• nintendiator@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Pipewire: works.

    Pulseaudio: worksn’t.

    Really, it’s as simple as that. Pulseaudio tried to be the systemd of sound and failed succeeded pretty horribly. Even its packaging was horrible, back when it was first put into Fedora and I tried uninstalling, it threatened taking down Libreoffice and Gedit with it.

      • nintendiator@feddit.cl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        No idea if that’s the case but they certainly seem to have been made with the same mentality. FOSS has for a while suffered of what I call the “Icaza pest”, trying to bring the Microsoft way of design and programming into Linux. The results and troubles this causes abound, considering eg.: the fart that has been Gnome themes since 3.x, or the Gnome posturing back in the day that “users have no right to change their settings” when modernization of Gnome-terminal, and how it’d interact with stuff like screen and dtach, were discused.

  • excitingburp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    PipeWire wins in the feature-set game, which is why it is being preferred over PulseAudio.

    According to the inventor of PipeWire, this is the wrong perspective to take. PipeWire is preferred over PulseAudio as a server, clients (apps) should continue to use the PulseAudio/JACK APIs because the PipeWire API is not designed for general use (it’s designed for things like pipewire-pulse and pipewire-jack).

    • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      So the middleware stays the same but the underlying server changes? That’s an amazing strategy I wish Wayland did this instead of breaking damn near everything with it’s strange restrictions on behavior and overlays

      • lengau@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s what xwayland is.

        Apps can talk to xwayland with the x11 protocol but instead of an X server rendering it, your Wayland compositor renders it.

        The restrictions come from the fact that those x11 behaviours are exactly things the industry has decided are a bad idea and should be replaced.

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Really? Like not letting apps draw over other apps? As far as I know Windows still allows that, so does even Mac OS. I don’t know who in the industry decided that screenshotting is a bad behaviour and needs to be removed but maybe they should find a new industry, like fast food line work for example.

          • Ullebe1@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Allowing any app unrestricted access to the input and output of any other app (like in X11) is a terrible security practice. It allows for trivially easy keyloggers and makes horizontal movement to other apps after the first has been exploited super easy.

            Many people’s answer to this is “then just don’t run untrusted apps, duh”, but that is a bad take since that isn’t realistic for 99% of users. People run things like Discord or Spotify or games or Nvidia drivers all the time, not to mention random JavaScript on various websites, so the security model should be robust in the presence of that kind of behaviour. Otherwise everyone is just a single sandbox escape in the browser away from being fully compromised by malware installed with root privileges. Luckily we know better now than when X11 was designed and that is the reason for things like Bubblewrap (used in Flatpak for sandboxing), portals and the security model of Wayland.

            And in the end: the people who decided this are the people actually willing to do the work to build and maintain the Linux desktop stack. If anyone knows what the right approach is, it’s them.