4 ms·
> Pulse was only really janky in the early years; by 2010 it was as solid as anything else in tech. Then why was PipeWire introduced as a PulseAudio replacemen
by DaSHacka 2y ago
> Pulse was only really janky in the early years; by 2010 it was as solid as anything else in tech.
Then why was PipeWire introduced as a PulseAudio replacement, and why have so many people sung its praises?
I think more people continued to have issues with Pulse for far longer than you realize.
- NekkoDroid 2y agoPipewire is a weird case. It was made as a general multi media orchistrator, that includes video and audio. It takes a lot of stuff from different sources. > Then why was PipeWire introduced as a PulseAudio replacement One of them is putting more focus on permission management with support for sandboxed containers, which is kinda necessary with the direction the Linux desktop is going. But it also is just a backend, that supports jack, alsa and pulse interfaces, so it was mostly a drop in replacement for the applications. Talk with the guy behind pipewire https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_buKw1la_tg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_buKw1la_tg (4:34 for the motivation behind pipewire)
- jononor 2y agoPipewire was created to support containerized applications (with limited system access), to also support video, and to unify both pro low-latency audio (JACK) and regular low-power audio (PulseAudio). It might have been possible to retrofit this all into the PulseAudio project - but the authors decided to start from scratch. There are some interviews and talks on YouTube, they might have insights into why exactly that was the case. But I have not seen any indications that it was because PulseAudio did not work for what it was designed for.