I’ve had to fix so many Windows PCs killed by spyware, trojans, and viruses, it sickens me. If windows’ poor code quality doesn’t crash Ardour, then the spyware/viruses/trojans will slow down the PCs to the point where it’s unusable.
I really hope they don’t ever make a Windows port and then people will be forced to switch operating systems to experience the goodness of Ardour.
As it stands, if you want VSTs, just run wineasio and you’ll be able to use Windows VST plugins with JACK.
I usually don’t participate in this windows/non-windows debates but here is my humble opinion on it :
Windows is used by … 85 - 90% of people (?) roughly speaking. The amount of music software for this platform, whether free (as in beer) or not, is huge. This implies that windows users have a tremendous choice for their own DAW. Ardour was primarily developed by people who care about the POSIX compliance. Linux is a good platform to develop with such a requirement in mind and therefore became a natural platform for ardour’s development (there are also other factors that make this choice relevant). While I understand that windows users could be interested in an ardour port for their platform (because of e.g. keeping all the VST stuff native), I think that the limited number of linux users (compared to windows users), who don’t have access to this tremendous software pool that their windows friends can enjoy, should remain the target of choice for ardour’s development. I don’t advise the main ardour developers to focus on a windows port because it will only distract them from the more important stuff that needs to be addressed before anything else. Of course, anybody can join the taskforce and devote time to port ardour to windows. Fine. But leave the main ardour developers out of it. Ardour needs to be developed further to become rock solid on a POSIX compliant platform. Anything else is at worst interference with the real and relevant development. C’mon windows users, don’t you already have enough toys to play around with ? And remember this : if you chose a proprietary platform in the first place, it is only natural that quality software for this platform will cost you some bucks. What do you think will happen if ardour was ported to windows ? for the moment, it would only mean opening a huge can of worms … there are already enough issues with linux and even mac users. If you add 10 times more users that struggle everyday with their commercial platform, I don’t think ardour’s development will be accelerated in proportion. Instead, I suggest you switch to linux (or mac) and try it for yourself and help this community to rid ardour from all its current issues. Only then would a windows port be a tiny bit more relevant (I think it is not at all but that’s personal, others might see the relevance that I don’t see).
A bit long, but that’s what I think …
Here’s the problem with not porting to windows…
For some, it’s cheaper to keep windows. Before you go all crazy and flame me, try to think of different situations.
Right now, I’m using a Mackie Onxy Satellite as my audio interface. If I were to want to switch to Linux, I would have to buy a new interface that is compatible. For the cost of that, I can upgrade my current DAW to it’s full version. If I wanted to switch to Mac, I would have to BUY a mac computer. For the cost of THAT, I would be able to buy 3 DAWs or upgrade and buy other expensive equipment.
Many people may be in this same position due to the lack of compatibility that Linux offers and the outrageous Mac prices. I might also add that both linux and OS X have crashed NUMEROUS times on me. In fact, I have bricked Linux more times than the entirety that I’ve own a windows system. A friend of mine currently attending Full Sail has crashed OS X countless times. A well maintained copy of windows isn’t the devil. This isn’t to say windows is the BEST. I think all operating systems suck equally. It all comes down to preference and cost.
Not to mention, more users = more subscribers. Open up to windows and you tap a much larger user base.
Traverso is a sound editor, its not a sequencer like ardour…
Also, it seems no one knows the existence of the most popular cross platform sound editor thats open source: Audacity, which use Lame, another important GPL sound editor, for mp3.
The real problem is that there is tons of different GPL sound editors, video editors, sequencers, and that except for few exception, no communities seems working with another, would be just for the advantages of not recoding the same thing each time someone start a new software in the matter.
For users that need to do many different tasks will need to download a sound editor, a sequencer and a video editor, + the librairies like Jack.
I’m practically in full agreement with Thorgal…
There’s one more good reason that focusing development on free platforms should get priority: Vista. (takes off stallman hat)
Because at least when an old Ardour corrupted a session file, or the other night when NFS totally froze my ethernet traffic (forced a reboot), or anytime my Gentoo box screws me hard, it’s consensual. Something will always go wrong… when it does, I’m happy that I spent the money on decent hardware instead so I wouldn’t have to wait as long 
And I’m grateful for the time that people are giving for all of this. If I can get some cash from garage bands for helping them turn out demo CDs, some is certainly reserved for donations to the projects I depend on- especially this one.
“Insert dongle? Sir, how dare you even suggest…!”
About 6 months ago I loaded Ubuntu on my home computer for the fist time. I did it for one reason alone. I wanted to try Ardour and there was no windows port. All I have to say is THANK YOU SO MUCH for pushing me to make the switch. I’ve found out that Ardour is the cherry on top of the Linux sundae. The best part is that Linux doesn’t exclude Windows or Mac users it runs great on both. As far as hardware goes and the cost of upgrading. Your hardware isn’t useless to everyone, sell it and buy what you need. Viva Ardour
Dan
There is a tool for windows called cygwin it is pretty much a bunch of dlls that implement posix support so that you can compile linux programs on windows.
could Ardour be compiled on windows with this???
Well, i heard mutch inaccuracies in this 3ad, so i have to reply:
BTW, my idea about Ardour development is mutch simpler: it has been developed from scratch on Linux and it’s code is not platform indipendent, so porting to another platform would require too mutch work.
BTW i believe we should’n care about this: I would care MUTCH MORE about ReactOS instead.
In the end, i don’t believe in a particular platform port, but platform indipendency is a great value 'cause allows more code sharing between indipendent (but similar) projects, that could be a “features/stability/debugger unifier” IMHO.
Happy coding, anyway.
Posted by: j035u5
“ Essentially, this is just snobbary when it comes down to it. People who use OSs other than windows do so for whatever reason, and feel that they should punish any user who wont make the move to the said operating system. I will never move entirely to Apple or Linux because I think Windows does a lot of things better and for that reason will always be my main platform “
In all the years that I’ve been listening to the dronings of the Linux/Windows debate, that is THE MOST succinct, intelligent and accurate assessment I’ve ever heard. It’s a simple fact that ALL OS’s have their strengths and ALL have their weaknesses and it’s snobbery to think otherwise. For example, as a development environment, Windows is light years ahead of Linux in my experience. Also (and this is soooo important) NOT EVERYONE wants to be a programmer. Therefore the fact that so much of Linux needs to be compiled from source is a massive turnoff for many users. Yes, package managers have improved the situation greatly - but it remains a fact that people just don’t want to be clogging up their machines with source code which they don’t understand and have no intention of ever delving into.
The open source ethos has much to commend it but frankly, it’s a double-edged sword. In fact, it turns off one helluva lot lot more people than it turns on. Is it right to ignore or (as j035u5 describes) “punish” people who happen to agree with the majority? Personally, I don’t see who benefits from that philosophy (expect, ironically, Microsoft). Maybe, one day, someone will be able to quantify and explain exactly how Linux benefits from all this - but for me, it’s a bit like religious zeal - everybody loses in the end.
It’s not about punishment at all… what’s mind-boggling is that you’re almost expecting that a Windows port should be made and if it isn’t, then obviously, the dev’s are just trying to “punish” Windows users.
Perhaps the dev’s don’t actually use windows. Perhaps they enjoy using linux. Perhaps this is why they primarily develop for linux.
Maybe, just maybe, from a developers point of view, there are issues that make a port to Windows more difficult and time consuming. Maybe they don’t want to spend the time porting over the code.
Now, considering this is free, open software - there is nothing to stop a windows-based developer from attempting to port Ardour. In fact, some work has already been done on this front (if you read the entire thread, including the post by Paul, you would know that). This is how Ardour was ported to MacOSX, so it’s perfectly possible that someone can download the latest revision and continue the work towards the windows port that has already been started.
At the end of the day, anyone with half a brain can see that OS wars are ridiculous. Each OS has it’s place. Lack of support for a LINUX application on Windows is far from punishment though, it’s simply the way it is right now.
Posted by: breakerfall
" At the end of the day, anyone with half a brain can see that OS wars are ridiculous. Each OS has it’s place. "
Well, at least we agree about something
The point I’m making is that if the devs are punishing anyone, ultimately, they’re punishing themselves. It’s difficult enough to make a living from s/ware development so if funding is needed (which it clearly is) why ignore the one market sector that actually WOULD be willing to pay?
“ Essentially, this is just snobbary when it comes down to it. People who use OSs other than windows do so for whatever reason, and feel that they should punish any user who wont make the move to the said operating system. I will never move entirely to Apple or Linux because I think Windows does a lot of things better and for that reason will always be my main platform “
I think that it’s pure Snobbary that several Windows apps aren’t ported for Linux…
Like IIS, asp, dot net… (kidding)
And that’s the problem Tim - whichever way you look at it, the winner is Microsoft.
Perhaps one of the basic problems is that the “free” software philosophy has gotten itself misinterpreted along the way. The intention of free sofware was always that it would be free, as in “speech” - not free, as in “beer”. Unfotunately though, too many people seem to find it difficult to differentiate between the two.
In the Windows world, there’s a culture that if something is worth having, it’s worth paying for. That culture seems somehow to have got lost in the Linux world - and Linux devs are the poorer for it (literally).
I guess that the bottom line is that in the longer term, a Windows version couldn’t (and wouldn’t) offer any benefit to the Ardour developers. Even ignoring the technical hurdles, if hundreds of thousands of new Windows users suddenly jumped on board it would undoubtedly make life a lot more difficult. And even if a Windows version could be made “chargeable” - and even if those users were willing to pay for it - it could only be a matter of time before someone brought out a free (as in “beer”) version.
Despite its noble origins, it seems like “free software” will always be perceived to be free, as in “beer”.
“In the Windows world, there’s a culture that if something is worth having, it’s worth paying for”.
That’s why lots of people run pirated software and you can find cracks even for shareware.
thorwil - look around you. The world is full of de-chipped mobile phones, forged passports, fake jewellery, counterfeit goods and smuggled booze. It’s a simple fact that where there’s money to be made, there’ll be criminal activity. This kind of thing has been going on for centuries. But it doesn’t alter the fact that most people will pay for anything that’s worth having.
This thread is becoming out of topic. Nobody could care less about whether one should pay for good software or not. The ardour dev’s published their code under the GPL, and so on. That’s their choice. Who are you (we) to criticize this ? who are you (we) to complain that they don’t bother porting their soft to win32 ? I personally don’t give a crap. I have been using unix and linux since I started using computers. Linux has become my platform of choice, and that’s just how it is for me. Not for the majority, and so what ? I am so grateful for an app like ardour to exist primarily on the OS I am using everyday. I donated money. If I were less broke, I would even subscribe, that’s the least I could do. The rest is philosophical crap. If I were using windows daily, I would have as I said earlier a tremendous choice for my audio work, I would not even bother knowing about ardour, jack, etc. So what is this discussion about ? Claiming that “the devs are punishing non linux or mac users” is the most idiotic thing I have ever read on this forum. I hope that whoever mentioned this realizes the total irrelevance and idiotic nature of such a statement.
Regarding the statement “In the Windows world, there’s a culture that if something is worth having, it’s worth paying for” : Windows is a business model, so windows users must either comply with it or break the agreement they had to accept when they acquired windows one way or another. Therefore, money is naturally a central issue in this model. Linux is NOT a business model. So why coming up with statement like this ?
Given that anyone running Windows has a computer that will happily dual-boot a Linux distro, it could be far better for everyone if those wishing to use Ardour do so like this. You have to remember that Jack allows lots of programs to interconnect; even if there was a good Windows port of Ardour you’d still want ports of all the other stuff. Simply dual-booting keeps Windows intact and gives you access to a low-latency kernel and all the goodies. I think you need to live in the Linux ecosystem for a while before the power of Jack (anything can patch into anything else) really becomes apparent. Learning a bit of Linux is actually great in terms of understanding what is happening ‘in the box’ (I’ve been using music software for 15 years and it’s been great for me). The devs can then concentrate on making the core software better.
I don’t think that anyone is saying that Windows is inferior, but (again) there are plenty of options on that platform. Dual-booting would give you so much more than Ardour (sequencing, synthesis, effects etc.).
What would be the problems with this as a solution? (I write this as a Linux and OS X user and I’m genuinely intrigued rather than trying to be a smart arse)
mattb - I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that approach. In fact, I’d guess that the majority of people on this forum are either running Linux/Wine or dual-booting Linux & Windows. However…
What it boils down to is whether Ardour should reach the masses or stay in a niche market. Neither path is inherently right or wrong but it’s clear from the postings here that many users feel Ardour to be a good enough product to be up there, competing with the heavyweights - like Pyramix, Pro Tools & Nuendo. That’s never going to happen while it ignores Windows.
Hi again
You’re probably right that 95% of people or so use Windows, although I don’t know how many have chosen to do so. I really don’t think that you need software to run on Windows for it to be a ‘pro’ app; I have been a pro engineer for over 10 years and I haven’t worked in one studio that has Windows running the DAW. Semi-pro/home users are probably the market here. Macs are dominant in pro work, and Ardour is happy on a Mac. This does indeed make it cross-platform; Windows doesn’t have to be one of the platforms! Logic Pro and Digital Performer ‘ignore the masses’, but as they are targeted at the pro end they don’t suffer as a result. Once again, we’re talking about commercial apps, and the same rules don’t apply here.
Interesting discussion. Cheers!
I’m no genius, by any means, but I DID discover this from Microsoft’s website about some kind of POSIX subsystem built into the new Windows 7…
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc754351.aspx
Perhaps this may be the answer to Win32 porting? at least for Windows 7 anyway… and therefore, Windows Server 2008 R2.