How about the Win32 Version?
from the manual (Introduction):
Why doesn't Ardour run on Windows ?
There have been several discussions about porting Ardour to Windows. The obstacles are relatively few in number, but rather substantial in significance. Ardour was written to run on operating systems that properly and efficiently support a portable operating system standard called POSIX (endorsed by the US government and many other large organizations). Linux and OS X both do a good job of supporting POSIX, but Windows does not. In particular, the efficiency with which Windows handles certain aspects of the POSIX standard makes it very hard to port Ardour to that platform. It is not impossible that we will port Ardour at some point, but Windows continues to be a rather unsuitable platform for pro-audio work despite the improvements that have been made to it in the last few years.
Its about a few VST plugin....
thx for telling me this....
according to those code...
I can tell how hard it is....
Ardour can run win32/x86 VST plugins (many of them, anyway). However, its rather hard to build it with this capability and because of the interaction between the GPL (Ardour's license) and Steinberg's licensing, nobody is allowed to build binaries of Ardour with this capability turned on. Many of Ardour's more programming-oriented users are running Ardour with VST plugin support enabled, and it works well for them.
Why would you want to run it on windows...microsoft SUX!
I find this one hard to believe, but you are saying I can run Win32 VST plugins on OS X if it has an intel processor? How? Where do I find the doc on this?
.. delete this post please - duplicate..
Paul is talking about running win32 VST plugins through the wine project on linux.
If I remember correctly, it has to do with the SDK and the license for VST's. If you use the SDK for your self... No problem. You use the SDK and distribute a binary for others -- it isn't for yourself anymore and the company wants to control things (like royalties).
However I believe you can distribute source code that makes use of the SDK (as the win32/wine/VST thing is source code form only)
I might be a little off, but close to explaining why!
I have several comments on my personal drupal website about WinHoles in general.
summary: 1) Because people generally like to be led around (like lemmings) and 2) MicroSucks fills in a large nitch market of people that don't want to think (too much anyways).
Solution (workaround?): Dual boot a machine, WinHoles for suck crap and Linux for professional / development stuff (like Ardour)...
I have one machine at home that is dual boot, one machine at work that has vmware workstation and (ha, as I like to say it) "runs winholes as a process on Linux". Other than that.. the rest of my machine 5 are Linux (exept more for one which is Windows *only* for LinearX products like pcRTA, LEAP and LMS).
I am finding fewer and fewer reasons to run WinHoles *EVERYDAY* -- still doesn't stop purchasing hardware!
Most GNU/Linux or Mac programs can hugely benefit from porting to Windows.
A lot of Windows users don't even know that alternative platforms exists, and most composition courses use Windows systems and programs.
A Windows port of Ardour could:
Moreover, if Ardour is GTK-based the interface can be ported without any problems. Is the performance the only issue that prevents a Windows port?
The average guy running windows generally has a poor understanding of how things work on his OS. So when Windows real-time perfomance related problems will appear (due to windows poor coding quality), the average user will think that ardour just doesn't run fine.
What will the benefit be for ardour ?
and most composition courses use Windows systems and programs.
I would love to switch to Linux for audio but at the moment I am using Ableton Live and Reason most of the time. A killer combination.
Reason is rock solid, doesn't crash at all. I do believe XP is excellent for music. But hopefully I am able to switch to Linux one day. I don't like the mentality of Apple and Microsoft.
I would miss a couple of things after the switch. Reason, Live and some plugins, Lounce Lizard3 and some vst effects.
I am doing music as a profession so the switch needs to be smooth... hopefully one day:)
/Marco - Melodiefabriek.nl
OK, for those who needs an open source multitrack alternative for Win32 here's Traverso:
In progress we (always) trust.
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. If this is a matter of you thinking Microsoft's practices are immoral then you need to get off your high horse and realise most of the english speaking world uses it and are unlikely to change. As it happens I was waiting for a program to use at home until Digidesign finally release Protools LE for Vista.
Markinoko is the perfect example of this snobbary, what makes you think people using a Mac know more about how it works than a windows user? From my experience, people move to OSX because they find that it's easier to use, although maybe you have a point about Linux users. I fail to see why a beginner couldnt have access to a decent free audio recorder anyway, and if it doesnt work on his machine, it's probably not his fault.
I fail to see the importance of POSIX support if it's all too easy to work around.
no, sorry. *that* is just snobbery.
'i use windows and so do lots of other people in my position, so you have to bend to our ways. you are in the minority so you are wrong'.
if this was a corporation writing the software purely for profit, then you *may* get away with calling them short sighted for not 'supporting the mainstream', but this is *not* a corporate venture. it is a small group of people writing software that they feel passionate about. one way to take that passion off someone is to force them to support a platform that a) they don't much care for, and b) does things in a very different way (causing much more work).
besides, there has been progress on the win32 front, go onto the svn and download and compile it yourself for all the other windows users out there. or are you not prepared to put in the work that you are forcing on these 'snobs'?
It looks like there is a JACK port in progress for Windows: http://jackaudio.org/node/13 .
That announcement is over a year old.
Jack have been ported to Windows, this is the link of the review:
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
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:
1. If the "limited number of users" theory would be true, then why devs refuses to keep in consideration the porting to Haiku, that IS the (POSIX-compliant) multimedia OS and _actually_ don't have a single multitracker ?
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.
2. The "windows’ poor code" theory is false too: the well-known quick look at the Win2k source article proved that the quality of the code is generally excellent. Modules are small, and procedures generally fit on a single screen. The commenting is very detailed about intentions, but doesn't fall into "add one to i" redundancy..
BTW i believe we should'n care about this: I would care *MUTCH MORE* about ReactOS instead.
3. The "plugin incompatibility" is a false problem too since N.A.S.PRO. exist.
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?
Your subscriptions & donations are critical help that make it possible for full-time development of Ardour to continue. Your support is critical and much appreciated.
May goal US$4500 (US$54k/yr)
Subscribers 805 US$2041/month
Support Ardour, get free upgrades: pay $1, $4, $10 or $50/month for a year: