Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: BeamboomOh man that video is such a good example of why I largely prefer written content. To skip through that long monologue to try and find interesting content is just... Exhausting.

I am so with you on that. I can read looong articles, but if I see a link to a half hour or hour video . . . forget it.

Yup, exact same with me. And particularly annoying are the teasers on web pages that LOOKS like an ingress to an article, but behind the link is just a video. Damn that's annoying!

There's ONE guy on youtube that makes really really good videos (demos/reviews of synths, I'm also a musician), really well produced and with a presenter that is ZERO fluff talk, straight into the grit right away. I can watch him, also cause he really knows his stuff. But the average vblogger? Forget it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library GuySo if they're worried, they can opt out. How is that "forced"?

That's why the quotation marks. It's like when we create a new account somewhere. Do we prefer the "do you want to receive spam from us" checkbox be checked or unchecked by default?
To have it enabled by default for unwary developers can be conceived as sneaking something in the back door. It's an additional feature. It's not core. Thus optional and should remain unchecked. From a general UX perspective.

But just to state it again - I do agree with you that from a pure "selfish" perspective it would be of our advantage to keep it enabled by default.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Oh man that video is such a good example of why I largely prefer written content. To skip through that long monologue to try and find interesting content is just... Exhausting.

But with "standalone" do they mean simply wireless, or an actual internal computer that makes the set not require external computing power? If so that surely must make the set more expensive, not less?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: superboybotPipewire is compatible with pulsewire and jack specific applications with pipewire-pulse and pipewire-jack respectively (on Arch, may be different on other distros).

Fantastic. I'll have to look into this. Thanks!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: chelobakaSteam works fine with PulseAudio so there is nothing to gain from tinkering with PipeWire.

The gain is rather to not have both jack and pulseaudio running, as many of us who also create music on Linux are more or less forced to do.

If one package could merge the use cases of both pulse and jack - as indeed seem to be their ambition - this is a major, major gain.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library GuyI'm almost leaning the other way: Making it opt-in means people will feel that, if they decide to do the opt in, that means they'll have to in some way take responsibility for it, and that may discourage them from doing so.

I do see your perspective, and you may indeed be right in that we might miss out on more now. But principally I think it's the right way to do it. It *does* imply embedding support for a second platform, and that should be an option and not "forced".
We don't like forced stuff in the Linux world. So we should apply that same moral also when it's not to our immediate benefit. :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Ok so let me see if I understand correctly: Is Pipewire a *drop-in* replacement for both pulseaudio and jack?

So any application who utilise either of the two will also work on pipewire without alteration in their setup? Install pipewire and remove jack and pulse, and all should work as before only with potential latency benefits?

It's indicated on the pipewire homepage, but it's not 100% clear to me.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: mao_dze_dunI think their statement very clearly shows why Epic (correctly) chose to make this opt-in.

That's a really good point.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I expect this to be a very common stance on it, especially from the bigger devs. We shall be happy if they enable it, but beyond that we're on our own.

And quite frankly I'm fine with that.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Not too toot my own horn here (or, alright, a little :) ) but back in the first post about the Steam Deck I actually said that I suspected the anti-cheat challenge (whom many voiced concerns) was something that Valve should have under reasonable control for the timeline leading up to launch.
I mean, they had to.

View this comment - View article - View full comments