One piece of hardware like an EQ or compressor isn’t really an ecosystem. It’s just one unit within a larger system, and that larger system is analog (from the standpoint of the device). PT isn’t really a closed system either, it’s just one piece of software with compatible hardware.
But even if PT was a closed system with HDX I think it only supports Raphie’s point; pro studios will buy that because it pays itself off, as opposed to “hobbyists” who aren’t willing to pay as much for that DAW/hardware.
So the question is also then what people are paying for…:
It’s definitely not the opposite of the best though. I’d say it’s very, very close to the best DAW out there. But again, the “existing producer community” that makes a living can afford it, and more importantly a lot of us who work in post-production can afford it as well. So the question is if there’s any money in it for Avid to open things up for Linux.
And getting back to the previous point: “We” are ok with paying a premium if there is better support and a minimum guaranteed performance level.
Fair enough, and of course I agree that it would be useful. But do you want to pay Steinberg for that extra work they have to do to keep up with hardware, software and OS changes? Because it’d be a guaranteed sh%@storm if they recommended a setup that all of a sudden stopped working as ‘promised’, or if they started lagging in updating that/those configuration(s).
…etc…
You should probably pick and choose your arguments a bit more carefully.
If you’re arguing for Ubuntu/Linux + a dedicated piece of hardware then you’re arguing for what is essentially a desktop platform. So you can’t then simultaneously argue that Windows / MacOS are doomed because people are moving to smart phones, tablets and could services. That would hit that hoped-for box equally hard.
Secondly, if you choose that argument, that desktop OS’ are dying, then how does Linux help?
Thirdly, if you’re arguing that we’re going to run this in the cloud, then you don’t have to argue for Linux at all. Then an MS cloud service will do just fine. That could be Azure (?) or whatever. To use as a user it won’t matter. It’s the service that’s guaranteed, not the OS. The OS will then be irrelevant.
In addition;
a) low latency for cloud DAWs… probably not so much… I.e.; no-go.
b) you’re not going to do a bunch of video rendering online either because the data transfer with higher-res source footage pushes the data transfer requirement so high you might as well just keep it all local and spend the time rendering locally instead… not to mention the risks of relying on an internet connection to output final renders. Those going for this are probably the exact same people that have such low requirements they can probably suffer through a render as well.
c) look at Microsoft’s balance sheets; where does it make the most money? On services/cloud or on selling Windows?.. i.e. it’s well prepared for more cloud services
d) MS is slowly switching over to UWP from win32. Future editions of Windows will be free of legacy compatibility which is instead added as a “module” to the MS CoreOS. So if anything if there’s a progress to be made to a sleeker and more secure platform it’s going to be UWP, certainly not Linux.
)
