Final paragraph sums it best:
Don’t want any bloatware or subscription services preinstalled on your computer? Consider installing Linux instead of Windows the next time you’re reinstalling your computer.
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
287 points (94.7% liked)
Technology
59086 readers
3755 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm quite interested in using Linux, but it won't run many, if any of the 100s of plugins I own, let alone my audio interface, or my production software.
At least, that's my assumption. I did a search and can see there's a decent DAW for Linux (the amusingly-named Cockos Reaper), it's affordable at $80. But I'd also need to buy a new audio interface, there's a few that have Linux drivers. An expensive experiment. My interest is because it'd be amazing to have a stable system to play music live, with no weird Microsoft shit happening in the background guaranteed.
Reaper is awesome. It's pro tools for non-millionaires.
Reaper is awesome indeed. But the DAW isn't the issue, it's the VST, very few work on Linux
it's wild to me how many people I see saying this. I assumed I was one of like... 3
Maybe Ardour can fit? You can pay $1 or more for the binary or compile it yourself.
Reaper is the best there is for Linux. There are other alternatives of you want FOSS, but they are not as good.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Ardour is very appealing to me because it supports VST3! There is a 'wrapper' available to make VST3 compatible with Linux, but that's just adding the complexity and potentially bugginess that I'd be trying to escape from.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Does the interface that you have now work under Linux? Linux has pretty good support for a lot of things now, so you may be able to use what you have. Reaper also has a generous free trial, so potentially this is a free experiment. (I'm no expert and just tinker with this stuff, but I have Reaper and I find it similarly easy/difficult as every other DAW I've used) Several distributions have "live images" where you can run it from a flash drive without copying anything to the hard drive. I don't know if you could set up Reaper and your interface from a live image.
If you do decide to do an installation, consider buying a different hard drive and installing Linux on that. You can install both Windows and Linux on the same drive, and it's not difficult, but it is slightly easier to use a separate drive and they are not expensive.
I have used Linux and Windows a lot, but I have only used Reaper in Windows, so unfortunately I can't say whether it's a similar experience.
Unfortunately, not only is my interface not supported, but it straight up doesn't work with linux (according to all the forum posts I've seen of people trying, failing, then asking UAD why no Linux compatibility). It's a UAD Apollo USB, ASIO-only.
I've got a frankly ludicrious number of M2 / SATA drives in my music PC so installing on a separate drive is no problem. Thanks for the tip! I bought a new interface for mobile production / live work, so maybe I'll fare better with that than the UAD beast. Certainly wouldn't want to stop using that because it's an absolutely fantastic interface, not to mention the 2x SHARC chips which allow me to run CPU-intensive UAD hardware recreations without smashing my CPU.
If you want to try Linux, try Ubuntu or mint. Those are the easiest to make an entry into.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(8 replies)
load more comments
(12 replies)
Nice try Microsoft! I'll never install Windows ever again.
I wish I could be like you but I like HDR too much.
I was just thinking about this recently, there’s a lot of talk about HDR and nit brightness specs and such recently, but I must be the only one that finds current panels too eye-searingly bright. My current IPS monitor is set at 2% brightness and it’s just comfortable enough for daily use. Even my OLED TVs don’t have brightness set over 10%.
I mean yeah I have the same issue too (escept I use around 20-25% brightness on my OLED). But HDR is about more than just brightness. For me it's worth it for the extra colors—especially teal—which SDR displays struggle the most at reproducing accurately.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I was honestly a little disappointed in how HDR looked. Maybe I didn't calibrate or set my colors properly. Dunno.
What kind of panel technology? You really need an OLED to get a decent HDR image. My old VA TV looked so washed out in HDR, so I never used it.
This will get patched fast. Microsoft loves the bloat!!
Aye. But make them work for it, eh? XD
view more: next ›