←back to thread

A bug saved the company

(weblog.rogueamoeba.com)
379 points ingve | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
kristianp ◴[] No.45022718[source]
Why do we need a paid app to record audio from the system? Surely it's a small enough job for a small utility/script? This seems very Mac ecosystem to me.
replies(9): >>45022760 #>>45022776 #>>45022793 #>>45022842 #>>45022883 #>>45023135 #>>45023318 #>>45024846 #>>45031065 #
javawizard ◴[] No.45023318[source]
Audio Hijack isn't a recording app. It's an app that allows you to selectively route audio from individual apps to different destinations - audio interfaces and otherwise.

Its built-in recorder is a small part of what the overall app does.

It drives me nuts how quickly people jump on the criticism bandwagon without bothering to look up what the thing they're criticising actually does first.

replies(1): >>45023688 #
mort96 ◴[] No.45023688[source]
Doesn't change the fact that when you try to find out "how do I record desktop audio on my Mac?", the answer is very often "use Audio Hijack", because macOS has no built-in way to record desktop audio. (Not even QuickTime's screen recorder can record desktop audio, only microphones! It's wild.)

These days, OBS is probably a decent alternative, but it's very video focused and very streaming focused, so it's not exactly great for that purpose.

replies(2): >>45024389 #>>45029954 #
1. veidr ◴[] No.45029954[source]
Not great, except for being free, and rock-solid reliable for the purpose of recording desktop audio!

(I pay for Audio Hijack Pro, too — and yeah it is better for the purpose, if the price is worth it to you.)

replies(1): >>45031735 #
2. mort96 ◴[] No.45031735[source]
Don't get me wrong, OBS is great! It's just clearly not made for this particular purpose, and therefore not great for that purpose. If you wanted to make an app whose main purpose is to record desktop audio, it would look a hell of a lot different than OBS.