i want to pay Steinberg OS . no more microsoft .
Linux has to mature a bit more before companies deem the ecosystem good enough to make products for it. And Iâm not talking about market share. The Linux community suffers from a chronic case of reinventing the square wheel that has no treatment, which means you donât even have a stable base to place your product on. Blackmagic is able to make Resolve happen there because Resolve is an Electron app(a headless Google Chrome running a web app) since version 17. Bitwig can do it because Bitwig is a Java app. Steinberg would have a day in hell trying to troubleshoot their DAW with the millions of different combinations of libraries, desktop environments, display servers, audio servers (which Linux has 6 of with one of them being an attempt at making the other 5 compatible with each other) and so on.
1 Like
That should not be a problem for Steinberg. Steinberg does not use the audio provided by the OS-vendor, they add their own that requires the hardware vendors to make ASIO drivers for the OS-vendor. That will however be problematic for Linux since it will need to be open-source for the OS-vendors and they will likely not accept a new audio solution that easy and Steinberg will likely not make ASIO GPLv2.
I am glad this thread keeps going, and I would still absolutely LOVE if Steinberg were to support Linux. As I and others have posted before, it has to be financially viable for them to do it, and I think the chances right now are very low that they will do it in the near future, no matter how passionate my posts have been in the past. BUT I STILL HOPE FOR IT AND I STILL WILL ASK FOR IT.
As another update to my own long journey with Linux, hereâs how I am currently doing it in April 2025. This may all change again in the future. This has been a wild trip for me!
Iâm an avid Linux user for all things other than media production today. Although god knows Iâve tried to move EVERYTHING over to Linux many times. I know many distros of Linux, and know the landscape and pitfalls well. This is over many, many years. In the last decade in particular, Iâve tried switching to Linux for all my DAW work many times⌠and in the last year or so I finally got VERY CLOSE to making the full transition, and nearly dumping both Windows and Macs, including all Steinberg products. SOOOOO CLOSE!
I bought and/or tested every single commercial plugin and DAW that is native Linux, not to mention tested all the open source ones too. I tested dozens and dozens of pro apps and plugins running on WINE/Yabridge, and discovered what does and does NOT work well. I even set up some of my pro jobs on Linux and did real-world money-making projects on it. And I loved it. I actually totally LOVED it.
The bottom line verdict is that it is ABSOLUTELY possible to do it today and it is ABSOLUTELY user friendly enough NOW for ânormalâ end users to set up a stable, high-performance DAW on Linux with a âreasonableâ learning curve and get great results.
BUT hereâs the problem FOR ME. Even after all my efforts, I STILL ran into specific workflows where I still needed a Mac or Windows machine for specific plugins or apps that would NOT run on Linux (native or emulated). Not to mention I missed the goodness that Steinberg has been releasing lately, and other developers too. The list became very long of the key apps and plugins that I still needed for my professional work.
BUT I STILL PRESSED ON and I kept trying to make Linux work for my specific situation, to see if I could create workarounds for the missing apps and plugins. After all, I argued to myself, Grammy-winning producers and Oscar-winning composers were creating amazing work on hardware and software VASTLY inferior to what I ALREADY got working on Linux. So why canât I just move forward and deal with what is missing and come up with my own workarounds? I practiced minimalism techniques, and for a while, I thought maybe it would be okay⌠again, SOOOOO CLOSE!
So I spent time on my own workarounds for my important tasks, and YES I was able to make it work for a time, BUT this is when I had my latest epiphany about DAW work on Linux⌠I realized that ALL those workarounds were COSTING ME TIME. A lot of time. Now if the task could be completed in a native DAW and/or plugin (running under Wine/Yabridge), then there was NO extra time needed. It was fine. But IF the task needed an app or plugin that was unavailable, and it was especially CRUCIAL to a paid job, for example, then that task would take 2-3-4X as long to do with my workarounds that were also sometimes inferior. And in the end, the epiphany was that I COULD NOT AFFORD THE EXTRA TIME OR INFERIOR RESULTS DUE TO INFERIOR WORKAROUNDS for my specific use cases. Key word, âspecific.â YMMV.
Some important realizations:
- IF I didnât do this professionally, I would still be on Linux for DAW work right this second. And Iâd be happy.
- IF I didnât NEED specific tools (apps/plugins), then Iâd still be on Linux for DAW work right this second. And Iâd be happy.
- HOWEVER items 1 and 2 arenât part of my current reality, a COLD HARD REALITY, and thus I had to return to Windows and Macs. As disappointing as that is. At least for now.
- I ended up coming back to Windows and phasing out ALL Macs since I know I can easily transition all my Windows machines to Linux in a heartbeat if/when the time ever comes.
- I still keep a Linux DAW machine for tinkering and testing, and I still love it.
- When I decided to fully jump back in to Windows, I will confess that a very nice thing happened in the same timeframe, and that was the brilliant Cubase 14, which is the best Cubase in years and years. I have to say HUGE kudos to Steinberg for what theyâve done for Cubase (and Nuendo) lately, as it has several new features that Iâve been asking for over many years.
- Every time I feel guilty (and yes, I do feel a little guilty TBH) about giving up on Linux for now, I use Cubase and Nuendo and realize they are a quantum leap more powerful now for MY specific workflows today and MY preferences than anything on Linux. I feel a little guilty for admitting that in this thread, BUT itâs honest, and it makes me feel a little better about âbetrayingâ my long-term desires to move to Linux by at least having such great DAWs that I can use TODAY on Windows.
- Iâm not giving up on Linux for DAW work, and eventually I will try again. But I feel it will be another 2-3 years or so before I try again with that kind of effort, depending on various factors in my life and business. And BTW, I still use Linux for EVERYTHING else other than media production.
- I admit I do NOT like Windows, but I have accepted the reality that my TOOLS are more important than the OS at this point in my life, to SAVE ME TIME and get the results I need. So I have accepted my fate for the next few years, but I know the landscape and will keep my hopes up. But I will also say that Microsoft has been doing some good work on Windows for ARM, and so my feelings against Microsoft are not quite as critical as they were this time last year. The fact that Steinberg supports Windows on ARM now is actually pretty neat TBH, despite my continued issues with Microsoft.
- YMMV â the time might already be right for YOU to switch to Linux if you want to. Itâs possible, it works, itâs fun, itâs powerful, and donât listen to the people who say itâs not possible or only for geeks, freaks, and nerds. BUT just be aware it cannot (yet) fully replace all the apps you MAY need. It all comes down to what YOU may need. In my case, I canât do it right nowâŚ
- I will continue asking Steinberg to support Linux. I donât think they will any time soon, but it doesnât hurt to ask. I know the market conditions have to be right for them. And they have proven they can adapt, that they can support different platforms (Windows on ARM leadership, for example), so I believe itâs possible. One day. Maybe theyâre already working on it secretly. Who knows. If they ever release it, I will JUMP on it in a heartbeat.
- So Iâm going to be realistic in my day-to-day work, but still optimistic, patient, and hopeful. Until then, Iâm going to take advantage of the impressive tools they released in this v14 cycle, which are EXCELLENT.
Thatâs my âlittleâ update for April 2025. And Iâll keep posting in this thread over the years and maybe one day Iâll be running Cubase/Nuendo on Linux and it will be a GREAT day indeed.
5 Likes
Then that makes things worse, since they will have to port ASIO for Linux, meaning theyâll be the ones reinventing the square wheel, as now ASIO will have to work with the other 6 audio frameworks that already exist in Linux. Once thatâs done, then they can think about porting Cubase.
Most of that low-level is already done. There is a Cubasis for Android and ChromeOS that are linux OS but with a crippled user interfaces.
1 Like
The only Linux thing Android and ChromeOS have is the kernel. Everything else is different, including the audio.
Not really. There is a lot of help functions that you can use, but you can also access standard linux interfaces if needed. Audio | Android Open Source Project
For low-latency stuff like a DAW you need direct access to HAL and that will have very much the same properties and behaviour as the layer underneath (the kernel). I think a ASIO interface need to have Audio HAL access to provide its functions. But I have not seen that Steinberg provides a ASIO interface for Android.
Android can use either ALSA or OSS, which nobody uses in Linux these days. Itâs either PulseAudio or JACK. In case you have to use both, then you use Pipewire, which is one wrapper that sits on top of other wrappers that ensure compatibility between JACK and PulseAudio.
Pipewire does not provide hardware access. It uses ALSA as sink.
Iâve tested over a dozen class-compliant audio interfaces (including several Steinberg interfaces) on Linux with great results and I achieved decent to very good latency with almost no hassle in several DAWs on several leading distros. It works fine with very little effort, notwithstanding the shifting landscape of audio frameworks and related issues, etcâŚ
Obviously we wonât get the highest possible performance and features that a good ASIO driver might provide, and there are unique features that are obviously not available like RMEâs TotalMix, etc., but I was shocked at how decent the latencies were, and you can easily achieve acceptable professional results, right now, no problem on Linux.
Plug and play, right out of the box, no installation of any extra drivers on several leading distros. Itâs kind of amazing actually, and I can get a newbie up and running on a simple Ubuntu or Linux Mint machine, for example, in minutes. A fresh install + Reaper + class compliant plug and play audio interface⌠boom, up and running easy peasy.
Is it perfect? No. Can it be improved? Of course. Thereâs a vibrant community working on it, and always making improvements, albeit they are also pulling in different directions sometimes, which can cause some interesting diversions if you get into the weeds, but that is ALSO the culture of Linux in general, and you get used to that. Itâs like a controlled chaos that somehow, miraculously, works great. And as mentioned, there is still a shifting landscape in terms of audio frameworks etc., but for the most part, out of the gate with common distros, itâs already shockingly easy to use, and has been for years.
The people who say itâs only for the nerds and geeks are totally incorrect. But if you ARE a nerd or geek, you can go down the rabbit hole as far as you want to and have all the fun you desire and geek out on the finer points of kernels, distros, all the way down to contributing code to open source projects to help however you can imagine⌠Linux pro audio caters to ALL types of users, just donât fear it, start simple, and youâll be fine.
The âproblemâ in my case, as I mentioned in my prior very long post, is that Linux is missing key plugins and apps that I absolutely need for professional work, and my best workarounds still wasted too much time, and not to mention Steinberg has made it more difficult for me recently by releasing kick-ass Cubase/Nuendo 14 which I would seriously miss on Linux at this point. BUT if it werenât for those factors in my case, Iâd be long gone from Windows
(and Mac) already and doing all audio work on Linux today with a smile on my face.
2 Likes
Have you tried Bitwig as an alternative? Is very complete, readoably priced and runs fine on Linux (Ubuntu in my case).
1 Like
Plus one for a Linux version of Cubase.
Itâs not a âreligiousâ thing as some of the Apple/MS evangelists above have asserted.
Itâs pure pragmatismâŚ
On the plus side:
- Not locked into super expensive proprietary hardware (Apple) with a VERY expensive upgrade cycle
- No corporate spyware and unwanted bloat OS features
- Linux Desktop distros are now sufficiently friendly to be used by non tech users.
- A super optimised appliance OS would ensure stability and longevity
- Less dependency on US products in the light of recent geopolitical changesâŚ
On the minus side:
- Suboptimal audio device support.
3 Likes
n-Track is now also available on Linux.
I guess that if a big player like Steinberg decides to embrace linux a lot of hardware manufacturers will follow.
3 Likes
I donât think itâs as much âembrace Linuxâ as it is âadhere to a development model for centrally supported operating systems.â In that regard, thereâs no such thing as a âLinuxâ operating system. Itâs a centrally developed GPL-licensed kernel around which other operating system distribution stacks are developed and maintained by other organizations.
From a support perspective, they would be all but forced to âChoose and Official Distroâ otherwise it would be nearly impossible to support. And not just an official distro, but an official set of subsystem components. This is wholly different than supporting âWindows on Arm,â because Windows on Arm is siloed, unforked development for Windows, and entirely controlled by MSFT, and only by MSFT.
I see people compare this to Reaper, which is absolute apples and oranges. And even Reaperâs support statement is actually âweâll support it on Linux to the extent that our builds work on reasonably recent distros.â Thatâs it.
My guess is that of all the people who want a âLinuxâ version of Cubase, most are actually meaning âI want a Debian version. Or a Red Hat version (haha). Or an Ubuntu version.â
We get repeated KERNELBASE.DLL posts in this forum all the time with âSB suxx0rzâ and âwhy canât you code rite, yo?â diatribes when it has nothing to do with SB at all. And thatâs just Windows (and Mac, but mostly Windows). My presumption is that the dev team is voting for A Hard Pass in this regard.
None of my opinion really matters, but my guess is that this is simply never going to happen, not in a supported way at least. I doubt theyâd even give away the free version on a Linux distro because they canât effectively support it. And if they canât support it, they wonât sell it. And if they canât sell it, then The Big Boss will say âthen why are you developing it?â
Again, what I think doesnât matter, but I was compelled to at least bring up âthere ainât no such thangâ as we laymen say.
3 Likes
No problem if Steinberg chose a distro 
1 Like
Hello dear colleagues,
Well, this a matter of time. Many DAWs are having their Linux, or BSD versions.
I think that porting Dorico, Cubase and Nuendo to FreeBSD, or any FreeBSD based distro, would be the easiest and more direct way, since MacOS is technically FreeBSD-based. Of course they have their major differences, but still MacOS is far closer to FreeBSD, than to any Linux distro, and technically the same team could handle the job.
For Linux, most probably Steinberg will need to hire more developers, due to the nature of Linux distros and their kernel.
In conclusion, as one of those who have serious experience with both BSD and Linux, as former system administrator, I would always prefer FreeBSD over any Linux distro, as far more secure, more stable, resource-lighter and easy to setup.
Best regards,
Thurisaz
Thatâs exactly what Autodesk does with Maya: it supports Red Hat. Framework computers supports officially two distros, Ubuntu and Fedora and the rest are only âcommunity supportedâ. Bitwig supports âUbuntu 22.04 or later, or any modern distribution with Flatpak installedâ. Toon Boom supports Red Hat only. Davinci Resolve officially runs only on Rocky Linux (a Red Hat variant). Matlab supports Debian, Ubuntu, Red Hat and Suse.
TL;DR: I think which distro to choose is not the main limitation. You officially choose only one, or a handful of distros and if people want to do an unofficial package for their own platform, itâs their business. You setup a wiki and let people contribute to it, the FOSS way.
1 Like
Yeah, to me, what you just indicated supports why SB wonât do it. People will be using RH for something, and will install Cubux on RH rather than, say, Debian. But theyâll lie to support about what distro they have, and are stuck when they ask if theyâve run an apt update and they say âI donât have that.â
I disagree. Itâs a matter of return on investment in a profit-driven business model. SB would provide Cubase on a Tamagotchi if the market supported the required profit margins. One can reasonably presume that the C-Suite at SB/Yamaha isnât saying âHey, have you guys heard about this Linux/BSD thing? Have we looked into that?â If they could provide a professional product on ix/ux/bsd while supporting their business model, which obviously includes the cost of development and support, then they would do it. They donât. Thereâs a reason for that, and âtimeâ is probably the last one.
1 Like