More > JRiver Media Center 21 for Linux

Simplest version for PC that plays well with JRiver MC ?

<< < (5/8) > >>

Awesome Donkey:
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=103769.0

kstuart:
Thanks for the link - as one poster pointed out - since the distro is free, it even fails that necessary quality of "snake oil" (or more properly "snake oil salesmen").

(The concept of "trying to sell something that does not provide a benefit" does not need a special term, since these days, that applies to a huge portion of the economy. :) )

The thought process on "audiophile linux" was:

* I did install Linux Lite on my 2003 XP laptop and it works fine in that underpowered situation.

* Then I tried installing it on this laptop that I use for web browsing, email, etc.

* Install went great, it actually shrunk the one existing partition (Windows) on my SSD and installed dual boot without fiddly intervention.  The install only asks simple questions like language, location, etc.

* When I started using Linux Lite - which was much more similar to Windows 7 than Windows 8 - I realized that the main problem is not the OS, but the fact that over many years (decades), I've done countless small tweaks.  Some I could do without, others were a necessary part of my workflow.

* The bigger realization was that Linux Lite was almost exactly the same as Windows 7 - and so why not use Windows 7 (rather than spend many hours recreating all those tweaks)?

* The only advantages of Linux at this point are related to the commercial aspect of Windows - i.e. its cost and MS' failure to do important things that have no profit incentive (such as USB2.0 Audio support present in all other OSes).

* And then I realized that the real new 21st Century OS is Android.

* The only other aspect of Linux that is relevant to MC21 usage, is sound quality - a significant number of users report better sound quality than Windows.   This could be due to aspects of their Windows installation, or it could be a real improvement.

* Note that a repeated double blind test conducted using audio convention attendees, showed subtle improvements to sound quality simply by using a faster PC (both PCs having "bit perfect" playback). 

mwillems:

--- Quote from: kstuart on June 05, 2016, 12:41:25 pm ---* The bigger realization was that Linux Lite was almost exactly the same as Windows 7 - and so why not use Windows 7 (rather than spend many hours recreating all those tweaks)?

--- End quote ---

Because while it may seem the same as windows 7 in terms of the user interface, the user interface is only a small outward facing part of the OS.  Under the hood it does things very differently, sometimes with benefits, sometimes with detriments (see below).


--- Quote ---* The only advantages of Linux at this point are related to the commercial aspect of Windows - i.e. its cost and MS' failure to do important things that have no profit incentive (such as USB2.0 Audio support present in all other OSes).

--- End quote ---

This is quite false.  Linux has many advantages and disadvantages as compared to windows, but many of them are not immediately visible.  For example, Linux systems can be (and in my experience are) more stable than windows systems.  I've had Linux systems go 6 months or more without rebooting, with no flakiness or degradation in performance.  With windows weekly (or daily) reboots are the norm because eventually things start acting strangely.  Additionally windows (even windows 7) phones home and sends telemetry and other data to Microsoft.  Linux doesn't do that.  Those are just two obvious examples, there are quite a lot of differences all the way around (network stability, better options for data integrity, etc.).  Assuming that the two are equivalent because a distro can be made to look like Windows 7 is missing quite a lot of what's going on "under the hood."


--- Quote ---  
* And then I realized that the real new 21st Century OS is Android.

--- End quote ---

Not to be pedantic but this is a perfect illustration of what I noted above: android is actually Linux.  Normally when people refer to Linux in conversation they're actually referring to GNU/Linux which is a combination of the Linux kernel (he Linux part) and a userspace built on a foundation of GNU core utilities and the GNU C compiler (the GNU part).  Android is not GNU/Linux because it uses its own userspace, but android uses the linux kernel, so is just as much linux as GNU/Linux in that both use the linux kernel as their core OS.  It's just the userspace that's different (the part the user sees), which illustrates my point pretty well; most people aren't even aware that android is a linux OS.


--- Quote ---* The only other aspect of Linux that is relevant to MC21 usage, is sound quality - a significant number of users report better sound quality than Windows.   This could be due to aspects of their Windows installation, or it could be a real improvement.

* Note that a repeated double blind test conducted using audio convention attendees, showed subtle improvements to sound quality simply by using a faster PC (both PCs having "bit perfect" playback).  

--- End quote ---

Whether or not there are gains to be had, you're unlikely to see these benefits in a tiny, questionably maintained Arch Fork with an RT kernel (which actually provably harms performance in any application that doesn't involve live audio recording).  Try a mainstream distro with a light-weight desktop environment and you'll see all the benefits that you're likely to see.
 
Something that may not be clear to you: in the open source community, for the most part, people volunteer in their free time to develop and maintain software.  Larger distros actually work better than smaller distros because: 1) they're a larger target for developers, so developers work harder to make sure things work on them, 2) there's more manpower available to actually do the necessary work of software development and maintenance, and 3) more users means the user created wiki documentation will be higher quality and the forums will be active enough to be able to answer questions.  

These things don't necessarily scale linearly, but very small distros tend to be both very low value-added and poor quality to the extent they try to "add value."  Small teams can do great things when its their actual job, and/or when their efforts are appropriately focused (say on one or two software programs), but it's a very different story when you're essentially signing up to use an entire OS that's essentially one person's hobby project, in which they might lose interest tomorrow, take ill, etc.  When I see a "boutique" distro like aplinux that makes several questionable design decisions (e.g. a rolling release model for an audio appliance?  old RT kernels?) and has fewer than 200 threads on their entire user forum, it does not inspire me with confidence.

Do as you like, of course, the joy of Linux is that there's almost infinite choice, but recognize that there are deeper waters just out of sight  ;D

kstuart:
I think we have a different meaning of "better" in this case.

For example, let's say that you had an automobile engine that had 10% more horsepower and 10% better mileage.  In an abstract way, that is better.

If I convinced a friend to replace the engine in his car with that one, his personal experience would likely be indistinguishable from before.   Only a yearly calculation of gas cost would show a difference.

Now imagine I had to convince the friend to buy a new car to get the 10% improvements.  His experience would be overall worse, because it would take him hours to learn the high beam switch, the radio controls, etc. etc.   Since we have already established that he would not notice the 10% differences, then his personal experience overall would be worse.

Lastly, if all auto manufacturers used the new engine, there would a society-wide improvement in gas usage, which would likely be statistically positive.

===

I arbitrarily chose the example, but it turns out to be a good one, because then the equivalent of "Tesla electric car" is "Android".   Linux and Windows share a lot of their disadvantages, the biggest one being a requirement for average users to do a lot of setup and a lot of maintenance.   They also share a lot of 1970s computing concepts.

( I was aware that Android is based on Linux, but that is irrelevant.  For example, the "Linux" version of MC21 cannot be installed on Android, so clearly JRiver uses the same distinction of meaning.)

kstuart:
I should mention here that the input from members in this thread IS helpful, these posts are just discussion of issues raised and should not be taken personally.

As far as the concept "distros that have modifications can cause problems with MC21" - that is true with anything other than the Jessie distro used by JRiver devs.  It is impossible to predict what change will cause a problem, otherwise action would be taken in advance. :)

So, it seems to me that unsupported distros are all equivalent in that respect.

===

The smaller group vs larger group issue can also be examined in iTunes vs WMC vs MC21 vs small and medium freeware media players development groups.

Each size has development group has its particular advantages:

* Small groups headed by one person can be the most responsive to user requests, but only up to a point.  Prior to MC, I used a player with the name of an insect :), the dev was quite outgoing and open to requests, but ultimately he only had enough time for major requests that were requested by large numbers of users (as is appropriate).

* Medium groups (the typical open source project) are actually the most likely to go aground and die.  Unlike the small group, medium group devs tend to be largely anonymous and so don't tend to get the personal feedback that most volunteers require as their real reason for participation.  So they are constantly leaving.

In a medium group, if you are just a user, your feedback and needs is just statistical.  You will only get improved MKV support if a significant number of other people happen to ask for it as well.  Generally, high profile stuff like 4K and 3D get more attention.

* Large groups (Microsoft, Apple, Samsung) are impossible to contact (even a large group, including some businesses, could not get MS to even notice the request to add USB2.0 Audio support).  What you get is generally what increases profitability.  Over time, these companies get less and less customer responsive (Google is constantly phasing out popular products and features that really don't cost them a significant amount to support, as one can read in their product Forums that have tens of thousands of pleas to not phase out some small aspect of Gmail.)

So, no particular size is automatically better.

Overall, human decisions are generally based on a mix of emotional reactions, personal self-interest and a tiny smattering of objective evaluation.

For example, having a couple of rude and ill-behaved guys use your product commercially, without asking your permission, can color your reaction to a whole group of hobbyists, the rest of whom may be very well mannered and considerate.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page