Kelly Miller wrote:
Firewire is the right answer for audio, especially if you plan to move it around. I'm too cheap for that so the only thing I've added is a USB sound adapter to have a software-selectable alternate output over copper SPDF to feed a receiver. It doesn't specifically have a Mac driver but works as a standard USB audio device anyway.
Um... Has someone missed something here? I keep an eye out on various plug and wire types, because I like that sort of electronic stuff, and last time I checked Apple has continued to change the USB and Firewire HARDWARE PORTS with every few versions of their stuff.
There have always been a bazillion variations of USB connectors. I haven't noticed any vendor-specific trends with them other than putting smaller connectors on small equipment. With firewire, the Mac's I've seen have added firewire 800 ports while retaining a 400 for compatibility and since firewire is a bus you really only need one (and they are backwards compatible with a cable adapter anyway).
In fact, I found multiple rants from people who want to know why Apple is trying to give themselves a leg up by using Microsoft's embrace & extend on the hardware side instead of the software side.
If they deviate from the IEEE standards they deserve a rant - and probably a lawsuit.
And you complain because the drivers don't work for a specific kernel version of Linux? At least the Linux guys aren't attempting to change the physical interface to give their audio devices an advantage on the market...
The hardware isn't going to change for the life of the machine. With fedora, you are forced to change to have continuing security updates.
Apple is a horrible example of a user-friendly company, because as of late they've been learning the Microsoft technique of wresting extra cash from users and giving themselves an advantage on system development.
Yes, saving money isn't their strong suit, but sometimes having something that works is more important.
Every time I hear someone say Mac OSX is a "true UNIX" I snicker, because generally running "real UNIX" programs in OSX requires installing the compatibility layer, because by default OSX does not support standard UNIX stuff; instead, they support specially rigged programs designed to interface with Cocoa...
Do you mean X? That's not a compatibility layer, it's the same thing everyone else runs for X programs - and you don't need it for command line/character mode. Cocoa is nicer but you aren't restricted to it and most open source applications are available through fink or macports. Some Mac users are fanatic enough that many programs that could run under X in their generic versions have Cocoa versions (thunderbird, mozilla, vlc, openoffice, etc.), but it doesn't matter to me. I tend to spend so much time with NX/freenx, remote desktop, and vnc connections to remote/different systems that the more similar they are the better.
-- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
