Ardour 4.0 released [LWN.net]

Ardour 4.0 released

Posted Apr 20, 2015 17:24 UTC (Mon) by thomas.poulsen (subscriber, #22480)
Parent article: Ardour 4.0 released

It looks like Paul Davis has been able to gather the needed support after the rather disturbing news of last year.

to post comments

Ardour 4.0 released

Posted Apr 21, 2015 12:00 UTC (Tue) by rsidd (guest, #2582) [Link] (3 responses)

Hopefully the Windows and Mac releases will help bring new users and new contributions. A lot of audio professionals use Macs these days, while the intersection between "professional audio" users and linux users must be quite tiny. Other free software like Audacity (good enough editing for most non-professionals, I believe) and VLC (for playback) have managed to make their presence known in the Windows/Mac world.

Re: new users and new contributions

Posted Apr 22, 2015 1:21 UTC (Wed) by ldo (guest, #40946) [Link] (2 responses)

Porting to Windows may bring in more users, but don’t expect it to grow the actual community. Windows users seem more accustomed to receiving than contributing, being more passive than active. When you see the difficulties in developing open-source, cross-platform software on Windows, you can’t blame them.

Re: new users and new contributions

Posted Apr 22, 2015 1:26 UTC (Wed) by rsidd (guest, #2582) [Link] (1 responses)

Well, true, but Android has solved that problem by having a SDK for windows. Maybe we need a linux-compatible SDK for windows that can be used to develop cross-platform open-source applications... The infrastructure is probably there already (eclipse, gcc, gtk/qt, etc).

Re: new users and new contributions

Posted Apr 22, 2015 13:16 UTC (Wed) by pflugstad (subscriber, #224) [Link]

> The infrastructure is probably there already (eclipse, gcc, gtk/qt, etc).

FWIW, I recently developed a fairly non-trivial QT app that runs on both Windows (builds natively under MSVC) and Linux. Lots of tabs, buttons, sliders, etc and it included TCP/UDP/IP networking, threads, reading/writing files, etc.

I was very happy with QT - I didn't have any Windows specific stuff in the GUI (just the networking and a thin). It looked "native" on both platforms and performed well.

In my experience, 90% of the problem of developing for Windows is avoiding all the Windows specific types and functions. C/Posix has 90% of what you need and if you stick with that, your code is perfectly portable.

In the past, I've done some fairly complex apps under Java (using Swing) which was developed on Windows but ran mainly on Linux (and parts of it on Android as well) - it didn't run as smoothly of course, and it looked out-of-place on both platforms, but it was workable.

So yes, I think the infrastructure is most definitely there.