I do hate it, and I have also proven how problematic it is, for those who said I was just spewing FUD. I'm not being paid by anyone to advertise their API, nor do I have any agenda (political or whatever) to advance, just telling it as I see it, which is hard to argue against.FitzRoy wrote:You know, I was going to ask the same question about ALSA. It seemed like Nach really hated it and wanted it wiped from history before it got to point where a bunch of programs supported it until a fear of breaking them through abandoning it took hold, solidifying its permanent existence in an oxymoronic field of "standards."
If OSS4 was integrated into Linux, ALSA only programs would probably disappear. There's only a handful of ALSA only programs out there. And after a while, it'd be fine to drop ALSA altogether as useless.
From all my machines at the moment, my newest desktop only has sound with OSS4, and my newest laptop only has sound with ALSA, how ironic. For the other machines, all are supported by both, with OSS4 working consistently better across the board.
The ALSA machines all consistently sound better when writing to them with the OSS API, as opposed to the ALSA API.
I really don't see how it's a question which is better, if ALSA wasn't stealing developers from OSS4, those who implemented sound for my laptop in ALSA would've done it in OSS4.
It's basically down to politics or people who haven't really looked deeply into the situation who are promoting ALSA.