to hear sounds from my computer!  If people had to jump through these same hoops just to see an image on their monitor, I bet something would get done.  Why not with soumd?  Rediculous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not a novice at this stuff , but neither am I an expert by any means .
However , when I ca n't make heads-or-tails of all the config files it seems to take just to get sound working , it demonstrates to me why Windows is still leading the market .
It figures out what hardware it has and configures it , period .
Why is this so difficult for Linux developers to understand ?
Not all of us have the time nor expertise to mess with all these layers of audio crap .
I just want to hear sounds from my computer !
If people had to jump through these same hoops just to see an image on their monitor , I bet something would get done .
Why not with soumd ?
Rediculous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not a novice at this stuff, but neither am I an expert by any means.
However, when I can't make heads-or-tails of all the config files it seems to take just to get sound working, it demonstrates to me why Windows is still leading the market.
It figures out what hardware it has and configures it, period.
Why is this so difficult for Linux developers to understand?
Not all of us have the time nor expertise to mess with all these layers of audio crap.
I just want to hear sounds from my computer!
If people had to jump through these same hoops just to see an image on their monitor, I bet something would get done.
Why not with soumd?
Rediculous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795965</id>
	<title>Re:PulseAudio is broken</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255974780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"PulseAudio can't even get that right. Stutters and skips are the norm, audio systems that worked previously no longer do, and the backers of this abomination are in abject denial about it."</p><p>Where 'abject denial' is defined as documenting the issues and workarounds - <a href="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bug\_info\_PulseAudio#Playback\_problems.2C\_crackling\_or\_skipping" title="fedoraproject.org">https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bug\_info\_PulseAudio#Playback\_problems.2C\_crackling\_or\_skipping</a> [fedoraproject.org] - and fixing them (most of the issues of this kind were fixed by kernel fixes in the last six months)? Wow, it's like a whole new vocabulary world out here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" PulseAudio ca n't even get that right .
Stutters and skips are the norm , audio systems that worked previously no longer do , and the backers of this abomination are in abject denial about it .
" Where 'abject denial ' is defined as documenting the issues and workarounds - https : //fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bug \ _info \ _PulseAudio # Playback \ _problems.2C \ _crackling \ _or \ _skipping [ fedoraproject.org ] - and fixing them ( most of the issues of this kind were fixed by kernel fixes in the last six months ) ?
Wow , it 's like a whole new vocabulary world out here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"PulseAudio can't even get that right.
Stutters and skips are the norm, audio systems that worked previously no longer do, and the backers of this abomination are in abject denial about it.
"Where 'abject denial' is defined as documenting the issues and workarounds - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bug\_info\_PulseAudio#Playback\_problems.2C\_crackling\_or\_skipping [fedoraproject.org] - and fixing them (most of the issues of this kind were fixed by kernel fixes in the last six months)?
Wow, it's like a whole new vocabulary world out here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795303</id>
	<title>Re:My bug reports were ignored!</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255972200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your definition of 'totally ignored' is an interesting one:

"Comment #6 From  Lennart Poettering (lpoetter@redhat.com)  2009-08-19 11:29:50 EDT   (-) [reply] -------      Private

Nate, please file seperate bugs about seperate issues.
Please file your bug #1 against gnome-media.
Your bug #2 is probably a duplicate of bug 506075.
Your bug #3 is probably fixed in F12. We changed the mapping between percent/pixels and actual dB to make it more natural.
Please file your bug #4 against rhythmbox.
Your bug #5 is already filed.
I will ignore all other issues mentioned in comments here.

So please: seperate issues need to be posted in seperate bugs. And dn't hijack bug reports by adding comments unrelated to the original topic. Thanks.
I will close this now."

Man, if that's being totally ignored, cut me a slice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your definition of 'totally ignored ' is an interesting one : " Comment # 6 From Lennart Poettering ( lpoetter @ redhat.com ) 2009-08-19 11 : 29 : 50 EDT ( - ) [ reply ] ------- Private Nate , please file seperate bugs about seperate issues .
Please file your bug # 1 against gnome-media .
Your bug # 2 is probably a duplicate of bug 506075 .
Your bug # 3 is probably fixed in F12 .
We changed the mapping between percent/pixels and actual dB to make it more natural .
Please file your bug # 4 against rhythmbox .
Your bug # 5 is already filed .
I will ignore all other issues mentioned in comments here .
So please : seperate issues need to be posted in seperate bugs .
And d n't hijack bug reports by adding comments unrelated to the original topic .
Thanks . I will close this now .
" Man , if that 's being totally ignored , cut me a slice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your definition of 'totally ignored' is an interesting one:

"Comment #6 From  Lennart Poettering (lpoetter@redhat.com)  2009-08-19 11:29:50 EDT   (-) [reply] -------      Private

Nate, please file seperate bugs about seperate issues.
Please file your bug #1 against gnome-media.
Your bug #2 is probably a duplicate of bug 506075.
Your bug #3 is probably fixed in F12.
We changed the mapping between percent/pixels and actual dB to make it more natural.
Please file your bug #4 against rhythmbox.
Your bug #5 is already filed.
I will ignore all other issues mentioned in comments here.
So please: seperate issues need to be posted in seperate bugs.
And dn't hijack bug reports by adding comments unrelated to the original topic.
Thanks.
I will close this now.
"

Man, if that's being totally ignored, cut me a slice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791859</id>
	<title>Re:Distribution problem</title>
	<author>zdzichu</author>
	<datestamp>1255953000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You may be interested that <a href="http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/pa-in-ubuntu.html" title="0pointer.de">Ubuntu isn't the best at PA integration</a> [0pointer.de].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You may be interested that Ubuntu is n't the best at PA integration [ 0pointer.de ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may be interested that Ubuntu isn't the best at PA integration [0pointer.de].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791455</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804681</id>
	<title>Re:10 years ago, sound DID work reliably in Linux</title>
	<author>r00t</author>
	<datestamp>1255982040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>10 years ago, you couldn't play two sounds at the same time unless your card could handle it in hardware.</p></div><p>No cacophony? Sweet! Sign me up!</p><p>Unfortunately OSS version 4 (part of FreeBSD and OpenSolaris) does mix sounds. It's in the kernel too, so things JUST WORK.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, that's about when (IIRC) they started introducing cards (e.g. AC97) that could only two one or two rates or (in some cases) could only do stereo. The driver would simply refuse to handle mono or 8 kHz so you had to resample by yourself.</p></div><p>OSS 4 resamples too. FWIW, the old OSS did stereo and fast rates if you used an ioctl to request them or if you opened<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp as the device.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>10 years ago , you could n't play two sounds at the same time unless your card could handle it in hardware.No cacophony ?
Sweet ! Sign me up ! Unfortunately OSS version 4 ( part of FreeBSD and OpenSolaris ) does mix sounds .
It 's in the kernel too , so things JUST WORK.Also , that 's about when ( IIRC ) they started introducing cards ( e.g .
AC97 ) that could only two one or two rates or ( in some cases ) could only do stereo .
The driver would simply refuse to handle mono or 8 kHz so you had to resample by yourself.OSS 4 resamples too .
FWIW , the old OSS did stereo and fast rates if you used an ioctl to request them or if you opened /dev/dsp as the device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10 years ago, you couldn't play two sounds at the same time unless your card could handle it in hardware.No cacophony?
Sweet! Sign me up!Unfortunately OSS version 4 (part of FreeBSD and OpenSolaris) does mix sounds.
It's in the kernel too, so things JUST WORK.Also, that's about when (IIRC) they started introducing cards (e.g.
AC97) that could only two one or two rates or (in some cases) could only do stereo.
The driver would simply refuse to handle mono or 8 kHz so you had to resample by yourself.OSS 4 resamples too.
FWIW, the old OSS did stereo and fast rates if you used an ioctl to request them or if you opened /dev/dsp as the device.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792027</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791777</id>
	<title>Re:Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>Jeremy Visser</author>
	<datestamp>1255952040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>Not that I blame you for not noticing, but have you seen<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/share/alsa/alsa.conf? Find these lines:<br><br>files [<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; "/usr/share/alsa/pulse.conf"<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; "/usr/share/alsa/bluetooth.conf"<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; "/etc/asound.conf"<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; "~/.asoundrc"<br>]<br><br>Comment out the first with a #. Thus...<br><br>files [<br>#&nbsp; &nbsp;"/usr/share/alsa/pulse.conf"<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; "/usr/share/alsa/bluetooth.conf"<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; "/etc/asound.conf"<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; "~/.asoundrc"<br>]</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that I blame you for not noticing , but have you seen /usr/share/alsa/alsa.conf ?
Find these lines : files [     " /usr/share/alsa/pulse.conf "     " /usr/share/alsa/bluetooth.conf "     " /etc/asound.conf "     " ~ /.asoundrc " ] Comment out the first with a # .
Thus...files [ #     " /usr/share/alsa/pulse.conf "     " /usr/share/alsa/bluetooth.conf "     " /etc/asound.conf "     " ~ /.asoundrc " ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not that I blame you for not noticing, but have you seen /usr/share/alsa/alsa.conf?
Find these lines:files [    "/usr/share/alsa/pulse.conf"    "/usr/share/alsa/bluetooth.conf"    "/etc/asound.conf"    "~/.asoundrc"]Comment out the first with a #.
Thus...files [#   "/usr/share/alsa/pulse.conf"    "/usr/share/alsa/bluetooth.conf"    "/etc/asound.conf"    "~/.asoundrc"]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796819</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255978140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They can and do, and at least it wouldn't break existing sound use cases for many users and existing applications and break the one sound card with speakers plugged in standard set up in many cases. We already have OSS -&gt; ALSA and ALSA -&gt; OSS interfaces that have been around for some time. PulseAudio reimplementing ALSA to look like ALSA is just plain silly. There's no point in solving some problems if you break a ton of others that have been solved previously.</p></div><p>You don't even know exactly what ALSA is. PulseAudio doesn't reimplement ALSA as kernel driver and kernel interfaces, it reimplements a low-level part of alsa library, which is a default way to access kernel alsa interfaces, and wraps it to PulseAudio API. At the same time it grabs ALSA controlled hardware and in exclusive manner (unless you have a hw mixing card). What's achieved this way is software mixing. Previously dmix was doing a very similar thing. Really, what PA does is not much different from OSSv4 except the latter has mixing in kernel so it is able to better emulate legacy interfaces, like OSSv3 and parts of libAlsa API that Lennart described as hard to virtualize and recommended not to use. However on top of userspace sound mixer it's easier to implement many fancy features that some people find usable, and are missing from any other Linux/Unix audio stack (including per-app volume, stream migration, Bluetooth audio support, network audio transfer etc.).</p><p>Some time ago sound servers sucked (except maybe dmix) because kernel part wasn't ready for it nor were they well designed. However Pulse Audio uses relatively new kernel features to avoid dropping and be as gentle as possible wrt. power consumption. At the same time it is able to adjust latency dynamically and provide very low latency if a client app requires it. These features are what makes PA a killer sound server, one that actually solves the old "Linux audio sucks" problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They can and do , and at least it would n't break existing sound use cases for many users and existing applications and break the one sound card with speakers plugged in standard set up in many cases .
We already have OSS - &gt; ALSA and ALSA - &gt; OSS interfaces that have been around for some time .
PulseAudio reimplementing ALSA to look like ALSA is just plain silly .
There 's no point in solving some problems if you break a ton of others that have been solved previously.You do n't even know exactly what ALSA is .
PulseAudio does n't reimplement ALSA as kernel driver and kernel interfaces , it reimplements a low-level part of alsa library , which is a default way to access kernel alsa interfaces , and wraps it to PulseAudio API .
At the same time it grabs ALSA controlled hardware and in exclusive manner ( unless you have a hw mixing card ) .
What 's achieved this way is software mixing .
Previously dmix was doing a very similar thing .
Really , what PA does is not much different from OSSv4 except the latter has mixing in kernel so it is able to better emulate legacy interfaces , like OSSv3 and parts of libAlsa API that Lennart described as hard to virtualize and recommended not to use .
However on top of userspace sound mixer it 's easier to implement many fancy features that some people find usable , and are missing from any other Linux/Unix audio stack ( including per-app volume , stream migration , Bluetooth audio support , network audio transfer etc .
) .Some time ago sound servers sucked ( except maybe dmix ) because kernel part was n't ready for it nor were they well designed .
However Pulse Audio uses relatively new kernel features to avoid dropping and be as gentle as possible wrt .
power consumption .
At the same time it is able to adjust latency dynamically and provide very low latency if a client app requires it .
These features are what makes PA a killer sound server , one that actually solves the old " Linux audio sucks " problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can and do, and at least it wouldn't break existing sound use cases for many users and existing applications and break the one sound card with speakers plugged in standard set up in many cases.
We already have OSS -&gt; ALSA and ALSA -&gt; OSS interfaces that have been around for some time.
PulseAudio reimplementing ALSA to look like ALSA is just plain silly.
There's no point in solving some problems if you break a ton of others that have been solved previously.You don't even know exactly what ALSA is.
PulseAudio doesn't reimplement ALSA as kernel driver and kernel interfaces, it reimplements a low-level part of alsa library, which is a default way to access kernel alsa interfaces, and wraps it to PulseAudio API.
At the same time it grabs ALSA controlled hardware and in exclusive manner (unless you have a hw mixing card).
What's achieved this way is software mixing.
Previously dmix was doing a very similar thing.
Really, what PA does is not much different from OSSv4 except the latter has mixing in kernel so it is able to better emulate legacy interfaces, like OSSv3 and parts of libAlsa API that Lennart described as hard to virtualize and recommended not to use.
However on top of userspace sound mixer it's easier to implement many fancy features that some people find usable, and are missing from any other Linux/Unix audio stack (including per-app volume, stream migration, Bluetooth audio support, network audio transfer etc.
).Some time ago sound servers sucked (except maybe dmix) because kernel part wasn't ready for it nor were they well designed.
However Pulse Audio uses relatively new kernel features to avoid dropping and be as gentle as possible wrt.
power consumption.
At the same time it is able to adjust latency dynamically and provide very low latency if a client app requires it.
These features are what makes PA a killer sound server, one that actually solves the old "Linux audio sucks" problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793601</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796875</id>
	<title>Re:This is the Sound of</title>
	<author>Korin43</author>
	<datestamp>1255978260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>All of the problems I ever have with PulseAudio are related to ALSA (lack of ALSA driver). I've never had a problem with Pulse itself. And some of the cool things PulseAudio does are nice, like software mixing and network sound (very useful for projects like <a href="http://www.colinux.org/" title="colinux.org">CoLinux</a> [colinux.org]). And I realize other projects have done the same thing, but the exciting thing about PulseAudio is you don't need to know that it's there for your program to work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of the problems I ever have with PulseAudio are related to ALSA ( lack of ALSA driver ) .
I 've never had a problem with Pulse itself .
And some of the cool things PulseAudio does are nice , like software mixing and network sound ( very useful for projects like CoLinux [ colinux.org ] ) .
And I realize other projects have done the same thing , but the exciting thing about PulseAudio is you do n't need to know that it 's there for your program to work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of the problems I ever have with PulseAudio are related to ALSA (lack of ALSA driver).
I've never had a problem with Pulse itself.
And some of the cool things PulseAudio does are nice, like software mixing and network sound (very useful for projects like CoLinux [colinux.org]).
And I realize other projects have done the same thing, but the exciting thing about PulseAudio is you don't need to know that it's there for your program to work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796595</id>
	<title>Re:This is why we have Macs</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1255977240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I believe the solution to any *PROFESSIONAL* Linux Audio Production issue is to just go buy a Mac.</p></div><p>"...and then you have two problems."  XD</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the solution to any * PROFESSIONAL * Linux Audio Production issue is to just go buy a Mac .
" ...and then you have two problems .
" XD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the solution to any *PROFESSIONAL* Linux Audio Production issue is to just go buy a Mac.
"...and then you have two problems.
"  XD
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792293</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>QuoteMstr</author>
	<datestamp>1255957380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>When an application can make the soundsystem stop working for all other applications, than there is a bug in the soundsystem, not just the application that caused the problem.</p></div></blockquote><p> <b>Pulseaudio is not an application</b>. It is a system component that happens to run in userspace. Why aren't you complaining that if you kill X, your desktop dies?</p><p>We're getting further and further away from the monolithic kernel model. It's something you'll just have to live with.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When an application can make the soundsystem stop working for all other applications , than there is a bug in the soundsystem , not just the application that caused the problem .
Pulseaudio is not an application .
It is a system component that happens to run in userspace .
Why are n't you complaining that if you kill X , your desktop dies ? We 're getting further and further away from the monolithic kernel model .
It 's something you 'll just have to live with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When an application can make the soundsystem stop working for all other applications, than there is a bug in the soundsystem, not just the application that caused the problem.
Pulseaudio is not an application.
It is a system component that happens to run in userspace.
Why aren't you complaining that if you kill X, your desktop dies?We're getting further and further away from the monolithic kernel model.
It's something you'll just have to live with.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791455</id>
	<title>Distribution problem</title>
	<author>LS</author>
	<datestamp>1255947720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've read in several places that the main problem with PulseAudio is not its design and implementation, but its instantiation.  Many distributions apparently do not properly set up PulseAudio, causing it to behave unexpectedly.  I found this to be the case with Ubuntu 9.04.  PulseAudio worked like crap until I followed the following directions to get it set up.  It's been working like a dream ever since:</p><p><a href="http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=789578" title="ubuntuforums.org">http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=789578</a> [ubuntuforums.org]</p><p>LS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've read in several places that the main problem with PulseAudio is not its design and implementation , but its instantiation .
Many distributions apparently do not properly set up PulseAudio , causing it to behave unexpectedly .
I found this to be the case with Ubuntu 9.04 .
PulseAudio worked like crap until I followed the following directions to get it set up .
It 's been working like a dream ever since : http : //ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php ? t = 789578 [ ubuntuforums.org ] LS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've read in several places that the main problem with PulseAudio is not its design and implementation, but its instantiation.
Many distributions apparently do not properly set up PulseAudio, causing it to behave unexpectedly.
I found this to be the case with Ubuntu 9.04.
PulseAudio worked like crap until I followed the following directions to get it set up.
It's been working like a dream ever since:http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=789578 [ubuntuforums.org]LS</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804397</id>
	<title>Linux needs pro audio support.</title>
	<author>bollox4</author>
	<datestamp>1255977180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is Linux capable of professional quality sound without glitching and problems? Absolutely! We already see Linux audio systems go hand in hand in the embeded market, and mobiles aside, even 100\% rock solid pro gear like synthesisers. <a href="http://www.mvista.com/download/case\_study\_MontaVista\_Linux\_and\_Yamaha.pdf" title="mvista.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.mvista.com/download/case\_study\_MontaVista\_Linux\_and\_Yamaha.pdf</a> [mvista.com]

Unfortunately for Linux until a reliable standard is settled upon that encourages the big boys to play, the Linux audio issues will continue. Who wants to assist a small market that cannot settle on a singular framework?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Linux capable of professional quality sound without glitching and problems ?
Absolutely ! We already see Linux audio systems go hand in hand in the embeded market , and mobiles aside , even 100 \ % rock solid pro gear like synthesisers .
http : //www.mvista.com/download/case \ _study \ _MontaVista \ _Linux \ _and \ _Yamaha.pdf [ mvista.com ] Unfortunately for Linux until a reliable standard is settled upon that encourages the big boys to play , the Linux audio issues will continue .
Who wants to assist a small market that can not settle on a singular framework ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Linux capable of professional quality sound without glitching and problems?
Absolutely! We already see Linux audio systems go hand in hand in the embeded market, and mobiles aside, even 100\% rock solid pro gear like synthesisers.
http://www.mvista.com/download/case\_study\_MontaVista\_Linux\_and\_Yamaha.pdf [mvista.com]

Unfortunately for Linux until a reliable standard is settled upon that encourages the big boys to play, the Linux audio issues will continue.
Who wants to assist a small market that cannot settle on a singular framework?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796111</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255975500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am amazed by the amount of hate being thrown here. Thank you for some clarification on a number of issues. When PA was first introduced into Ubuntu, I had some issues with it, but by the next release it worked perfectly for me with the default install. When I built my primary machine, I was very careful about what hardware went into it. I had a nightmare of a time trying to setup my audio a very particular under windows (when I still used windows years ago). In my (evidently lonely experience) PulseAudio works amazingly once it is setup. While getting it just the way I wanted might take a little bit of time, it is FAR better than my experience under Windows where opening or closing an application, plugging in or unplugging an audio device could reset or simply break my configuration. Of course it would be nice if everything just worked the way <b>I</b> want them to work, but it probably isn't what everyone else wants. Anyway, I am VERY happy with PulseAudio and just want to say thank you for your contribution, even if others won't take five minutes to google their problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am amazed by the amount of hate being thrown here .
Thank you for some clarification on a number of issues .
When PA was first introduced into Ubuntu , I had some issues with it , but by the next release it worked perfectly for me with the default install .
When I built my primary machine , I was very careful about what hardware went into it .
I had a nightmare of a time trying to setup my audio a very particular under windows ( when I still used windows years ago ) .
In my ( evidently lonely experience ) PulseAudio works amazingly once it is setup .
While getting it just the way I wanted might take a little bit of time , it is FAR better than my experience under Windows where opening or closing an application , plugging in or unplugging an audio device could reset or simply break my configuration .
Of course it would be nice if everything just worked the way I want them to work , but it probably is n't what everyone else wants .
Anyway , I am VERY happy with PulseAudio and just want to say thank you for your contribution , even if others wo n't take five minutes to google their problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am amazed by the amount of hate being thrown here.
Thank you for some clarification on a number of issues.
When PA was first introduced into Ubuntu, I had some issues with it, but by the next release it worked perfectly for me with the default install.
When I built my primary machine, I was very careful about what hardware went into it.
I had a nightmare of a time trying to setup my audio a very particular under windows (when I still used windows years ago).
In my (evidently lonely experience) PulseAudio works amazingly once it is setup.
While getting it just the way I wanted might take a little bit of time, it is FAR better than my experience under Windows where opening or closing an application, plugging in or unplugging an audio device could reset or simply break my configuration.
Of course it would be nice if everything just worked the way I want them to work, but it probably isn't what everyone else wants.
Anyway, I am VERY happy with PulseAudio and just want to say thank you for your contribution, even if others won't take five minutes to google their problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802909</id>
	<title>Re:All you really need to know</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255962600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Let's see how many of the Generation Y, amateur, snot nosed brats I get making a response to this post</i></p><p>I predict the answer will be: none.  No one really cares what you think about this stuff.  I sure don't.</p><p>I see two possibilities here.  Either you are just trolling, in which case shame on you for wasting our time; or else you really believe all this ranting stuff you wrote, in which case you need to gain some technical maturity.  Ubuntu didn't work for you, thus it must be junk for everyone.  You don't understand why PulseAudio is designed the way it is, therefore it must be the work of an idiot, and anyone who defends it must be an idiot.  You propose scrapping GNOME entirely, as if that were even possible, let alone a good idea.  And you don't offer any facts or even reasoned debate about any of this.  You don't like the design of GNOME, ergo it is "aping Windows", ergo it must be scrapped.</p><p>Whether you were trolling or serious, I have this bit of advice for you: grow up.</p><p>steveha</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see how many of the Generation Y , amateur , snot nosed brats I get making a response to this postI predict the answer will be : none .
No one really cares what you think about this stuff .
I sure do n't.I see two possibilities here .
Either you are just trolling , in which case shame on you for wasting our time ; or else you really believe all this ranting stuff you wrote , in which case you need to gain some technical maturity .
Ubuntu did n't work for you , thus it must be junk for everyone .
You do n't understand why PulseAudio is designed the way it is , therefore it must be the work of an idiot , and anyone who defends it must be an idiot .
You propose scrapping GNOME entirely , as if that were even possible , let alone a good idea .
And you do n't offer any facts or even reasoned debate about any of this .
You do n't like the design of GNOME , ergo it is " aping Windows " , ergo it must be scrapped.Whether you were trolling or serious , I have this bit of advice for you : grow up.steveha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see how many of the Generation Y, amateur, snot nosed brats I get making a response to this postI predict the answer will be: none.
No one really cares what you think about this stuff.
I sure don't.I see two possibilities here.
Either you are just trolling, in which case shame on you for wasting our time; or else you really believe all this ranting stuff you wrote, in which case you need to gain some technical maturity.
Ubuntu didn't work for you, thus it must be junk for everyone.
You don't understand why PulseAudio is designed the way it is, therefore it must be the work of an idiot, and anyone who defends it must be an idiot.
You propose scrapping GNOME entirely, as if that were even possible, let alone a good idea.
And you don't offer any facts or even reasoned debate about any of this.
You don't like the design of GNOME, ergo it is "aping Windows", ergo it must be scrapped.Whether you were trolling or serious, I have this bit of advice for you: grow up.steveha</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801971</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799611</id>
	<title>All you really need to know</title>
	<author>steveha</author>
	<datestamp>1255944720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's all you really need to know:</p><p>The Linux world is converging on two sound solutions: JACK and PulseAudio.  Both of them solve important problems.</p><p>When you want audio with absolute minimum latency, like for professional audio recording, you want JACK.  You also want to be plugged in to the wall, not running on battery power, because JACK will keep your CPU busy.</p><p>If you want to run Linux on a modern laptop or netbook, you want PulseAudio.  PA is designed to let your CPU sleep as much as possible, and thus save battery life.</p><p>I can hear some of you now saying "I don't want any sound daemon; I want to run my apps against the bare metal."  In that case, I hope you never want to hear sounds from more than one app at a time.  Modern motherboards tend to have very simple audio devices, with absolutely no hardware support for mixing audio, or even sample-rate-converting audio.  You might have a single output device that accepts a single stream of samples at 24-bit 48000 Hz, full stop.  "Oh, I'll just let ALSA Dmix handle it."  Why is Dmix good and PulseAudio bad?  Both are user-space solutions; and PulseAudio can do anything Dmix can do, plus more.</p><p>Or maybe: "I'll just run OSS4, which does sample-rate-conversion."  Yeah -- in the kernel.  Not the right place for it; kernel drivers are not supposed to use floating-point math.  OSS4 tries to do <em>everything</em> in the kernel, and uses IOCTLs to set parameters in the driver.  I don't want bugs in the audio stack to cause kernel panics; I want complicated audio mixing and conversion to happen in user space.  (With realtime priority set, thank you very much.)</p><p>PulseAudio isn't perfect, but the basic ideas behind it are sound, which is why the whole Linux world is adopting it.  We really do want a user-space daemon to do all the stuff that isn't appropriate for in-kernel drivers to do.  If we wanted to throw away everything and start over from scratch, we would pretty much re-invent PulseAudio as the best solution; look at the user-space daemons used in Mac OS X and Microsoft Vista/Windows 7.  Given that reality, how can we best proceed: by throwing out PulseAudio and starting over, or by fixing the remaining bugs in PulseAudio.  I vote for fixing PulseAudio, and so has the rest of the Linux world, which is why PulseAudio is getting universally adopted.</p><p>The worst of the problems are over by now.  To clean up the Linux audio mess, we have had to fix bugs in ALSA drivers, fix bugs in audio applications, fix bugs in PulseAudio, and get the distributions to setup PulseAudio correctly.  It has been painful but we are well past the worst of it.</p><p>If you can solve your specific current needs on your specific current hardware by disabling PulseAudio, then fine, do that.  But don't generalize this into thinking that PulseAudio should be removed from all systems and abandoned.</p><p>I think Lennart should release a new audio system called "Audio Daemon 7".  Microsoft seems to be doing well with "Windows 7", by dropping the tainted name "Vista".  At this point, the name "PulseAudio" seems pretty tainted.  But PA itself is the Right Thing To Do and it's becoming the standard.</p><p>steveha</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's all you really need to know : The Linux world is converging on two sound solutions : JACK and PulseAudio .
Both of them solve important problems.When you want audio with absolute minimum latency , like for professional audio recording , you want JACK .
You also want to be plugged in to the wall , not running on battery power , because JACK will keep your CPU busy.If you want to run Linux on a modern laptop or netbook , you want PulseAudio .
PA is designed to let your CPU sleep as much as possible , and thus save battery life.I can hear some of you now saying " I do n't want any sound daemon ; I want to run my apps against the bare metal .
" In that case , I hope you never want to hear sounds from more than one app at a time .
Modern motherboards tend to have very simple audio devices , with absolutely no hardware support for mixing audio , or even sample-rate-converting audio .
You might have a single output device that accepts a single stream of samples at 24-bit 48000 Hz , full stop .
" Oh , I 'll just let ALSA Dmix handle it .
" Why is Dmix good and PulseAudio bad ?
Both are user-space solutions ; and PulseAudio can do anything Dmix can do , plus more.Or maybe : " I 'll just run OSS4 , which does sample-rate-conversion .
" Yeah -- in the kernel .
Not the right place for it ; kernel drivers are not supposed to use floating-point math .
OSS4 tries to do everything in the kernel , and uses IOCTLs to set parameters in the driver .
I do n't want bugs in the audio stack to cause kernel panics ; I want complicated audio mixing and conversion to happen in user space .
( With realtime priority set , thank you very much .
) PulseAudio is n't perfect , but the basic ideas behind it are sound , which is why the whole Linux world is adopting it .
We really do want a user-space daemon to do all the stuff that is n't appropriate for in-kernel drivers to do .
If we wanted to throw away everything and start over from scratch , we would pretty much re-invent PulseAudio as the best solution ; look at the user-space daemons used in Mac OS X and Microsoft Vista/Windows 7 .
Given that reality , how can we best proceed : by throwing out PulseAudio and starting over , or by fixing the remaining bugs in PulseAudio .
I vote for fixing PulseAudio , and so has the rest of the Linux world , which is why PulseAudio is getting universally adopted.The worst of the problems are over by now .
To clean up the Linux audio mess , we have had to fix bugs in ALSA drivers , fix bugs in audio applications , fix bugs in PulseAudio , and get the distributions to setup PulseAudio correctly .
It has been painful but we are well past the worst of it.If you can solve your specific current needs on your specific current hardware by disabling PulseAudio , then fine , do that .
But do n't generalize this into thinking that PulseAudio should be removed from all systems and abandoned.I think Lennart should release a new audio system called " Audio Daemon 7 " .
Microsoft seems to be doing well with " Windows 7 " , by dropping the tainted name " Vista " .
At this point , the name " PulseAudio " seems pretty tainted .
But PA itself is the Right Thing To Do and it 's becoming the standard.steveha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's all you really need to know:The Linux world is converging on two sound solutions: JACK and PulseAudio.
Both of them solve important problems.When you want audio with absolute minimum latency, like for professional audio recording, you want JACK.
You also want to be plugged in to the wall, not running on battery power, because JACK will keep your CPU busy.If you want to run Linux on a modern laptop or netbook, you want PulseAudio.
PA is designed to let your CPU sleep as much as possible, and thus save battery life.I can hear some of you now saying "I don't want any sound daemon; I want to run my apps against the bare metal.
"  In that case, I hope you never want to hear sounds from more than one app at a time.
Modern motherboards tend to have very simple audio devices, with absolutely no hardware support for mixing audio, or even sample-rate-converting audio.
You might have a single output device that accepts a single stream of samples at 24-bit 48000 Hz, full stop.
"Oh, I'll just let ALSA Dmix handle it.
"  Why is Dmix good and PulseAudio bad?
Both are user-space solutions; and PulseAudio can do anything Dmix can do, plus more.Or maybe: "I'll just run OSS4, which does sample-rate-conversion.
"  Yeah -- in the kernel.
Not the right place for it; kernel drivers are not supposed to use floating-point math.
OSS4 tries to do everything in the kernel, and uses IOCTLs to set parameters in the driver.
I don't want bugs in the audio stack to cause kernel panics; I want complicated audio mixing and conversion to happen in user space.
(With realtime priority set, thank you very much.
)PulseAudio isn't perfect, but the basic ideas behind it are sound, which is why the whole Linux world is adopting it.
We really do want a user-space daemon to do all the stuff that isn't appropriate for in-kernel drivers to do.
If we wanted to throw away everything and start over from scratch, we would pretty much re-invent PulseAudio as the best solution; look at the user-space daemons used in Mac OS X and Microsoft Vista/Windows 7.
Given that reality, how can we best proceed: by throwing out PulseAudio and starting over, or by fixing the remaining bugs in PulseAudio.
I vote for fixing PulseAudio, and so has the rest of the Linux world, which is why PulseAudio is getting universally adopted.The worst of the problems are over by now.
To clean up the Linux audio mess, we have had to fix bugs in ALSA drivers, fix bugs in audio applications, fix bugs in PulseAudio, and get the distributions to setup PulseAudio correctly.
It has been painful but we are well past the worst of it.If you can solve your specific current needs on your specific current hardware by disabling PulseAudio, then fine, do that.
But don't generalize this into thinking that PulseAudio should be removed from all systems and abandoned.I think Lennart should release a new audio system called "Audio Daemon 7".
Microsoft seems to be doing well with "Windows 7", by dropping the tainted name "Vista".
At this point, the name "PulseAudio" seems pretty tainted.
But PA itself is the Right Thing To Do and it's becoming the standard.steveha</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</id>
	<title>Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255948440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree with <a href="http://insanecoding.blogspot.com/2009/06/state-of-sound-in-linux-not-so-sorry.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">the original article</a> [blogspot.com]: ALSA is the way to go, I have drivers for all cards I've thrown at it, all applications imaginable that support ALSA work just fine for me, and no, as a OSS-to-ALSA changeover survivor, I don't want to change everything to another frigging API <em>yet again</em> (much less back to OSS), thank you very much. And while PulseAudio is less than perfect right now, I recognise it has uses.</p><p>But that's just that - <em>it has uses.</em> In its current state, I'm not using it for plain-ordinary music playing on my Debian system. I don't think it's ready enough as a common day-to-day audio routing thing. Still too many problems.</p><p>An example case: I was <em>really</em> disappointed when I upgraded Ubuntu on an older computer (600Mhz Pentium III with 256M memory and ESS Solo 1 onboard audio, plenty good enough for OpenOffice.org and web browsing, even ran Compiz at very good performance on GeForce 2 MX =) and sound playback started to just plain suck, when it previously worked just fine with straight-up app-to-ALSA playback. The machine just wasn't fast enough to route stuff through an application, plain and simple. And now Ubuntu foisted PulseAudio in. Uninstall PulseAudio = uninstall entire frigging GNOME desktop. I kept trying to tell it "no, I just want ALSA playback" in sound settings. No dice, pulseaudio kept respawning and hogging audio device all to itself. I kept disabling shit from all places imaginable. No dice, pulseaudio kept respawning. Now, I'm going insane (an unrelated story). I'll be armed with GCC and some dummy binaries. Mheheh. Muahaha. MUAHAHAHAHA.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...any better ideas?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree with the original article [ blogspot.com ] : ALSA is the way to go , I have drivers for all cards I 've thrown at it , all applications imaginable that support ALSA work just fine for me , and no , as a OSS-to-ALSA changeover survivor , I do n't want to change everything to another frigging API yet again ( much less back to OSS ) , thank you very much .
And while PulseAudio is less than perfect right now , I recognise it has uses.But that 's just that - it has uses .
In its current state , I 'm not using it for plain-ordinary music playing on my Debian system .
I do n't think it 's ready enough as a common day-to-day audio routing thing .
Still too many problems.An example case : I was really disappointed when I upgraded Ubuntu on an older computer ( 600Mhz Pentium III with 256M memory and ESS Solo 1 onboard audio , plenty good enough for OpenOffice.org and web browsing , even ran Compiz at very good performance on GeForce 2 MX = ) and sound playback started to just plain suck , when it previously worked just fine with straight-up app-to-ALSA playback .
The machine just was n't fast enough to route stuff through an application , plain and simple .
And now Ubuntu foisted PulseAudio in .
Uninstall PulseAudio = uninstall entire frigging GNOME desktop .
I kept trying to tell it " no , I just want ALSA playback " in sound settings .
No dice , pulseaudio kept respawning and hogging audio device all to itself .
I kept disabling shit from all places imaginable .
No dice , pulseaudio kept respawning .
Now , I 'm going insane ( an unrelated story ) .
I 'll be armed with GCC and some dummy binaries .
Mheheh. Muahaha .
MUAHAHAHAHA. ...any better ideas ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree with the original article [blogspot.com]: ALSA is the way to go, I have drivers for all cards I've thrown at it, all applications imaginable that support ALSA work just fine for me, and no, as a OSS-to-ALSA changeover survivor, I don't want to change everything to another frigging API yet again (much less back to OSS), thank you very much.
And while PulseAudio is less than perfect right now, I recognise it has uses.But that's just that - it has uses.
In its current state, I'm not using it for plain-ordinary music playing on my Debian system.
I don't think it's ready enough as a common day-to-day audio routing thing.
Still too many problems.An example case: I was really disappointed when I upgraded Ubuntu on an older computer (600Mhz Pentium III with 256M memory and ESS Solo 1 onboard audio, plenty good enough for OpenOffice.org and web browsing, even ran Compiz at very good performance on GeForce 2 MX =) and sound playback started to just plain suck, when it previously worked just fine with straight-up app-to-ALSA playback.
The machine just wasn't fast enough to route stuff through an application, plain and simple.
And now Ubuntu foisted PulseAudio in.
Uninstall PulseAudio = uninstall entire frigging GNOME desktop.
I kept trying to tell it "no, I just want ALSA playback" in sound settings.
No dice, pulseaudio kept respawning and hogging audio device all to itself.
I kept disabling shit from all places imaginable.
No dice, pulseaudio kept respawning.
Now, I'm going insane (an unrelated story).
I'll be armed with GCC and some dummy binaries.
Mheheh. Muahaha.
MUAHAHAHAHA. ...any better ideas?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795537</id>
	<title>Re:Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>AdamWill</author>
	<datestamp>1255972980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"An example case: I was really disappointed when I upgraded Ubuntu on an older computer (600Mhz Pentium III with 256M memory and ESS Solo 1 onboard audio, plenty good enough for OpenOffice.org and web browsing, even ran Compiz at very good performance on GeForce 2 MX =) and sound playback started to just plain suck, when it previously worked just fine with straight-up app-to-ALSA playback. The machine just wasn't fast enough to route stuff through an application, plain and simple."</p><p>Nope, not plain and simple. As I noted in other comments, this is due to resampling (it wouldn't happen if the audio in question didn't need to be resampled). The default resampling algorithm is chosen to give good quality on the vast majority of hardware (this is a polite way of saying you could pick a better system out of any given city dumpster<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:&gt;). If you're running on extremely slow hardware, you can change the default resampling method with a fairly simple configuration file edit:</p><p><a href="http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki/index.php?title=PulseAudio#PulseAudio" title="tuxfamily.org">http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki/index.php?title=PulseAudio#PulseAudio</a> [tuxfamily.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" An example case : I was really disappointed when I upgraded Ubuntu on an older computer ( 600Mhz Pentium III with 256M memory and ESS Solo 1 onboard audio , plenty good enough for OpenOffice.org and web browsing , even ran Compiz at very good performance on GeForce 2 MX = ) and sound playback started to just plain suck , when it previously worked just fine with straight-up app-to-ALSA playback .
The machine just was n't fast enough to route stuff through an application , plain and simple .
" Nope , not plain and simple .
As I noted in other comments , this is due to resampling ( it would n't happen if the audio in question did n't need to be resampled ) .
The default resampling algorithm is chosen to give good quality on the vast majority of hardware ( this is a polite way of saying you could pick a better system out of any given city dumpster : &gt; ) .
If you 're running on extremely slow hardware , you can change the default resampling method with a fairly simple configuration file edit : http : //proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki/index.php ? title = PulseAudio # PulseAudio [ tuxfamily.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"An example case: I was really disappointed when I upgraded Ubuntu on an older computer (600Mhz Pentium III with 256M memory and ESS Solo 1 onboard audio, plenty good enough for OpenOffice.org and web browsing, even ran Compiz at very good performance on GeForce 2 MX =) and sound playback started to just plain suck, when it previously worked just fine with straight-up app-to-ALSA playback.
The machine just wasn't fast enough to route stuff through an application, plain and simple.
"Nope, not plain and simple.
As I noted in other comments, this is due to resampling (it wouldn't happen if the audio in question didn't need to be resampled).
The default resampling algorithm is chosen to give good quality on the vast majority of hardware (this is a polite way of saying you could pick a better system out of any given city dumpster :&gt;).
If you're running on extremely slow hardware, you can change the default resampling method with a fairly simple configuration file edit:http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki/index.php?title=PulseAudio#PulseAudio [tuxfamily.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792495</id>
	<title>Actually, Poettering,</title>
	<author>yttrstein</author>
	<datestamp>1255958940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"says such complaints and criticisms about PulseAudio in some Internet forums are not really shared by the vast majority of technical people."<br><br>Yes, actually they are.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" says such complaints and criticisms about PulseAudio in some Internet forums are not really shared by the vast majority of technical people .
" Yes , actually they are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"says such complaints and criticisms about PulseAudio in some Internet forums are not really shared by the vast majority of technical people.
"Yes, actually they are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794557</id>
	<title>Consequences are odd where misapplied.</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1255968900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's all very handy in the environment you describe but it can just be a source of weird bugs in a simpler environment.  An odd one was multiple versions of Thunderbird, Seamonkey and even Netscape on gnome crashing every time the user tried to compose mail - no matter which version I put on there it just kept falling over if run locally but worked every time run remotely.  The thing tried to make a noise, went looking for bluetooth hardware that didn't exist and then crashed the email client.  Removing pulseaudio and reinstalling pulseaudio without bluetooth support fixed that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all very handy in the environment you describe but it can just be a source of weird bugs in a simpler environment .
An odd one was multiple versions of Thunderbird , Seamonkey and even Netscape on gnome crashing every time the user tried to compose mail - no matter which version I put on there it just kept falling over if run locally but worked every time run remotely .
The thing tried to make a noise , went looking for bluetooth hardware that did n't exist and then crashed the email client .
Removing pulseaudio and reinstalling pulseaudio without bluetooth support fixed that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all very handy in the environment you describe but it can just be a source of weird bugs in a simpler environment.
An odd one was multiple versions of Thunderbird, Seamonkey and even Netscape on gnome crashing every time the user tried to compose mail - no matter which version I put on there it just kept falling over if run locally but worked every time run remotely.
The thing tried to make a noise, went looking for bluetooth hardware that didn't exist and then crashed the email client.
Removing pulseaudio and reinstalling pulseaudio without bluetooth support fixed that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793425</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>RiotingPacifist</author>
	<datestamp>1255964100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Then on to power consumption.</p></div><p>Why is this being done by PA not by ALSA? It really seams this should be implemented in ALSA not in a userspace tool</p><p><div class="quote"><p>OSSv4 or older flavours simply does not have the API to deal with a modern linux desktop</p></div><p>Instead of getting into flamewars over APIs, could you explain why OSSv4's <b>API</b> can't handle the modren linux desktop.</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...it really wouldn't be a proper solution (and guess what? it would need a daemon running anyway!!)</p></div><p>Audio APP-&gt;kernel-&gt; seams like a nice solution, then IF something needs to be pushed back out into userspace, do it<br>Audio-&gt;userspace-&gt;kernel just adds more problems for 90\% of users, it makes sense to me to have audio-&gt;kernel-&gt;userspace-&gt;kernel when required, the 10\% that regularly use stuff that needs userspace action configure it themselves (much like people install jack if they need it).<br>One final point regarding APIs. Why should the standard API cover stuff like position dependent events when this could be handled by a wrapper/app?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>More and more audio device *are* network based.</p> </div><p><div class="quote"><p>Then there is the whole concept of thin-clients.</p></div><p>Most users don't care, we've simply gone from something that worked to something that doesn't, but generally speaking most desktop audio is coming out of the speakers, this path should be a priority and if that means stuff gets a bit uglier for these devices/setups so be it. If the only way to handle them while keeping desktop audio sane is too ugly then the people that use these devices should configure PA when needed (or hal should), so that 90\% of the time desktop audio (usually single app(+random event sounds)-&gt;speakers) is as simple as possible.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Then of course there is the mixer.</p></div><p>This is partly inherited from alsa but dear god do audio devs not understand that 0 = mute? If you must have an infinite scale then don't tell me my audio is at 0!</p><p><div class="quote"><p>PulseAudio as an architecture is fast becoming the defacto standard</p></div><p>Terrible argument as soo many de facto standards suck. (not that it matters but de facto is two words, much like de jure)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>In addition, rights access and management is a big issue.</p> </div><p>I think this is a major strength of PA, however I am the only person that uses my desktop and when I switch to a root TTY I still want to listen to my audio alerts, is there an easy way to disable this feature. (e,g the bug that existed in alsa was a feature not a bug)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>You've probably being using a distro that doesn't care to integrate PA properly</p></div><p>Funny i use Fedora, which AFAIK has it's PA maintained by Lennart, yet it still has many problems.</p><p>p.s thank you for the informative posts, while I disagree with parts of PA i do appreciate it and can't stand the level of FUD around it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then on to power consumption.Why is this being done by PA not by ALSA ?
It really seams this should be implemented in ALSA not in a userspace toolOSSv4 or older flavours simply does not have the API to deal with a modern linux desktopInstead of getting into flamewars over APIs , could you explain why OSSv4 's API ca n't handle the modren linux desktop .
...it really would n't be a proper solution ( and guess what ?
it would need a daemon running anyway ! !
) Audio APP- &gt; kernel- &gt; seams like a nice solution , then IF something needs to be pushed back out into userspace , do itAudio- &gt; userspace- &gt; kernel just adds more problems for 90 \ % of users , it makes sense to me to have audio- &gt; kernel- &gt; userspace- &gt; kernel when required , the 10 \ % that regularly use stuff that needs userspace action configure it themselves ( much like people install jack if they need it ) .One final point regarding APIs .
Why should the standard API cover stuff like position dependent events when this could be handled by a wrapper/app ? More and more audio device * are * network based .
Then there is the whole concept of thin-clients.Most users do n't care , we 've simply gone from something that worked to something that does n't , but generally speaking most desktop audio is coming out of the speakers , this path should be a priority and if that means stuff gets a bit uglier for these devices/setups so be it .
If the only way to handle them while keeping desktop audio sane is too ugly then the people that use these devices should configure PA when needed ( or hal should ) , so that 90 \ % of the time desktop audio ( usually single app ( + random event sounds ) - &gt; speakers ) is as simple as possible.Then of course there is the mixer.This is partly inherited from alsa but dear god do audio devs not understand that 0 = mute ?
If you must have an infinite scale then do n't tell me my audio is at 0 ! PulseAudio as an architecture is fast becoming the defacto standardTerrible argument as soo many de facto standards suck .
( not that it matters but de facto is two words , much like de jure ) In addition , rights access and management is a big issue .
I think this is a major strength of PA , however I am the only person that uses my desktop and when I switch to a root TTY I still want to listen to my audio alerts , is there an easy way to disable this feature .
( e,g the bug that existed in alsa was a feature not a bug ) You 've probably being using a distro that does n't care to integrate PA properlyFunny i use Fedora , which AFAIK has it 's PA maintained by Lennart , yet it still has many problems.p.s thank you for the informative posts , while I disagree with parts of PA i do appreciate it and ca n't stand the level of FUD around it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then on to power consumption.Why is this being done by PA not by ALSA?
It really seams this should be implemented in ALSA not in a userspace toolOSSv4 or older flavours simply does not have the API to deal with a modern linux desktopInstead of getting into flamewars over APIs, could you explain why OSSv4's API can't handle the modren linux desktop.
...it really wouldn't be a proper solution (and guess what?
it would need a daemon running anyway!!
)Audio APP-&gt;kernel-&gt; seams like a nice solution, then IF something needs to be pushed back out into userspace, do itAudio-&gt;userspace-&gt;kernel just adds more problems for 90\% of users, it makes sense to me to have audio-&gt;kernel-&gt;userspace-&gt;kernel when required, the 10\% that regularly use stuff that needs userspace action configure it themselves (much like people install jack if they need it).One final point regarding APIs.
Why should the standard API cover stuff like position dependent events when this could be handled by a wrapper/app?More and more audio device *are* network based.
Then there is the whole concept of thin-clients.Most users don't care, we've simply gone from something that worked to something that doesn't, but generally speaking most desktop audio is coming out of the speakers, this path should be a priority and if that means stuff gets a bit uglier for these devices/setups so be it.
If the only way to handle them while keeping desktop audio sane is too ugly then the people that use these devices should configure PA when needed (or hal should), so that 90\% of the time desktop audio (usually single app(+random event sounds)-&gt;speakers) is as simple as possible.Then of course there is the mixer.This is partly inherited from alsa but dear god do audio devs not understand that 0 = mute?
If you must have an infinite scale then don't tell me my audio is at 0!PulseAudio as an architecture is fast becoming the defacto standardTerrible argument as soo many de facto standards suck.
(not that it matters but de facto is two words, much like de jure)In addition, rights access and management is a big issue.
I think this is a major strength of PA, however I am the only person that uses my desktop and when I switch to a root TTY I still want to listen to my audio alerts, is there an easy way to disable this feature.
(e,g the bug that existed in alsa was a feature not a bug)You've probably being using a distro that doesn't care to integrate PA properlyFunny i use Fedora, which AFAIK has it's PA maintained by Lennart, yet it still has many problems.p.s thank you for the informative posts, while I disagree with parts of PA i do appreciate it and can't stand the level of FUD around it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792039</id>
	<title>Re:Can I tell it to go away when I don't need it?</title>
	<author>pionzypher</author>
	<datestamp>1255954860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.ubuntugeek.com/fix-for-all-pulseaudio-related-issues.html" title="ubuntugeek.com">This help?</a> [ubuntugeek.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This help ?
[ ubuntugeek.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This help?
[ubuntugeek.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393</id>
	<title>Too many choices....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255946940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The largest problem with Linux audio is not really any particular driver model / sound server. OSS, ALSA, PulseAudio and Jack all work when set up properly, with supporting hardware, and supporting software. But it's never a given that a particular app will support whatever you're using, or give you the choice to select your output device if you have multiple sound cards.</p><p>I've been running Ubuntu for a long time now, and recently installed Windows as a dual boot for making music. Why? I can spend X hours on setting stuff up, or I can spend X hours on making music. I can simply count on any app that matters supporting ASIO or DirectSound on Windows.</p><p>While I actively try to convert people to Ubuntu for regular desktop apps I still tell people who plan to do audio/video stuff to go for Windows/OS X. While it's totally doable to set up a working environment in Linux if you know what you want and which apps you want, I like to play with stuff for fun. I'd rather invest my time in having fun creating content than trying to get stuff to work.</p><p>(And yes, I've tried Ubuntu Studio. Nice, but not there yet for me.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The largest problem with Linux audio is not really any particular driver model / sound server .
OSS , ALSA , PulseAudio and Jack all work when set up properly , with supporting hardware , and supporting software .
But it 's never a given that a particular app will support whatever you 're using , or give you the choice to select your output device if you have multiple sound cards.I 've been running Ubuntu for a long time now , and recently installed Windows as a dual boot for making music .
Why ? I can spend X hours on setting stuff up , or I can spend X hours on making music .
I can simply count on any app that matters supporting ASIO or DirectSound on Windows.While I actively try to convert people to Ubuntu for regular desktop apps I still tell people who plan to do audio/video stuff to go for Windows/OS X. While it 's totally doable to set up a working environment in Linux if you know what you want and which apps you want , I like to play with stuff for fun .
I 'd rather invest my time in having fun creating content than trying to get stuff to work .
( And yes , I 've tried Ubuntu Studio .
Nice , but not there yet for me .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The largest problem with Linux audio is not really any particular driver model / sound server.
OSS, ALSA, PulseAudio and Jack all work when set up properly, with supporting hardware, and supporting software.
But it's never a given that a particular app will support whatever you're using, or give you the choice to select your output device if you have multiple sound cards.I've been running Ubuntu for a long time now, and recently installed Windows as a dual boot for making music.
Why? I can spend X hours on setting stuff up, or I can spend X hours on making music.
I can simply count on any app that matters supporting ASIO or DirectSound on Windows.While I actively try to convert people to Ubuntu for regular desktop apps I still tell people who plan to do audio/video stuff to go for Windows/OS X. While it's totally doable to set up a working environment in Linux if you know what you want and which apps you want, I like to play with stuff for fun.
I'd rather invest my time in having fun creating content than trying to get stuff to work.
(And yes, I've tried Ubuntu Studio.
Nice, but not there yet for me.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791335</id>
	<title>Why is OSS no longer in the kernel?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255946340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've read the background articles (but not the featured rebuttal about PulseAudio yet), and I was wondering why OSS was "deprecated" in favor of ALSA and whether (and if not why not) there's a possibility of OSSv4 being put back into the kernel.  Anyone know?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've read the background articles ( but not the featured rebuttal about PulseAudio yet ) , and I was wondering why OSS was " deprecated " in favor of ALSA and whether ( and if not why not ) there 's a possibility of OSSv4 being put back into the kernel .
Anyone know ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've read the background articles (but not the featured rebuttal about PulseAudio yet), and I was wondering why OSS was "deprecated" in favor of ALSA and whether (and if not why not) there's a possibility of OSSv4 being put back into the kernel.
Anyone know?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800691</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Wonko the Sane</author>
	<datestamp>1255949340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As a PA developer and supporter, I've written up various articles explaining what PA is all about before and posted similar comments to mailing lists etc.<br>You can read some of them here:<br><a href="http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/" title="guthr.ie">http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/</a> [guthr.ie]</p></div> </blockquote><blockquote><div><p>Desktop environments need to ensure they integrate nicely with PulseAudio. GNOME is obviously doing this, but KDE is lagging behind. I do hope to rectify the latter situation personally, and have a pretty clear roadmap to making this happen &ndash; it&rsquo;s just a matter of finding the time to do it!</p></div></blockquote><p>Do you publish patches or a git tree so that interested users can try out your changes?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a PA developer and supporter , I 've written up various articles explaining what PA is all about before and posted similar comments to mailing lists etc.You can read some of them here : http : //colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/ [ guthr.ie ] Desktop environments need to ensure they integrate nicely with PulseAudio .
GNOME is obviously doing this , but KDE is lagging behind .
I do hope to rectify the latter situation personally , and have a pretty clear roadmap to making this happen    it    s just a matter of finding the time to do it ! Do you publish patches or a git tree so that interested users can try out your changes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a PA developer and supporter, I've written up various articles explaining what PA is all about before and posted similar comments to mailing lists etc.You can read some of them here:http://colin.guthr.ie/2009/08/sound-on-linux-anti-fud-calm-certainty-and-confidence/ [guthr.ie] Desktop environments need to ensure they integrate nicely with PulseAudio.
GNOME is obviously doing this, but KDE is lagging behind.
I do hope to rectify the latter situation personally, and have a pretty clear roadmap to making this happen – it’s just a matter of finding the time to do it!Do you publish patches or a git tree so that interested users can try out your changes?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791745</id>
	<title>Re:who's to blame.</title>
	<author>noundi</author>
	<datestamp>1255951680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When an application can make the soundsystem stop working for all other applications, than there is a bug in the soundsystem, not just the application that caused the problem.</p></div><p>It could also be a hardware issue or a driver issue. This is not even up for discussion. This is how Linux and Windows work. Period.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When an application can make the soundsystem stop working for all other applications , than there is a bug in the soundsystem , not just the application that caused the problem.It could also be a hardware issue or a driver issue .
This is not even up for discussion .
This is how Linux and Windows work .
Period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When an application can make the soundsystem stop working for all other applications, than there is a bug in the soundsystem, not just the application that caused the problem.It could also be a hardware issue or a driver issue.
This is not even up for discussion.
This is how Linux and Windows work.
Period.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791983</id>
	<title>Re:Article is doomed to failure, but PulseAudio is</title>
	<author>Entrope</author>
	<datestamp>1255954020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of devices stream data over a network and play it locally as audio.  That does not necessarily make any of them a "network based" audio device in the sense that they can be driven by PA.</p><p>Audio is not unique in needing device ACLs adjusted; it should not need a unique solution for doing that.  In fact, having an audio server handle ACL adjustments when something else does that is a violation of the Unix philosophy of chaining together simple tools that focus on one thing.</p><p>Application-controlled latency is good.  Library-enforced latency is bad.  Sending audio from one user-space process to another is a case of the latter.</p><p>After reading your post made "as a PA developer", I'm even more down on it than before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of devices stream data over a network and play it locally as audio .
That does not necessarily make any of them a " network based " audio device in the sense that they can be driven by PA.Audio is not unique in needing device ACLs adjusted ; it should not need a unique solution for doing that .
In fact , having an audio server handle ACL adjustments when something else does that is a violation of the Unix philosophy of chaining together simple tools that focus on one thing.Application-controlled latency is good .
Library-enforced latency is bad .
Sending audio from one user-space process to another is a case of the latter.After reading your post made " as a PA developer " , I 'm even more down on it than before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of devices stream data over a network and play it locally as audio.
That does not necessarily make any of them a "network based" audio device in the sense that they can be driven by PA.Audio is not unique in needing device ACLs adjusted; it should not need a unique solution for doing that.
In fact, having an audio server handle ACL adjustments when something else does that is a violation of the Unix philosophy of chaining together simple tools that focus on one thing.Application-controlled latency is good.
Library-enforced latency is bad.
Sending audio from one user-space process to another is a case of the latter.After reading your post made "as a PA developer", I'm even more down on it than before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791767
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29798359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29812043
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793055
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793195
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794831
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796875
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804681
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792507
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797675
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795965
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792109
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29819493
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800237
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792905
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795521
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796133
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802805
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792019
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792241
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792293
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797145
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793929
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796721
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793211
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796093
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792587
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29798331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791841
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29824979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792277
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794557
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801085
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792517
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792743
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795155
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793301
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797015
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_0155235_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794047
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791453
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792205
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793129
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792507
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804381
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792363
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795965
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797145
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796093
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792517
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792689
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793211
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792683
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794235
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791889
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795715
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801971
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802909
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802883
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29802805
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791269
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791573
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793055
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792587
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792495
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795101
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791731
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791885
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791993
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804711
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792029
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792027
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29804681
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29806737
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795155
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791767
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792131
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796721
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796595
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795521
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792503
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792569
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799719
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791545
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791627
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800237
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794557
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791983
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795091
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796021
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29824979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793195
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792109
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794047
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793425
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796111
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792241
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792019
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791867
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793205
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29812043
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795919
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797619
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797663
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800991
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793601
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796819
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797015
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795041
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792221
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791433
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791543
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794831
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796875
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29796005
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792743
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801619
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792905
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792293
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791481
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792527
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793929
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29800789
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797039
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791745
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791907
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797675
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793301
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791689
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793483
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791859
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29799755
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794099
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801115
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29793807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29797103
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791391
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791369
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29819493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794317
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792395
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29798331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29798359
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791335
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791449
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29794551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29801231
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792039
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29791877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792607
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792535
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29795959
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_0155235.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_0155235.29792991
</commentlist>
</conversation>
