Steinberg products for FreeBSD (as it's the MacOS parent)

Steinberg Lounge
1

Hello Cubase and all other teams at Steinberg,

I have decided to open my discussion here, because I’m a Cubase, and Dorico user.
There is a growing interest about Linux versions of the Steinberg products.
Many DAWs (Studio One, Harrison Mixbus, Reaper, BitWig, Ardour, Audacity, Waveform and orthers) and MuseScore already support Linux, and FreeBSD as well.
Would be nice if Steinberg makes the step towards the free OSes, too.
My suggestion is FreeBSD, as parent OS of MacOS and the fact that both OSes share a lot in common, which, in theory, should make the software porting from MacOS to FreeBSD much easier than building it for Linux. This is valid for the Audio interface drivers and the Virtual instruments, too.

I am going to quote this here:

"Darwin - which consists of the XNU kernel, IOkit (a driver model), and POSIX compatibility via a BSD compatibility layer - makes up part of macOS (as well as iOS, tvOS, and others) includes a few subsystems (such as the VFS, process model, and network implementation) from (older versions of) FreeBSD, but is mostly an independent implementation. The similarities in the userland, however, make it much easier to port macOS code to FreeBSD than any other system - partially because a lot of command-line utilities were imported along with the BSD bits from FreeBSD. For example, both libdispatch (Grand Central Dispatch in Apple’s marketing) and libc++ were written for macOS and worked on FreeBSD before any other OS. "

Still there are many things that make me thinking about FreeBSD as the better choice, over Linux. I’m going to collect all my post from a different Linux threads here:

2023:

2024:
February:

June:

2025:
May:
Аll the major things that make FreeBSD superior over any Linux are mentioned here:

No doubt that we need an opportunity to choose between Windows, MacOS, or some free OS like FreeBSD, or Linux.
The music software and the Virtual instruments was the only reason for me to move to Windows. If they were available for FreeBSD, I wouldn’t make the switch.
If the Big companies in this business make their step towards FreeBSD, or Linux, the rest will follow them. Presonus already did their step. We are now waiting for Steinberg.
Personally, to me this is a matter of time to happen, since the market is going in that direction.

I hope we could involve some Steinberg representatives in these discussions. Would be nice to know what they are thinking about.

Best regards,
Thurisaz

2

I think this is less likely than Cubase on Linux. Might be easier to port (I don’t know) but not enough users. I also don’t see that changing anytime soon.

As far as I can tell, most of those DAWs that you claim have FreeBSD suppport do not. There is a Linux emulator called linuxinator that can apparently run on FreeBSD to allow some Linux binaries to run on FreeBSD, but I think this is likely to have some of the same types of issues as the WINE windows emulator. And if we call “maybe being able to run on the wrong OS through emulation” as “supported” then by that very strange definition of “supported“, all Steinberg software is already “supported” on Linux because it may be possible to use WINE.

3

Hi @mducharme,

Well the switch from Linux, to FreeBSD, or any FreeBSD-based distribution is simple process.
Even the Linux users will find FBSD far more straightforward e easier for tweaking and administration. This is my personal experience.
The principles in the usage of free OSes isn’t the same using paid OSes…
For those who are going to use FreeBSD, or Linux as platform for digital studio, the OS doesn’t matter that much, if supports the software and the drivers.
When it comes to Desktop UX, there is no difference between Linux and FreeBSD, both using Gnome, or KDE desktop environments. They are even very similar in their basic Terminal commands, that are used by most of the MacOS users.
So, the argument about the OS popularity, in this case, isn’t valid.
Those who are using free OSes as desktop, don’t have a problem to switch to whatever OS is going to host the Steinberg products. Most of them are using free applications that are supported in FreeBSD, as well.
Why almost every software on the market, or free, has support for both Windows and MacOS?
It’s not about popularity. Windows is paid, and very often sold alongside the hardware. MacOS is free, but works only with Apple’s hardware.
And if the popularity is a factor, well MacOS, itself, is the most popular FreeBSD fork. :wink:
It’s close enough to FreeBSD, to be considered a distro based on FreeBSD.

I haven’t claim that all the mentioned DAWs are natively support FreeBSD, that’s why I mentioned Linux first, in the sentence. Surely Ardour, Audacity and the notation app MuseScore have native support.

Linuxulator

In the past I was using this Linux userland to run some linux drivers and software inside FreeBSD… it was far more stable than Wine. I have never had any issues.

Best regards,
Thurisaz

4

I disagree. It is certainly the case that environments like Gnome and KDE work on both. But you’re going to have to try to convince most Linux users to move to the other operating system because you feel it is better. I think you are going to get some pushback there.

At my work, a long time ago, we used to run some FreeBSD servers, they were set up by my friend who was a big FreeBSD evangelist who worked with me. I used to manage them myself after he left for another job (16 years ago). We later moved those servers onto Linux for various reasons - much easier to find people with Linux sysadmin experience, and while FreeBSD is somewhat similar, it is not identical.

Even my friend who was the big evangelist who always talked about how much better it was than Linux wound up switching. What finally made him decide to switch is, he worked for an IT consultancy and had convinced them to set up FreeBSD instead of Linux for quite a few customers. Then the Heartbleed bug with OpenSSL was discovered, big emergency. While all of the major Linux distros released emergency patches right away, that wasn’t the case with FreeBSD so he had to stay up all night for the entire weekend and beginning of the next week doing manual emergency patching by compiling a new OpenSSL on all his customers servers when all of the Linux servers were easily taken care of with apt upgrade or yum update. He told me he still loved FreeBSD but his love for it wasn’t worth the string of all nighters that he pulled. He has mostly used Linux since then.

Maybe this has improved since then, I don’t know. But you seem to be taking for granted that you’ll be able to tell Linux users “switch to FreeBSD, it is better!” and they will all go “oh ok! I will do so right now!”. I don’t think it will be that easy.

Much later we got another Linux sysadmin and had to set up an OpenBSD virtual server for a special application that could only run on that platform. The sysadmin strongly pushed back and freaked out, did not want to have to support OpenBSD. You may argue that his reaction was silly and there was no reason for it, but you’re going to get some of that from others, I guarantee it.

It makes no sense to me to recommend that Steinberg make FreeBSD ports of their programs when a lot fewer people use FreeBSD than those who use Linux and you are unlikely to convince them to switch. If they could have been convinced that easily, they would have been convinced already. FreeBSD has been around for a long, long time, and if all that had to happen was for Linux enthusiasts to be told “FreeBSD is better, you should move”, then there would be a lot more FreeBSD users than Linux users today (and there aren’t).

Oh yes, certainly those three do, because they are open source products. So I’m sure there are packages that will make those three run fine on FreeBSD. But the others, we have no idea. Sure you mentioned Linux first, but you said “already support Linux, and FreeBSD as well”. Although it is an odd wording to separate them with a comma like this, in English this means the same thing as “already support Linux and FreeBSD” and since order doesn’t matter is the same thing as saying “already support FreeBSD and Linux”. Mentioning Linux first and then adding “and FreeBSD as well” does not clarify that those things do not officially support FreeBSD. The comma and putting FreeBSD last does not make any practical difference in the meaning of your sentence.

Maybe the Linux ports of those applications will work on linuxinator, but unless you’ve tried to use them yourself, you can’t say anything of the sort. Your experiences with other applications in linuxinator quite frankly don’t really matter all that much. You don’t necessarily have any idea what weird things those applications might do. They might run for instance but crash all the time. You really have no idea unless you have tried them yourself. From doing Google searches online I can’t seem to find any users who actually have run those applications on FreeBSD with linuxinator.

Tell you what - first go and personally convince the majority of Linux users on planet Earth to switch to FreeBSD. Then - maybe - this make sense. However, I think you will find the convincing is not as easy as you assume.

5

@mducharme,

You are right for everything related to Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD as server platforms.
I’ve been working as a system admin maintaining Debian Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD servers, long ago.
OpenBSD is a “tough guy” I wouldn’t use it everywhere. To me it’s perfect for Firewall and Router. It has the best Firewall available in any UNIX-like OS the Packet Filter. Very powerful and easy to setup. It’s a good decision to hide all your servers behind OpenBSD router.

Well, for the rest of the topic we’ll need someone from the development team to join and share opinion.
Back then, when I was using FreeBSD as desktop, I needed to use the linux emulator, nowadays there is native NVidia driver for FreeBSD. Many things have changed.
The DAW and notation apps users are not going to care about any eventual, server - based, issues like the one with the OpenSSL.
I don’t have to convince anyone to switch to FreeBSD. Steinberg would be the one to do it.
I’m just sharing my opinion and experience here, and where FreeBSD is superior over Linux, and what could be beneficial for the Linux users if they decide to make a switch.
No doubt that FreeBSD, as desktop outperforms every Linux.
No doubt that FreeBSD is more secure and stable as desktop. than Linux.
No doubt that FreeBSD offers easier and more straightforward method of administration, than Linux.
FreeBSD doesn’t run services that aren’t allowed by the user.

Fortunately I am busy enough and I don’t have much free time to spend on testing what will work on FreeBSD, or Linux.

The point here is, which OS will take lesser time and manpower to be integrated. Since the porting from MacOS to FreeBSD is easier, then the logical decision would be - FreeBSD. This is safer for the company, too.

6

I don’t think Steinberg wants to be in the business of trying to convince users on one OS to move to another less popular one…

Unless you mean by building Cubase on FreeBSD it will convince people. But that strikes me like Field of Dreams logic - “if you build it, they will come”. It works in a classic Phil Alden Robinson movie with a fantastic James Horner score, but I don’t think it quite carries over to the real world.

7

Can I please have Cubase on OpenIndiana?

Seriously, I tried to find the market share for FreeBSD, and every number I found is way below 1%. And that is probably mostly server. The number of people that use FreeBSD as a Desktop and for DAW work is most likely completely negligible, and the number of those people willing to use Cubase even lower. Why would a company spend lots of money porting, maintaining and supporting their product for what, a couple of hundred people? That would be commercial suicide…
I am not even convinced that porting Cubase to Linux would be a commercially viable endeavor for Steinberg.

8

We can’t even get them to add VU meters.