Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ RPH ] on Friday 21 July 2006 09:40 \__
>
> > So off I go to install PCLinuxOS on the main family PC. Stick in the
> > LiveCD and boot. That was easy. Click on install icon on desktop. Follow
> > instructions. Half an hour or so later I have a bootable system.
> >
> > So why the disappointment? Well, from all the sob stories that certain
> > people trot out I wanted to fiddle about getting everything working.
> >
> > Damn thing just bloody worked! Only thing I had to do was get hold of a
> > driver for my printer (HP LJ1020) - downloaded it, followed instructions
> > and it... worked.
> >
> > What the hell am I supposed to tweak? Guess I'll just have to use it
> > instead!
> >
> > Seriously for a moment, it did install just fine, and it's now the
> > primary OS - XP is still on there so daughter can run her games, but
> > otherwise she has barely noticed the difference. There was only one app I
> > didn't have, but as it is something I wrote myself I just ported it
> > across.
> >
> > Okay, I have one minor gripe - the main mixer volume doesn't work, but
> > the headphone mixer channel affects the volume. Not that this would be a
> > problem for me in any OS as my speakers have a good old fashioned knob
> > marked "volume"!
>
>
> Rich, I had what I though was a similar problem in Ubuntu
> and SUSE (same computer, sound card embedded in the on-board
> Intel chipset). Later I realised that I was just
> manipulating the wrong mixer dials, which means that only my
> ignorance is to blame. Sound balance, I suspect, is
> something I didn't manage to change because it did not
> correspond to the type of output (CD, Master, System Sounds
> and so forth). So I suggest you tinker with the mixer and
> see how you get along. Perhaps the mixer interfere is not
> intuitive (both GNOME and KDE), but I am told by a friend
> whom I recently convinced to try Linux (Mandriva 2006) that
> mixing under Linux is far more advanced than XP in every
> area. Perhaps it's a case of complexity, attributed to
> excessive level of choice.
Uh huh... I love your spinning of the many Linux problems with audio.
I'm sure you're going to try to attack Windows in some way too.
> Windows XP has some third-party mixers that extend the
> capability of the more rudimentary one. These only come with
> pricey professional sound cards though.
lol
Windows has a basic mixing device. No, it doesn't have sparkly windows
effects, but it does have a mixer for every audio device, and it works
as advertised - unlike Linux.
Also, each and every application has access to the sound device
(regardless of hardware) at the *same* time. Not true in Linux.
Vista adds upon this by giving each application its own independent
mixer (and a totally rewritten kernel for audio as well dropping
latencies even below a Macintoshes - and WAY below Linux audio
latencies).
> This entire thing reminds me of a statement once made by wd
> in this newsgroup. People come to Linux with the presumption
> that it's hard and any case they find to justify this and
> give up would do. Stereotypes (FUD,prior experiences in the
> nineties, etc.) are the worst enemy of Linux. "It's not me,
> it Linux. Easier to blame the software, which others say is
> hard/faulty".
Probably either because it WAS a fault of Linux, or it is so damned
unintuitive it would actually take documentation to explain - which is
one of the worst points about Linux.
> Best wishes,
>
> Roy
>
> PS - it took me /months/ to realise that mixing (volume and
> balance) was always working flawlessly.
|
|
