I found that if I remove phonon-backend-gstreamer and phonon-backend-xine and installed phonon-backend -vlc everything worked fine
Interesting! I might have to toy with this sometime soon. Did that fix the problem system-wide, or just with VLC? I have toyed a lot
with Phonon configuration in the past and could never overcome the problem, hence resorting to removing NVIDIA's HDMI driver.
nice article, very informative, but i think the obvious question that begs to be asked and answered is why would you use an OS that has such silly flaws such as defaulting to using an intel audio driver for a nvidia audio chip?
Because the pros outweigh the cons, of course ;-)
I should state that the issue discussed in the post is not going to be typical of most distros out there. Ubuntu, Fedora, openSUSE, et cetera, are designed to be friendlier in these regards, and with the help of Pulseaudio, it's not difficult to choose a default audio device for playback and recording.
For those using distros like Gentoo, that leave most of the configuration up to the user (that's the point, after all), problems like these can arise. Under KDE, using the Phonon configuration tool should
work in configuring defaults just fine, but in personal experience, it's hit or miss.
This problem in particular is a little interesting because the only non-SoC HDMI driver found in the kernel is nestled in behind Intel's HDA driver. It seems like the Intel HDA driver has become some sort of de facto standard, because I don't see how exactly the HDMI/DP driver relates itself to Intel's audio driver. Perhaps it feeds off of the snd-hda-intel driver, I'm not certain.
snd_hda_codec_hdmi: "Say Y here to include HDMI and DisplayPort HD-audio support in snd-hda-intel driver. This includes all AMD/ATI, Intel and Nvidia HDMI/DisplayPort codecs."
That said, the fact that it requires Intel's driver doesn't much matter, since that wouldn't have changed the default audio device at all. That has to do with ordering and since the GPU is queried before any audio card, it seems as though it got preference once booted into the system.
Most of the hardware-related problems that plague Linux have to do more with the vendors and software developers than Linux itself. ALSA could
have a simple option available to allow the user to pick a default audio card, but it doesn't. Pulseaudio has made things easier, but at the expense of certain features. Thus, the problem isn't fixed. As I mentioned in the news post, 'the audio system found within the OS is horrible', and with regards to configuration, I couldn't mean that more.
Audio is the number one hardware problem I've ever had with Linux. Today, I never have a problem with graphics, I/O, networking, peripherals, et cetera. In many cases, it's easier
to configure/manage hardware in Linux than it is in Windows. Last month, I hooked up an Xbox 360 wireless gamepad to Gentoo and had it working
in three minutes. Windows? 45 minutes.
seriously, other than not having to pay a per seat license for linux on the desktop, what other reason do you have for using linux as your primary OS?
For the sake of time, I can't get too exhaustive about things, but I'll give a quick run-down.
First and foremost: free and freedom. This is a cliche "plus", but it couldn't be more true. I can install Linux as many times as I'd like, on as many machines as I'd like, and never, ever, ever
have to worry about things like activation. I can use the OS without ever thinking about $$$ at all, in fact. There are some exceptions of course, like VMware Workstation, but that's not quite the same thing. Windows costs money, and has a ridiculous activation scheme. Linux doesn't, and that to me amounts to a great feeling of freedom.
Second, I just like how the OS works. It's highly configurable, offering a far greater level of tweaking-ability than Windows. Again, I don't feel like I'm being throttled back with Linux... whereas I do with Windows. With Windows, there are a billion things that drive me nuts, and while there are things that drive me nuts just as well with Linux, the delta between the two is huge.
When I first started using Linux, I didn't do it because I wanted to be cool, or different. I wanted to because Windows pissed me off in more ways than I could count. After pretty-well forcing myself to use and learn Linux, I ended up moving away from Windows entirely except for certain tasks that require it. Linux to me feels comfortable, I can focus on working rather than focus on how I can work around stupid Windows "features".
The number of niggles Windows has used to drive me so nutty that I ended up keeping a journal for a while where I'd put what rubbed me the wrong way about Windows that day. I say "day", because quite literally I ended up adding to this list almost every single day. After a while, I deemed such a diary was a little retarded, so I stopped doing it. At that point I proved to myself that I wasn't just hating on Windows for the sake of it.
Third, configuration. Take a sample of 1,000 Windows 7 machines and most of them are going to look the same. Sure, the taskbar and such will be a slightly different color, but overall, there's not much to differentiate one install from another. Take a sample of 1,000 Linux machines, and well, I doubt it needs to be said.
Fourth, stability. I admit that things have gotten much
better with regards to stability since Windows 7 launched, but to me, nothing can compete to Linux. More often than not, if someone experiences a crash of some sort under Linux, it's due to the graphics driver or some other hardware driver. It's a lot easier for Windows to not experience such issues given the support for it is unparalleled, but despite that, Windows still crashes more than Linux (in my personal experience of the past 6 years of using both OSes for the most part full-time).
Fifth, repositories. If I want to install an application, 99% of the time I can load up a software manager and install whatever I need through there. That level of convenience is hard to match.
Six, interoperability. You know what's nice about opening up a file manager under Linux? I can click on a hard drive with any FS on it and read and most times write to it. According to Windows, there only exist two file systems; FAT and NTFS. It's totally ignorant of any other OS on earth.
Seven, hardware support. Yeah, yeah, this sounds ironic, but it's true. You can boot up a Live CD on a desktop or notebook and even without installing it have more hardware enabled than you would right after installing Windows. I've even booted up a Live CD for Linux and used webcam software after installing it through the software manager. While Windows almost always requires you to download special drivers, Linux supports a ton of hardware right out of the box... it's staggering. If you ever go into the kernel and poke around the device section, the number of devices supported is almost mind-numbing. And this all for a kernel source folder that takes up something like 300MB.
In the end, no OS is perfect, and in many ways, even Linux can make me want to punch a wall. But at the end of the day, I've had a ton of experience with both OSes, and it's Linux that I end up feeling far more apt to use, despite its issues.
Here's a related article that might be of interest:
Thanks for posting!