Topic: Can UAD get there first?

https://forum.harrisonconsoles.com/thre … l#pid58578

I wonder what RME will do if UAD goes into the World of Linux.

Windows 10, Mixbus 32c v7.xx, Fireface UFX+ &  AvLinux MXE, Mixbus 32C v7.xx,  Fireface 802,

2 (edited by ramses 2022-01-16 20:58:07)

Re: Can UAD get there first?

I'm surprised that UAD actually wants to start Linux support given that only few smaller interfaces with low port density and only few Shark DSPs are supported for Windows.. And this although Windows is still a much larger market compared to the Linux market. Also bad, none of their USB / TB recording interfaces support both, Windows and Apple.

Also, the quality of Windows 10 drivers is far from stellar. I had performance and stability issues with the UAD-2 Octo when trying to run just one virtual Fender Amp and 2 VSTs with lower latency / realtime performance. https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … CIe-EN-DE/

In my opinion, for UAD it makes no sense to get bogged down in the Linux area when Windows support is not complete for all products and by no means on par with Apple (in terms of stability, assuming that stability under Apple is better because so many customers are so excited about UAD solutions under Apple).

Side notes:
- Best you also win in the lottery to be prepared for the additional costs for plugins. Even if you buy them during special offers it's still a significant amount of money for stuff, that is only useable under UAD/Sparc DSP.
- These Shark DSPs are not the fastes ones frankly said .. you might need additional devices to accumulate DSP power as there are plenty of interesting, but very [Shark-] CPU hungry plugins.
Wish you luck !

BR Ramses
UFX+, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro21H2, Cub12Pro

Re: Can UAD get there first?

Well, the somewhat nasty facts that the plugins run inside the UAD hardware could make it much easier for them supporting Linux. Because they would not have to change their plugins as such, they would only have to provide VST adapters for Linux for their DSP-based plugins. Plus, of course, device drivers for the interfaces as such.

Since there are still not so many high-end plugins available natively on Linux, this would open up a whole world. An UAD world of course, which would be to their economical benefit. (Basically, to my opinion, you currently can't work on Linux without using Windows VSTs with one of the wrappers such als LinVST.)

4 (edited by ramses 2022-01-18 12:19:05)

Re: Can UAD get there first?

SchwobSchwob wrote:

Well, the somewhat nasty facts that the plugins run inside the UAD hardware could make it much easier for them supporting Linux. Because they would not have to change their plugins as such, they would only have to provide VST adapters for Linux for their DSP-based plugins. Plus, of course, device drivers for the interfaces as such.

Since there are still not so many high-end plugins available natively on Linux, this would open up a whole world. An UAD world of course, which would be to their economical benefit. (Basically, to my opinion, you currently can't work on Linux without using Windows VSTs with one of the wrappers such als LinVST.)

Agree from technical aspects, but thats only one of many aspects towards a successfull product.

UAD seems to have its root in Mac.
With the same argumentation it should be easy for UAD to port their entire product portfolio to Windows and to allow for some flexibility to use either USB or Thunderbolt as interface depening on what your computer has.

But reality looks different:
- only for windows small and limited interfaces with usb support, but not for Mac
- the better interfaces with more I/O and DSP power only for MAC and only for thunderbolt

As good as every other vendor has driver support for their products for Windows and Apple.

And not to talk again about my instability problems with the UAD-2 Octo which is a product which is in the market since many many years (definitively no chipset problems, as this goes through PCIe). Such problems I had never ever with any of the RME products that I use since around 7y: RayDAT, UFX, UFX+, ADI-2 Pro.

And now you think that UAD, which hasn't yet finished to polish their product line for full Windows and USB/TB support would bring something phantastic for Linux ? Questionable ..

Don't get me wrong, I am wishing the Linux community good luck, but I have some doubts.

On top comes, that UAD will need to invest plenty of time on the GUI part for the Mixer and the plugins.
Here I think the diversity of so many Linux Distributions might be challenging at times for dev and their product support.

BR Ramses
UFX+, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro21H2, Cub12Pro

Re: Can UAD get there first?

They (UAD) moved the goalposts shortly after telling people to go ahead and make a petition. Apparently UAD made a joke about Linux users.

I'd rather accept that Linux support isn't going to be official than misleading people. Which the UAD did now.

In light of this, I better understand why RME can’t promise anything official to the Linux people. At least in the near future

Windows 10, Mixbus 32c v7.xx, Fireface UFX+ &  AvLinux MXE, Mixbus 32C v7.xx,  Fireface 802,

Re: Can UAD get there first?

Quote: “An UAD world of course, which would be to their economical benefit.”


With due respect.

To my understanding of the matter, this statement is completely presumptuous.

The international character of this forum draws people together from many continents, countries, cultures and naturally, of differing languages.

So poor writing, bad grammar, misspelt words and even the tautology and conflated notions I observe from time to time, simply do not matter to me, in the very least.

They are entirely predictable and understandable. To me, the main point is whether any reasonable, normal person would be able to comprehend what has been written?

The technical nature of the forum, however, lends it towards upholding factual information, as opposed to crackpot theoretical notions and ideas. Therefore, it behoves anyone who wishes to be taken seriously, to deal in facts.


At Jan 17th 2022, UAD had amassed 1500 signatures requesting Linux support.

Originally UAD posted that they would require “Multiple Tens of Thousands” of active UAD users, before considering development. I understand that this has since been amended to “20,000 signatures of active UAD users”.

I have noted others, (not UAD themselves) have posted various other, lesser numbers around the internet, which of course are misleading and pointless, a false dawn.


My point, is simply a business one.

An essential approach for anyone in business, I trust you will agree?

If UAD were genuinely convinced of the economic viability of such a niche market?

They would invest capital expenditure into it and press ahead with development, without any urging from anyone else.

The fact that they haven’t, is to my mind, a clear demonstration that as a business proposition, they remain entirely unconvinced that the proposal has real legs of potential growth, that would make such an investment worth the biscuit.


Furthermore, it may be that two other agendas in particular, might be at work here, so they are worth considering.

It may be that UAD are simply conducting a cost-free piece of market research to settle internal debate regarding whether the required size of market necessary, actually exists? In business, such questions should be asked.


I congratulate them for that, as someone who had an interest in a company that once spent a cool £1,000,000 on market research, simply to discover a name of a single product, that would mean the same, in every market throughout the world.

Words like “elegance” in the west, can literally mean “****” in the far east.

When I discovered this, I suggested they use a number, instead of a word.

You couldn’t make this stuff up, but it’s absolutely mind-blowingly true.

So the product ended up with a number, and thankfully, did well.


On the other hand.

It may be that UAD have found continuing badgering from Linux users distracting and tiresome.

So posed a survey, anticipating they are already clearly aware of the eventual answer. In order to close down debate, in a decisively final manner.

As so few signatures had been received, that might account for UAD lowering the threshold, making their proposal appear more reasonable,  knowing it could not be reached.


Personally, I have nothing against Linux or indeed Linux users, and would be personally delighted for them, were their earnest desires to be fulfilled.

Therefore, I am writing this with the best will in the world towards them, and hope their dreams come true.

I simply would not like their hopes to be falsely raised by well-meaning individuals.

Those who might be turning a blind eye to actual commercial realities.

Even realities regarding the survey in which they place hope.

But, misrepresenting, the truth of the situation.