From kde-core-devel Thu Feb 19 18:03:01 2004 From: Alexander Neundorf Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:03:01 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: aRts needs to be replaced (was Re: Disabling aRts in knotify) Message-Id: <200402191903.01410.neundorf () kde ! org> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=107721380824316 On Thursday 19 February 2004 17:55, Scott Wheeler wrote: > On Thursday 19 February 2004 17:13, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > > > So you want a mediaplayer that has no equalizer? > > > > A media player is not a soundserver. > > > > > You don't want to set > > > different volumes for different apps? > > > > That's each app job, not the soundserver's. > > > > > Even if you don't need all of the above I can assure you that there are > > > people out there that want/need features like that. > > > > None of them belongs in a sound server. > > Well, given a reasonable framework the programmer doesn't care what process > this stuff is happening in. The fact that aRts does this stuff in the > sound server process is just an implementation detail. I really don't think so. It's a design fault. We could also write a webbrowser which implements html, http, tcp, ip all itself (ok, slightly exaggerated ;-) I heard way to many complaints about bad sound quality with arts if the system is busy and the buffers are too small. I don't want a sound daemon which blocks /dev/dsp, which eats cycles, which can crash and which makes the sound quality worse without adding *anything* for me. Then I simply won't even consider to develop a multimedia app with it. And I was in this position, and I decided not to do it. > Of course we could debate the merits of aRts' design, but well, that would > be mostly silly since I don't think anyone here is interested in the > specifics. > > But the application programmer should be able to do something like "turn > the volume down on this stream by 10%" or something without having to > reimplement that over and over again. Yes. And IMO it is very important that this doesn't depend on such a daemon, because it doesn't have to. It is also important that is nevertheless able to work with this kind of daemons, e.g. for network transparency. > I don't care whether you chose to use a soundserver or not, and I'm not > sure if that's what you're getting at, but there needs to be something > available to multimedia programmers in KDE that handles these common media > tasks (decoding, playing, buffering, etc.). Yes. Bye Alex -- Work: alexander.neundorf@jenoptik.com - http://www.jenoptik-los.de Home: neundorf@kde.org - http://www.kde.org alex@neundorf.net - http://www.neundorf.net