TriCaster on Linux, Anyone??

[Quiet1onTheSet]

Methinks it's neat that the partition responsible for reformatting our TriCasters to factory condition is made up of Linux code.

Ahh, but TriCaster wholly on Linux, makes for a compelling sounding system, that could result in increased realization of processing umph, Linux being the capable, highly-efficient OS that it is.

'M not a programmer or computer tech, so I may be off-base here. But I'm fantasizing that some Linux manifestation would be none too cool, if it were wrapped in a portable live production studio that is TriCaster.

But might there be a hazard with this idea, relative to hardware compatibilities, particularly having to do with peripheral media devices?
In other words, do current media devices play well on SUSE Linux for example or, say -- Ubuntu?

Anybody think NewTek would do well to place a Linux-powered TriCaster (version 3.0?) software system in the development pool? If not, what are the most compelling reasons?

If so, why?
:beta:

[sbrandt]

I second the motion.

All in favor.....

[PIZAZZ]

boo to Linux.

Peter have you used Linux? What is your experience with Linux?

I would rather NewTek use an OS that is guaranteed to be around with the support of a real company behind it.

Linux is cool for some but not for all. Talk about a nightmare of technical support trying to get a linux based box to allow file sharing with a bunch of PCs at the office. yikes.


Considering much of the VT/TC suite uses DirectX tools and there is not a real true compatible version of Linux that handles DirectX correctly, well let's just say a linux TC is just not going to happen without a ton of work. Is it even worth it?

For the few times I have had issues with a TriCaster, it was more so because UPS dropped it or a power supply died. I have NEVER had problems with the Operating System.

[sbrandt]

Whenever Hollywood needs graphic software to do fantastic things that have never been done before and on a giant scale, it seems like they always use Linux. There must be a good reason for that.



Following from an article on Linux in Hollywood:

"Disney/Pixar, DreamWorks Animation, Sony, ILM and other movie production studios from Hollywood are using Linux to produce their movies. I bet not many of you knew this (I didn't until today) but practically every blockbuster movie you see in theaters today was created with Linux. Hollywood prefers to use Linux instead of other operating systems, like Windows or Macintosh, for three simple reasons: it's BETTER, faster and cheaper.

In Hollywood, Linux is considered the state-of-the-art, and 95% of the desktops and servers used at those big budget movie production studios, like Sony and Disney/Pixar, to create special visual effects and animation, are Linux based operating systems. Yes, I know that many of you will say now, "it's not true", "it can't be right" or "I heard they use Mac OS X software", but it is true and Linux is used to render those CGI Blockbusters you probably saw on theaters, faster than any other operating system.

The movie Scooby Doo, for example, was created at the Rhythm and Hues studio and the whole movie was rendered and touched up with the help of custom made software which ran on Linux systems. Other blockbuster movies like The Matrix, Titanic, Gladiator, Superman Returns, What Dreams May Come, Cats and Dogs, Shrek, The Perfect Storm, Prince of Egypt,

The Road to El Dorado, Antz, Chicken Run, Deep Blue Sea, Star Trek: Insurrection, Fantasia 2000, Men in Black, Hollow Man and many many more, were created with Linux software such as RAYZ, Maya or Shake. Now, don't think all the software used in movie production is free, because most of the applications cost somewhere between $8,000 and $15,000 or even more, but hey, it's Hollywood!

Another example is the very popular Shrek movie made at the DreamWorks studios, and the renderfarm used has a 1,000+ processors, 80% Linux and 20% IRIX. DreamWorks created a render tower made up of dual 1GHz P3 2GB RAM computers housed in a 1RU (1.75") package stacked 41 units high, which can replace computers consuming 40-50 feet of data center rack space. Also, DreamWorks uses both internally developed programs tailored to the needs of their animation production and commercially available animation software, and because most of their internal developed software was originally created for the SGI IRIX operating system, it's much easier to port the applications to a Linux system, which is much more similar to IRIX than Windows or Mac OS X."


http://news.softpedia.com/images/news2/Hollywood-Loves-Linux-3.png
On the left you can see the Linux render tower (renderfarm) from DreamWorks studios.

(I'd vote again but I don't belong to A.C.O.R.N. and didn't worship at the styrofoam temple in the Invesco Mile Hile Stadium in Denver, so I probably wouldn't get away with it...)

[Paul Lara]

Anybody think NewTek would do well to place a Linux-powered TriCaster (version 3.0?) software system in the development pool? If not, what are the most compelling reasons?

Here's a deal-breaker for you, Peter:
Flash Media Live Encoder doesn't run on Linux.

[DiscreetFX]

Methinks thy idea is a good one in spirit. Thy TriCaster working in harmony on such a robust and open OS. High-end Autodesk video editing solutions already work thyn way. However methinks it is a dream that will not happen anytime soon since TriCaster is so tied to DirectX and the Windows API. Your Linux prayers may not be answered this time. Thy god coders at NewTek would know the answer for sure.

Once thee boot into the TriCaster interface the OS underneath doth not matter anyway.

[Paul Lara]

Once thee boot into the TriCaster interface the OS underneath doth not matter anyway.

AMEN Brother Bill.

[Quiet1onTheSet]

boo to Linux.
...Considering much of the VT/TC suite uses DirectX tools and there is not a real true compatible version of Linux that handles DirectX correctly, well let's just say a linux TC is just not going to happen without a ton of work. Is it even worth it?

For the few times I have had issues with a TriCaster, it was more so because UPS dropped it or a power supply died. I have NEVER had problems with the Operating System.

Thanks for providing your input on this, given your vast experience with Microsoft Windows and NewTek solutions, Jef.

Here's a deal-breaker for you, Peter:
Flash Media Live Encoder doesn't run on Linux.Alas! That's a significant, additional bit of enlightenment, there, brother Paul.

Pity that, truth, though.
:hey:

[Quiet1onTheSet]

However methinks it is a dream that will not happen anytime soon since TriCaster is so tied to DirectX and the Windows API.

[Thy]Linux prayers may not be answered this time...

Once [thou bootest] into the TriCaster interface the OS underneath doth not matter anyway.[Old English edits, and bold text, mine -pg]


AMEN Brother Bill.
Oh, OK. I'm sure you two have a valid point, at the very least, regarding the user/operational aspect.

[SBowie]

Just my personal opinion, but I think a Linux TC it is just slightly more likely than an AmigaDOS one. :p

[Quiet1onTheSet]

Just my personal opinion, but I think a Linux TC it is just slightly more likely than an AmigaDOS one. :pAwww! That was too cold, mate!

[billmi]

I think Bill hit the nail squarely on the head, with the idea that the OS doesn't matter.

Tricaster is built as a video appliance. Sure a lot of us do root around "under the hood" but that's not what it's built for. It's built for the user to be dealing with the Tricaster interface, at which point the OS is moot.

Back in the 1990s, I developed touch screen kiosk applications, and initially when asked what was under the hood, I talked about AmigaDOS and its advantages for that sort of thing. Interprocess communication meant I could do things like have my AmigaVision flow call up a terminal program, query a database on a mainframe and display the results, without needing to actually write new code for an app that did all of that. Problem was, that killed sales with answers of "We only use DOS," or "We're a Mac facility" despite the fact that the customer would NEVER be under the hood. I didn't start making sales until I changed my OS answer to "It's a proprietary black-box system running on a series of custom graphics and sound co-processors."

Ever look through the skins directory on a Tricaster? The Tricaster interface is called "BlackBox," and IMHO, that's with good reason.

Being a stand-alone appliance, and keeping its OS as hidden as possible gets the Tricaster past a lot of OS bigotry, just like back in the day when you used to be able to by a "Macintosh Video Toaster."

[Quiet1onTheSet]

...Back in the 1990s, I developed touch screen kiosk applications, and initially when asked what was under the hood, I talked about AmigaDOS and its advantages for that sort of thing...I didn't start making sales until I changed my OS answer to "It's a proprietary black-box system running on a series of custom graphics and sound co-processors."

Ever look through the skins directory on a Tricaster? The Tricaster interface is called "BlackBox," and IMHO, that's with good reason.

Being a stand-alone appliance, and keeping its OS as hidden as possible gets the Tricaster past a lot of OS bigotry, just like back in the day when you used to be able to by a "Macintosh Video Toaster."Wow. I remember being mesmerised by that attractively slick TOASTERLink advertisment hitting the magazines back in the day...

BTW, I suspect you've advanced the argument "your side of the poll" is making, quite well, Billmi.

[mysteron09]

My day gig is as an enterprise IT architect, and over the years I've developed an aversion to anything Microsoft for mission critical apps. However, for dedicated systems that have an extensive integration test and maintenance program, as does Tricaster, I'm willing to at least hear out the case for a Microsoft platform. A fresh XP install that doesn't have constant updates buggering up the registry (e.g. from constant driver and program installations) will probably perform well for a long time.

I personally would prefer a Linux or OSX-based solution, as I find those systems to be inherently more stable and capable of handling real-time tasks. There is extensive Linux use and support from the big IT players (e.g. IBM, Oracle) as well as in mission-critical apps in various markets.

[billmi]

Wow. I remember being mesmerised by that attractively slick TOASTERLink advertisment hitting the magazines back in the day...


It was an interesting approach hide AmigaDOS and cover up the Amiga logo so the hard-core Mac user doesn't know/admit they are using it. Seemed an effective way to market to users who drank the Kool-Aid and would not ever consider using a different OS.

Computer Connection used the same concept selling "Media Stations" back in the 90s. I made a launch menu for them that let the user choose between Toaster and a sound editing app instead of showing the Amiga Workbench, and that was it. Commodore and Amiga logos got covered up, and they were sold as self contained media workstations.

Toaster Link seemed silly to me to tie up a perfectly good Mac just to use it as a remote control when you could just use the keyboard and mouse that originally came with the Amiga, save money and get other work done on the Mac.

It reminded me a lot of a conversation I had with a co-worker at Fresno State, who had just purchased a 286 DOS parasite computer (whole computer on a card that ran inside the 'Mac.)

Me: "That's pretty cool, but for that price you could get a whole 386 machine that would be faster, and have its own monitor and keyboard, and its own hard drive giving you more total storage."

Co-Worker in entranced voice: "But then it wouldn't be in my Mac."

I can totally see why from an IT/support standpoint getting all the *computers* in a facility on the same OS make sense. The thing is, a Tricaster isn't filling the same role as those other computers. I don't worry about the OS or programming languages used in my security system, consumer DVR, video switcher, cameras or anything else with an embedded processor, because they are filling different roles than my computers.