Did they realize they needed a better solution? (though Pipewire also deals with video)
(the point here is basically: why couldn't they fix pulseaudio?)
Did they realize they needed a better solution? (though Pipewire also deals with video)
(the point here is basically: why couldn't they fix pulseaudio?)
Personally I think the Linux world follows redhat way too closely. Especially since it's really IBM now.
But I'm more open to pipewire because of this. Having nice people behind it is important too IMO.
Personally I don't really trust either and I lament the high level of commercial involvement in Linux. It's one of the reasons I use FreeBSD. And they are still doing very well in features. For example they had jails (real containers, not chroot) way before Linux had containers.
I don't believe in "win-win scenarios" when it comes to commercialisation. In the end the commercial interests will always trump everything. I think RedHat's recent actions around CentOS are a good example of that.
I'm pretty sure he got similar amounts of criticism at the time
* low latency / pro audio
* secure video streaming and desktop capture under Wayland
* unification of Jack and PulseAudio ecosystems (Pipewire implements both APIs)
I don't think RedHat or anyone ever said that Pulseaudio is perfect or covers all use cases.
Pipewire is a completely new backend written from the ground up keeping interactive use cases in mind. It implements the Pulseaudio API for compatibility, so it can be used as a drop-in replacement, but has its own extensible interface.
Probably.
But the Pipewire developer is at Red Hat, and Fedora has it as default.