Cubase for Linux

The kernel is not a big issue. The major part is GUI. It is for sure a big effort to have multiple platform support. But is also good for the general quality. You need to design the software for it, and different system will trigger different bugs differently so you can find the bugs that are rare too. And good design is important to not get too far behind. Even Microsoft have given up and now making devices with “cancer” aka Linux in the form of Android phones. When driving do not look in the rearview mirror, look forward.

@cubace
If I can talk for personal experience (as I mentioned several times in these forums I work as programmer in a AAA game company)

You forgot the memory management, the audio system that works differently in the various OS, the support for Linux plugins that are not VST, all the code #defines that you need to add and that make code more unreadable and difficult to maintan, the inevitable creation of new bugs and workarounds to support stuff that before was not there, the support for the dongle, hire knowledgeable programmers that are able to code for Linux, it might even take an entire different team to do the porting and yeah you are right also the GUI is a problem.

Again for personal experience the wider the support for different platforms becomes the more massive and monolithic is the code, code with no errors is “no code at all”, you do not find more bugs adding more code, you create new bugs and subtleties that makes you spend more time debugging and slowing you down in developing other features.
We develop games for all the major consoles, and please believe me, on a project with 250 persons I have never heard anyone of them saying “wow thanks to the XBox I have found a memory leak on PS4”.

‘making devices with “cancer”’ I profoundly dislike this expression and belive you can do a better job in formulating it, in fact I do not understand the meaning of the whole phrase, I get that you you are generalizing something about Microsoft talking about devices that seem to be phones, which makes me even more puzzled cause the topic is Cubase for Linux and not mobiles applications…

It is a quote from former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer.

… who also called the concept of an open-source Linux kernel, i.e. the idea that one might actually control one’s own computer, “communism”. Interestingly, considering most computers (i.e. so-called “smartphones”) are now controlled by people other than their nominal owners, it would appear the Stever Ballmer’s view has prevailed.

they are not able to release an update of 10.5 for 20H2 so you have to get off the cloud and stop dreaming that they will make a cubase version for linux even if that would have been great

It is very interesting that when a user’s wish is formulated here (Cubase for Linux), so many “knowing” clarifications are offered by other users that this is an unrealistic wish - and why this is the case.
The wish to fly to the moon was also once unrealistic. If one had followed those who had declared Mr Kennedy to be insane…

I think that the task of a user forum is not to say what is NOT possible. It is Steinberg’s job to make it possible. As a user, I don’t care how (I don’t have to know how the carburettor in my car works…).
Besides, I find the arguments in favour of Linux quite understandable.

Needless to say:
yes, I too would like to have Cubase on a Linux computer. Why? Because I want it. And I would also pay for it (as I do now).
:wink:

i love linux and i have to use windows just to be able to use cubase. . . afterwards, you really shouldn’t dream because steinberg doesn’t think about users but rather thinks about how to touch their wallet. I find it ugly to delay the users of 10.5.20 which was released in May 2020 and not explain the compatibility with the update 20H2

I have a little story for you:

A man goes to a hotel and asks for the prices of the rooms:

  • “100$ with view on a wall” responds the concierge.
  • “I see, and how much is it with a panoramic view?” asks again the man
  • “480.000$, Sir”
  • “What? 100$ with 480.000$???” asks the man - “Why is that huge difference?”
    And the concierge - “Because to show the panorama to you we have to take down the building in front”

To be super clear I have nothing against Linux and I would be happy (for you) if there was a supported version for your favorite OS.

In my “knowing clarifications” I was trying to have an adult conversation to tell that dad Steinberg it’s not mean because doesn’t want to grant your wish, I was just objectively explaining, giving real world observations and a tiny bit of experience in the field, what could be the possible reasons why there is still no Linux version, why it is so complicated and why maybe the cost to make it doesn’t give enough return of investment to the company in order to grant your wish.

I was not saying it is impossible, just reflecting on why perhaps you do not have it yet and yeah as a user I know you do not care how is it done, but on the other side a software developer (or a business man) doesn’t care how much you want it if it is not profitable to make it.

You can still wish that you car can fly but if no one comes with the technical skills to make it so that your “carburettor” defeats the gravity you will end up frustrated because despite how much you wish it, with all yourself, that car will never move up the ground so, better to know why rather than harbor false expectations.

this is what i was saying, steinberg is not interested in users but in their money. See blackmagic, why can they make a version of resolve for linux? And there are other examples

Yes but look that the ROI (Return of Investments) that I was mentioning in my post is the DNA of every person that sells anything.

If you buy a cake and you pay 5$ it’s not because the person who made it is an angel but because the ingredients were cheaper. Who would give you something that costs so much to produce at a lower price?

But even yourself or myself let’s say we want to resell our studio speakers: would we sell them for few bucks if they are a good pair of speakers, perfect conditions and costed a lot? No. But this doesn’t make us “just interested in money”, don’t you think?

I am not trying to defend anyone in this topic not Steinberg not the users I am observing that perhaps there are not so many Linux users that convince Steinberg to make a dedicated version for that OS.
I was trying to explain (and I think I did it with real computer language examples and not using abstract words) that is a super complicated thing to replicate on Linux a software that is already so big and so mature and so old.

Ppl often has no idea how much complex is programming and thinks that you put a button here a checkbox there and the feature is done.
I am confident that you are familiar with Audacity, compared to Cubase it is like a tiny project, has like a fraction of the features and complexity that Cubase has.
Well you can browse the source code for it.

Here’s the link, check in the src folder and see how many files there are in there and what’s their content and tell me just by judging by the amount of things you see if it is easy or not to convert and test the whole program from scratch on completely different operating system.

I do not want to argue or discuss with anyone in here I want just that ppl realizes that there is no magic wand or tooth fairy that from one day to the other can do such amount of work only because “you know, computers can do that”.
It is not impossible but perhaps would cost millions and perhaps after is out finished people would not even buy it because they are already settled on Win or Mac (that let’s be honest are the vast majority of the system where any audio production is done).

In any case since no one of Steinberg is stepping in to confirm or deny anything this is my last post on this topic because I don’t know how to explain better than this:

I would like to have a Linux version but I understand (because my real life job is to be a programmer) that this requests costs literally millions of euros to the company and since the number of Linux users is a very low percentage this operation would be very risky.

1 Like

People are using as DAW. Still not for everyone. Someone will make the application that are good enough. The OS is superior. And when then happen it will very hard for Steinberg and Avid to jump on that boat. Reaper and Bitwig are already there on some beta stage. Mixbus is ‘live’. We wont get cubase until we have moved to one of them…

when do you realize that it is just user money that steinberg is interested in ?! Why Blackmagic (it’s not a stupid company and there are others) can make the win, mac and lin version of its davinci resolve and which works much faster under linux than under windows and on which have spent a lot of adobe PR and AF user because the one if he can do almost anything. They also offer a slightly restricted version of their software for free! Then do you know Blender 3D? do you still need a comment? Steinberg is not able to comment on the 20H2 and the compatibility with 10.5.20 and it is because they want us to buy the cubase 11. It’s very ugly, if I had known that at the time the purchase of cubase I would have looked for another software.

Sure they want our money. I give then that. But I have no big regrets to move to something else, at least give it a try. However I think it much harder to give up the instrument plugins that I use. Some vendors already do linux versions. Like waves, and they use the same plugins binaries on their accelerators. (SoundGrid and StageGrid that are linux machines)
Others like Native Instruments have huge problems to maintain their products, I think they are about 500 persons so they do most likely send power-point to each other rather than doing code work. Thinks change. Todays youngsters are have seen other things than microsoft. Within EU there was a 9.4 millions chromebooks sold in 2020. 44.3 millions tablets. (Apple has 34%) so that is 29 millions, mostly Linux/Android. You can like it or not, but if they want to sell software they need to make for the devices people buy.

yes, but that’s what I’ve been saying from the start, steinberg is not interested in users but only in their money

Absolutely, but many old companies with a lot of old customers also have difficult to understand how hard it is to get new customers. it might be cheaper to do everything to not lose the old ones…

NASA uses Linux.

In terms of OS’ for dedicated engineering and infrastructure purposes, the order is
Linux
Windows
Apple

Most of the tech giants uses a lot of Linux desktops, except Apple. However it is mostly in software engineering. On many companies this causes a lot of conflicts and friction where they have a IT strategy to “standardise” on Microsoft products. For many companies it also make sense, but if those that are in tech industry it very much a Baghdad Bob strategy.

Linux is almost a miracle built by shared interest and altruistic contributions. There is a lot of beauty in it and it has become mature enough to be used in certain cases but one of its major flaws is the lack of appreciation of some of its users for the effort that lies behind its achievements. These users think that by stubbornly insisting, they will convince developers to work for them for free, because they just deserve it and money is an unnecessary evil thing that corrupts the entire world.
Unsurprisingly most of them have a young age and not many responsibilities in their lives. While the world is not perfect, as of now, most of us have to pay rent or a mortgage to survive.
In NASA and engineering circles this is obviously not a problem because most of them are developers themselves.

yes, there’s very few with a story like that. CraigsList, AutoHotkey, Blender

Linux is definitely becoming more viable, with Windows going full on “user experience” more the way of Apple, rather than rudimentary engineering platform… which was inevitable.

3 posts were merged into an existing topic: Cubase for Linux