Comments on: 3 out of 6 users prefer software mixing http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/ Change thrives on me Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:18:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Bryan Clark http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/comment-page-1/#comment-1539 Bryan Clark Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:07:14 +0000 http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/#comment-1539 Andrew: Thanks for the correction, I swear I copied the link directly from his page... not sure if it changed since I first grabbed the image but I updated it either way. The model release (for people) is mostly about privacy, which is mostly about expectations of being private. With the given CC license and a public posting of the image on flickr I would think it hard to expect much privacy assuming the license was respected. I agree that it still seems a very complicated gray area especially when it comes to things posted publicly online. Good points! Andrew: Thanks for the correction, I swear I copied the link directly from his page… not sure if it changed since I first grabbed the image but I updated it either way. The model release (for people) is mostly about privacy, which is mostly about expectations of being private. With the given CC license and a public posting of the image on flickr I would think it hard to expect much privacy assuming the license was respected. I agree that it still seems a very complicated gray area especially when it comes to things posted publicly online. Good points!

]]> By: Andrew http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/comment-page-1/#comment-1537 Andrew Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:31:23 +0000 http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/#comment-1537 By the way, that image appears to be licenced under the CC-BY-SA-NC licence, not just CC-BY-SA. Also, having a licence for the copyright doesn't mean you can use images of recognisable people for promotional purposes. You need a model release for that (and some other uses), otherwise you can be sued for things like defamation (e.g. for effectively claiming that that particular person likes a product/service). It's complicated, and varies considerably by jurisdiction, but basically copyrights aren't the only issue involved in publishing photographs of people. So a CC licence doesn't automatically mean you can copy a photo of someone and use their likeness in any context you like. See e.g. http://www.danheller.com/model-release-primer.html and http://www.danheller.com/model-release (although they're written mainly from the photographer's perspective). And of course there's a wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_release. By the way, that image appears to be licenced under the CC-BY-SA-NC licence, not just CC-BY-SA.

Also, having a licence for the copyright doesn’t mean you can use images of recognisable people for promotional purposes. You need a model release for that (and some other uses), otherwise you can be sued for things like defamation (e.g. for effectively claiming that that particular person likes a product/service).

It’s complicated, and varies considerably by jurisdiction, but basically copyrights aren’t the only issue involved in publishing photographs of people. So a CC licence doesn’t automatically mean you can copy a photo of someone and use their likeness in any context you like.

See e.g. http://www.danheller.com/model-release-primer.html and http://www.danheller.com/model-release (although they’re written mainly from the photographer’s perspective). And of course there’s a wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_release.

]]> By: Sander http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/comment-page-1/#comment-1524 Sander Wed, 17 Oct 2007 23:03:57 +0000 http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/#comment-1524 Most people wouldn't know whether they have software or hardware mixing anyway.... Something like PortAudio looks very promising. Most people wouldn’t know whether they have software or hardware mixing anyway…. Something like PortAudio looks very promising.

]]> By: Greg Gilbert http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/comment-page-1/#comment-1519 Greg Gilbert Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:49:54 +0000 http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/#comment-1519 I don't prefer software mixing over hardware mixing, I prefer all my apps to be able to play audio when they need to without regard to what else may be running. Since every computer I've owned since around 2002 has needed software mixing to accomplish that, I'd rather have it work well. I don’t prefer software mixing over hardware mixing, I prefer all my apps to be able to play audio when they need to without regard to what else may be running. Since every computer I’ve owned since around 2002 has needed software mixing to accomplish that, I’d rather have it work well.

]]> By: Stoffe http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/comment-page-1/#comment-1517 Stoffe Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:42:12 +0000 http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/#comment-1517 Rudolf, cards with hardware mixing is really really uncommon and aren't really made at all since years back. Also, the CPU is not "hogged" as todays CPU's are really good at that kind of thing. I don't know why manufacturers stopped providing hardware mixing, but a guess would be that there was no benefit to speak of. If there was an actual demand, cards would definitely have the support... So in short, software works for "everyone", hardware gives no benefits, better to focus on software, yes? Rudolf, cards with hardware mixing is really really uncommon and aren’t really made at all since years back. Also, the CPU is not “hogged” as todays CPU’s are really good at that kind of thing. I don’t know why manufacturers stopped providing hardware mixing, but a guess would be that there was no benefit to speak of. If there was an actual demand, cards would definitely have the support…

So in short, software works for “everyone”, hardware gives no benefits, better to focus on software, yes?

]]> By: Rudolf Kastl http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/comment-page-1/#comment-1514 Rudolf Kastl Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:56:32 +0000 http://clarkbw.net/blog/2007/10/17/3-out-of-6-users-prefer-software-mixing/#comment-1514 why would anyone prefer softmixing over hardware mixing besides a hardware manufacturer that saves a few cents? softmixing has the benefit of hogging your cpu? Why would you prefer softmixing? why would anyone prefer softmixing over hardware mixing besides a hardware manufacturer that saves a few cents? softmixing has the benefit of hogging your cpu? Why would you prefer softmixing?

]]>