I am frustrated by the constant rebranding and tech churn (Qt now? Why?) under the new Audacity management. A lesson for other open-source projects: don't be bought out by commercial companies.
Audacity 4.0
261–270 of 278 posts
Re: Audacity 4.0
#262I highly recommend this video [1] by the Head of Software at Muse who had a big part in the development of Audacity 4.0. Some great insights and really fun to watch! [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYM3TWf_G38
Indirectly related his video on music notation itself, "Notation Must Die: The Battle For How We Read Music"[1], is really good IMHO. > Many people feel that western notation makes it unnecessarily hard to read music. If we want to sight read, learn music theory or just practice an instrument, surely there's a better way? Right? This has been a hot topic for almost 1000 years... AND I PUT IT TO BED RIGHT HERE! 1. htt…
How arrogant of the Musescore developers to think they know better than hundreds of years of historical music notation by actual musicians. Seems in line with their arrogant disregard for the community and bad Audacity overhaul and nonsensical rebranding.
Re: Audacity 4.0
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indirectly related his video on music notation itself, "Notation Must Die: The Battle For How We Read Music"[1], is really good IMHO. > Many people feel that western notation makes it unnecessarily hard to read music. If we want to sight read, learn music theory or just practice an instrument, surely there's a better way? Right? This has been a hot topic for almost 1000 years... AND I PUT IT TO BED RIGHT HERE! 1. htt…
How arrogant of the Musescore developers to think they know better than hundreds of years of historical music notation by actual musicians. Seems in line with their arrogant disregard for the community and bad Audacity overhaul and nonsensical rebranding.
That's absolutely not the tone or conclusion of the video
Re: Audacity 4.0
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
He also hit the nail on the head- reaction videos are just low effort click bait.
[flagged]
The full sentence from the snippet you copy-pasted is
> This has been a hot topic for almost 1000 years... AND I PUT IT TO BED RIGHT HERE!
It's clearly intended to be a joke, no one would honestly think they've "solved" a 1000 year discussion with no objective answer.
Re: Audacity 4.0
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
There were a bunch of minor versions between 3.0 and 4.0 made up of fundamental refactor work to establish separation of concerns. As I understand it from the call graphs he shared, the problem was that the UI was reaching deep into the audio code directly instead of using a clear API boundary to separate concerns and route commands and change state. So fundamentally while the UI worked, it also was deeply entwined w…
> So, if you're going to have to rewrite your UI layer to disentangle it from your back-end anyway why not also bring it up to speed? So, if you're going to have to rewrite your back-end to disentangle it from your UI layer anyway why not also bring it up to speed?
Because they have 10 people working on it and they can't boil the ocean with that kinds of resources. If you try to do all the things at once, then you get nothing actually to the finish line. You'll be getting what you want in the next point release.
Re: Audacity 4.0
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
> so difficult to upgrade to new versions Perhaps, because GTK developers insist, that GTK2, GTK3, GTK4 are different toolkits. > Qt4 to Qt5 usually only involved ... I'd start with Qt3 to Qt4.
Yeah let's start on a specific version that they overhauled the API since computers are getting new hardware features, god forbid a different DPI. And use that as a leverage point against a library that kept their API quite stable for the last 20 years! Especially when comparing Qt against a library who couldn't keep its shit together for 5 years and is infamous for breaking all sorts of API and removing features.
> since computers are getting new hardware features
It's not possible to move forwards fast anywhere.
> and removing features
Yeah, this is indeed very unfortunate. They claim the GTK core team is about 2 devs, so tiny that we're lucky the development goes further at all. Hard to understand considering Red Hat became part of IBM.
Re: Audacity 4.0
#267Re: Audacity 4.0
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So, if you're going to have to rewrite your UI layer to disentangle it from your back-end anyway why not also bring it up to speed? So, if you're going to have to rewrite your back-end to disentangle it from your UI layer anyway why not also bring it up to speed?
Because they have 10 people working on it and they can't boil the ocean with that kinds of resources. If you try to do all the things at once, then you get nothing actually to the finish line. You'll be getting what you want in the next point release.
So, as I said, a matter of priorities.
Re: Audacity 4.0
#269Re: Audacity 4.0
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
imagine picking some Vue framework over Qt when talking about "the stable road future kids walk down to become professionals". There's software written today in Qt that traces back all the way to the mid 90s and are still top-of-the-line for their business. The project I'm working on has been based on Qt since Qt 4 era, has been through people vouching for JavaFx, Angular, JUCE, React, Electron, and a dozen other fra…
Structurally, Qt is sometimes worse given the compatibility issues. There are desktops where Qt5/Qt6 software runs fine if you can get it to compile, but the GL interface has been broken on many platforms for over a decade. If folks don't plan on maintaining things after a release cycle it no longer matters how one ports disposable code. On mobile the App life cycles are short. Quasar does exactly what Qt has been do…
> There are desktops where Qt5/Qt6 software runs fine if you can get it to compile, but the GL interface has been broken on many platforms for over a decade.
do you have example / bugreports of this ? for my app I run tests across a wide range of laptops, platforms and distros, across nvidia / intel / amd / llvmpipe / ... and it all works fine. hell, with the help of Claude I managed to port back the current dev branch of Qt6 back to Windows XP, with working OpenGL.