[esarbe]

> in fact it at first pushed us back A LOT

That argument I don't quite follow. Would you consider rephrasing it? My question is; how did PA set back Linux sound if it did expose all those flaws in the audio driver in the first place?

[guywhocodes]

Not everyone is a power user. At this time I was in university and Linux went from a reasonable choice to an unreasonable due to sound not working again.

If you care about real world usage, PA set us back years when Ubuntu made it default.

[esarbe]

> Linux went from a reasonable choice to an unreasonable due to sound not working again.

But that's the crux, isn't it? Linux sound was not not-working because of PA. Linux sound was not working because it was fundamentally broken with drivers that had wildly different behaviors. Everyone was hacking around broken drivers all the time, I distinctly remember how I had to recompile the kernel back then to get some custom-fixes for my setup in because the driver was so kaput.

Only with the introduction of PA was there finally a way to test and evaluate the drivers in a systematic fashion.

So, in short, my point is this; any software that - in this broken state of Linux audio - tried to introduce a software that made available the features the drivers proclaimed would have run into exactly the same problem as PA. Because PA didn't introduce the problem, PA made it visible.

It's like blaming the doctor for diagnosing the illness.

So, while your experience was that sound suddenly wasn't working anymore because Ubuntu configured the default setup to use PA, for lots of people that sound never worked this was fine - because their drivers weren't broken.

[rektide]

Alsa is fine, if you needed absolutely no features whatsoever. This weird glamorization of alsa as sufficient or at all adequate feels like itcs true, for only rhe most basic basic basic of users.

Anyone who has ever plugged in a usb headset or connected a bluetooth headset or plugged an hdmi output into their laptop knows the value of pulseaudio. It's role as a modular, pluggable, controllable audio intermediary layer is invaluable: it has a great control panel that lets you say, ok app, start sending your output somewhere else now. Even if you only have one soundcard ever: it let you adjust per app volume! Utterly basic need. To propose that users ought have been fine without these basic capabilities is insanity. Alsa was insanity.

Alsa was a dead, impotent, lifeless husk. It let apps output audio to a device, if you knew to try various hardcoded strings like hw:1.0, hw:2.0, hw:2.1. But that was all alsa was good for. One couldnt open a control panel & change the volume of an app. One couldnt send an app to a new output (bluetooth, hdmi, usb audio). Trying to get a sound card to pick between various output modes, for optical output for example, was hell: i spent literally days getting optical audio going. Everything required careful scripting in a shitty awful .alsarc dsl to do anything good.

Pulseaudio made it all much easier.

I have no clue why anyone would valorize alsa. It was incredible finnicky, super hard to configure. It feels like certain sects just want to spread poison against linux & freedesktop. There have always been reactive, outraged camps. Eternally dismayed at progress, at better. I just can't take seriously the thought that alsa was an appropriate & adequate tool for end users, in any way though. It's ridiculous: nothing worked without careful careful delicate scripting & trial by error, and the system was utterly static, unable to respond to change. Alsa was not an end user system, unlike pulseaudio: it was an api for software. Pulseaudio changed the game. I am so tired lf hearing pretenses that alsa was ok or enough. It never was amything remotely adequate. The nonsense hate has to die. Progress was required. I saw it work flawlessly on many systems even in the earliest days. It wasn't & still usually isn't required. I don't see what anyone could be asking for. It just seems like a need to sow doubt.