PDA

View Full Version : lightwave 8.0 and linux?



cresshead
01-02-2004, 03:19 PM
hi seeing as newtek added a linux capable render capability i wonder if this will continue in lightwave 8 and possibly be extended to a full version of lightwave 8.0 on linux??

maybe their plate is full right now but it's something they could look into in future...

Chrysolithos
01-02-2004, 04:13 PM
I read an article in Millimeter (or some such industy rag) about how much Hollywood likes Linux because they want to be able to modify it if they need to and Open Source lets them do just that.
Not that I need it here in the barren NW, but it would help NewTek sell more copies to LALA land, perhaps.

milkman
01-02-2004, 04:37 PM
Yea, verily.

Lightwave is pretty much the last reason I have to not switch to Linux.

wiremuse
01-02-2004, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by milkman
Yea, verily.

Lightwave is pretty much the last reason I have to not switch to Linux.

Certainly is the only worthy reason to boot into windows. DFX is running in linux http://www.eyeonline.com/products/teasers/df_linux/df4_linux.html
would be nice if Lightwave would follow. Most 2D Software such as Photoshop runs flawlessly in recent builds of WINE(some benchmark operations were in fact faster than some operations natively in windows). Just missing LW now=)

I highly doubt 8 will be running on linux given the current status of things. If we are lucky maybe 8.x or 9.x. I have my hopes up because the market certainly seems to be there for LW Linux.

thedaemon
01-02-2004, 08:20 PM
Photoshop doesn't run flawlessly in WINE yet, Wacom support isnt really working yet.. :(

wiremuse
01-02-2004, 08:59 PM
Originally posted by thedaemon
Photoshop doesn't run flawlessly in WINE yet, Wacom support isnt really working yet.. :(

My box must be magic then because everything runs fine here.

Beamtracer
01-03-2004, 03:22 AM
Running Linux on an AMD Opteron machine allows you to run the processor in full 64-bit mode. Microsoft Windows only allows 32-bit processing on the Opteron.

Ross_DD
01-03-2004, 03:41 AM
Hi,

i'm very right with LW Linux porting.

i hope that can be quickly...

Bye

Philours
01-03-2004, 04:52 AM
Oh yes, would be sooooo great !!!
Linux absolutely rulez !

Sho
01-03-2004, 11:04 AM
Agreed. I'd love to see Linux ports of Layout and Modeler.

hairy_llama
01-03-2004, 09:39 PM
I would also love to use LW on linux.

benhaines
01-05-2004, 02:26 PM
To be honest the core of it is easy, afterall they have Lightwave for Mac OSX which is Unix. So the difficulty would be GUI... IMO

Later :)

Noclar7
01-05-2004, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by benhaines
To be honest the core of it is easy, afterall they have Lightwave for Mac OSX which is Unix. So the difficulty would be GUI... IMO

Later :)

Thats what I was thinking,
I've been starting to use linux more and more now, and am currently only running linux at home. I would definetly be running linux at work if LW was ported.

back to the ease of port issue though, there might be a problem with plugin developers, as even when using lwsn on linux, not all plugins will work, esp 3rd party. but, if they are making mac OSX versions, this might not be as big of a deal eather.

Cheers,
RJ

Ross_DD
01-06-2004, 03:43 AM
Hi,

i'm sorry for my bad english.

just some words about Lightwave Linux porting.
If we analyze the main OS for graphic purposes, Win and Mac got the market "domain".
WinXP Pro e Win2k Pro are the best versions of MS OS;
with optimizing options (exclude all MS auto-updates, remote-controls, messaggistic, etc... and making OS installation in more disk-partitions, one for booting, one for caching, etc..)
there is a small sensible performance increase but the stability and vulnerability is always uncertain...
Mac OS is better than Win OS; this is my opinable opinion (i'm a PC user but i had worked on Mac Quadra, 9600, G3 and G4 in the past...) but there is some disadvantage also as the very
expensive cost and minor possibility of hardware upgrades (and software compatibility about third party plugins of more applications, in particularly... ).
Moreover, new Mac G5 are many interesting but there is some doubts about his effective performances and affidability, in 3D particularly...
Mac is the best for DTP and photo-editing and a bit in video-editing (Shake, Final Cut) but always professional 3D is on SGI and PC work-stations.
Professional 3D is "born" on SGI machines with UNIX-based OS (IRIX).
This powerful workstation is very monetary expensive and for high-professional use only.
Vantages of UNIX-based OS is the more flexibily and stability.
Majority of this vantages are in Linux OS.
Today the best PC performance (in 3D of course) are on Athlon 64bit machines with Linux OS.
Some of more important and powerful programs, (Shake, Amazon 64bit Paint-system, majority of Discreet and AVID applications), runs on UNIX-based OS only, than Linux, except some not much cases.
i think that Linux Red Hat is the more efficient OS for high-end graphic purposes, particularly in 3D graphic.
i have possibility of testing that OS with Amazon Paint software and it's a real good and more efficient workspace with the best performance that i've seen, with humbleness and sincerity: absolutely not instability, no crashing and very faster!
Major graphic-animation and cinema-FX agencies are working on Linux system.
Also they use proprietary applications based on Linux flexibilty and major customizing capability.
LightWave is one of more power and useful 3D-application (LW is the best 3d-app for me).
Linux porting of LightWave is really a good and useful thing.
My humble opinion is that Linux is the moresuitable "environment" for LightWave software
structure;
i'm not a programmer but i think that flexibility of LScript, modular-structure of LW application and his powerfull customizing options can find in Linux environment the more affidable and valid solution.

Thank You Very Much and Very Good New Year For All (from Italy to all the World).

Peace.

Ross.

Phil
01-06-2004, 05:17 AM
Well it's almost there in any case. The only current problem with running LW on linux (via Wine) is that the dongle appears to be unavailable.

Given the slightly less than happy situation with the linux LWSN port, with NT seemingly leaving it to die a slow and ugly death, I'm inclined to think that a working Wine-based port would be a cost effective way for them to assess the real demand for a native port. In this way, people wouldn't be left in the situation that those using Alphas and SGIs were.

I am not sure how much a native port would be worth in any case, especially since you'd either need a Wine layer to handle Win32 plugins or need to get full 3rd party support in place for linux plugins. Given the slow response to L[6] and the ongoing disparity in plugin available between Win32 and Mac, I'd hope a dongle enabled Wine-based port or compatibility layer could be forthcoming.

cresshead
01-06-2004, 06:29 AM
regarding using lw7 in wine on linux what's the reponse and render times like?

i realise it's running in demo mode in wine but it should give us an idea to how it would perform if it were available.

is there a performance hit with linux/wine compared to win2000?

there are several options for lw

lightwave on win2000 intel p4
lightwave on mac 0s/9
lightwave on mac osx [32bit]
lightwave on max osx [64 bit recompile would be nice]
lightwave on linux native
lightwave on linux native but 64 bit recompiled for athlon 64
lightwave on wine/linux

would be nice to have some of those choices!

Ross_DD
01-06-2004, 10:27 AM
i'm agree with You, especially for "lightwave on linux native but 64 bit recompiled for athlon 64"

For me it would the best choice.

Bye

Phil
01-07-2004, 04:31 AM
There is a slight lag in startup and OpenGL times, but it's not entirely noticeable. Under current versions of Wine with the nVidia driver, both for SuSE and RedHat 9.0, the panels don't draw themselves correctly unless you request them twice (i.e. press m twice for the motion options). This wasn't the case in early Wine builds so I need to find out how to give the developers appropriate information about this and file a bug report.

In terms of usability, there are no real problems. Everything continues to work as expected, even the hub is called and you can send objects between layout and modeler as under the Windows environment. KDE seems to allow child windows to display underneath the main program windows, which is a minor glitch, but hardly serious because you can access them from the window list.

It's also easy to hook up LW from a Windows partition so that your drives, etc. under Wine much those under Windows so that existing work could be accessed.

The only fly in the ointment is the dongle support and potentially the inavailability of quicktime under a vanilla install. I'm not sure whether QT will install under Wine - been too busy recently to try that. Photoshop 7 will install under recent Wine builds, which is a bonus for those who hate GIMP (which is available for Windows in both the old 1.2 and now in the pre2.0 (1.3) versions).


Originally posted by cresshead
regarding using lw7 in wine on linux what's the reponse and render times like?

i realise it's running in demo mode in wine but it should give us an idea to how it would perform if it were available.

is there a performance hit with linux/wine compared to win2000?

there are several options for lw

lightwave on win2000 intel p4
lightwave on mac 0s/9
lightwave on mac osx [32bit]
lightwave on max osx [64 bit recompile would be nice]
lightwave on linux native
lightwave on linux native but 64 bit recompiled for athlon 64
lightwave on wine/linux

would be nice to have some of those choices!

wiremuse
01-07-2004, 10:24 PM
There are several linux players out there that support the latest Quicktime video codecs =) such as Xine and Mplayer.

jamesl
01-08-2004, 02:37 AM
If Newtek is serious about being a player in major studios (and there's scant evidence that they have been serious in the past), then they'll port to Linux. And I don't understand the plugin problem... with a solid SDK, plugins can be ported with a minimum amount of effort. The existence (and capabilities) of Lightwave forced Alias/Wavefront to re-evaluate their entire business model. Maya is priced for volume now, and that was a serious shot across the bow for Newtek. They need to respond by providing a better product at a similar price point that studios can consider. Until there is a Linux port, they don't have that.

And yes, I know there are studios based on Windows, but they're the exception, not the rule. Dreamworks, Sony, ILM, Pixar, PDI, etc. are using Linux because they can easily migrate from their dinosaur SGIs to inexpensive Linux workstations with a minimum hit to their proprietary pipelines.

Cheers,

james lloyd
sony pictures animation

jamesl
01-08-2004, 02:42 AM
...I'm not really fond of Linux. People who say it's more stable than Windows aren't trying to run drivers for equipment that Windows handles with ease (scanners, printers, digital cameras, wacom tabs). Might be nice to host a webserver, but running Maya or Houdini with multiple monitors on an Nvidia card on Linux... yikes. Still, the studios have already made their choice.

cheers!

james lloyd
sony pictures animation

jamesl
01-08-2004, 02:59 AM
Why should Newtek be concerned with porting LW to Linux so they can sell a couple hundred (at best) licenses to the major studios? Because Alias/Wavefront figured out a long time ago that having their software used in major films is worth way more than any advertising they could afford. Lightwave is used in major motion pictures now, but that has been despite their efforts, not as a result.

Cheers (and good night)!

Limbus
01-08-2004, 04:57 AM
I really hope that NewTek will port Lightwave to Linux in the near future (8.5 maybe?). I would switch to Linux in an instance.

Flo

Nakia
01-08-2004, 07:57 AM
Need to bring back some IRIX support once agian.

jamesl
01-08-2004, 08:55 AM
Nobody is using SGI workstations these days. If you are, I suggest you upgrade to Intel/AMD and forget about Irix.

Lamont
01-08-2004, 09:06 AM
Hey!! I use(d) an SGI workstation!! It's a dual Xeon on WinXP, it's great, but it got a virus and 3DS Max died. So instead of dealing with it, I took it off the network and now I'm using an AMD.

LW on Linux? I use Windows and I doubt I'd be using Linux at home or work, but the thought of LW on another platform is great. More users.

Nakia
01-08-2004, 03:46 PM
Not to put linux down, On the wall at my job (Sun Server support) Someone wrote on the board Linux=Solaris written by Children

SGI is still good workstations the newest ones are pretty nice but $$$
One day when companies can afford $$$ SGI will make a come back or Apple will just by them out and use thier cool technology.
A dream

Phil
01-08-2004, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by jamesl
...I'm not really fond of Linux. People who say it's more stable than Windows aren't trying to run drivers for equipment that Windows handles with ease (scanners, printers, digital cameras, wacom tabs). Might be nice to host a webserver, but running Maya or Houdini with multiple monitors on an Nvidia card on Linux... yikes. Still, the studios have already made their choice.

cheers!

james lloyd
sony pictures animation

Linux does have its issues, but I still find it much more flexible in dealing with data. It's stable, but not much more so than Windows for a regular user (in my experience). It's still possible for a rogue application to completely lock up X Windows and it's also possible to lock up a local workstation in this way as well. You can recover the system from a remote login (usually), but that's perhaps the only saving grace.

No one sane is pretending linux is a panacea, but there is a legitimate and growing interest in it. I don't expect LW to be any more stable under linux, but the only thing stopping me using it now under linux is that the dongle cannot be found. Sure, I could run off and find a patch to remove the dongle requirement, but that would probably introduce additional problems, certainly with regard to dongle-locked plugins :D

I'll wait to see what happens, but even a comment from NT (yes/no/under consideration) or an official poll on the forums would give me greater hope that this will come to be. I'm not sure how thin NT's tech support is spread - perhaps they might have to start off with an 'unsupported' port in the first instance if their techs aren't linux savvy.

jamesl
01-08-2004, 04:58 PM
SGIs cannot compete price/performance wise, and studios have already abandoned them and rebuilt their pipelines around linux. Maybe NASA will shell out a few hundred grand for one of their supercomputers, but they will never be in the mainstream again... and even SGI switched to linux! Irix is indeed dead.

Nakia
01-08-2004, 05:15 PM
Linux still cost $$, do to support. I work on Sun servers in the Financial Market with thousands of Servers (over 3,000 Sun Servers in our NY city area alone). Now Linux servers are pouring in 100 a week worldwide since October. The issues are crazy!! The company built their own special build because of the lack of linux support for SANs hardware. You can't pass a rack of Linux servers without seeing one or two in "Amber" Light mode.
Now the company is looking at Sun's Blade servers to run linux or intel Solaris (Which has been proven production ready). The reason for looking at Sun servers for linux if they need to switch to solaris and still have support. Linux is a good move if you have the support team to back it up. You start clustering at hit a serious load you OS and App better be tight. THe movie world can afford to move to Linux because the payout might be good but what about the smaller contractor? Can they afford to keep loosing render time for poorly re-compiled kernels? Or dealing with loading the newest Nvidia drivers to gain more wireframe support to realise that 25 workstations GCC was not the same one the kernel was compiled with. Some of the issues can be solved with kickstart servers to be built with the new build of what is needed. But file servers will need to be seperate. NOw connectivity between the two needs to be top notch.
At my company we a designing a generic linux support from design to trouble shooting and it can get crazy.

Phil
01-08-2004, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by Nakia
Can they afford to keep loosing render time for poorly re-compiled kernels? Or dealing with loading the newest Nvidia drivers to gain more wireframe support to realise that 25 workstations GCC was not the same one the kernel was compiled with.

Now to be fair, that is documented in the readme file - it took me no more than a minute to establish the cause of this problem here and address it. This isn't a failure of 'linux', either. It's not as though you have to kill the Windows version of LW, either, but it might simply be a case of making a Trio bundle, even if the linux port (were it to exist) was unsupported because there weren't enough techs who were familiar with linux *shrug*

It's not an all-or-nothing scenario - if the dongle issue could be resolved, you'd actually have a Wine-compatible build of LW right now that could be used just like the Windows one. It's that close that it is slightly frustrating :D

Nakia
01-08-2004, 06:21 PM
I do think that NT should really invest in a hardcore Linux rendering solution. Workstation end depends on Video Card support and other Hardware. Render farms use less need to be supported hardware. But with Real large renderfarm the thought of storage will need to be address, but thats not NT problem.
I dual boot both Windows and Linux on my HP xw6000. If I was able to model on the Windows side and just boot back into Linux and have it rendering with more control. I will love that. Rendering solution will be a good idea with the Blade servers out there. LW do have it rendering solution for Linux but how much control do get on the linux side? I'm not to experiance with it, but can you change rendering options through linux? Be able to adjust the lighting would be a good feature and even Surfaces.

jamesl
01-08-2004, 09:24 PM
Nakia, I wasn't debating whether Linux was better than Irix (or Solaris or any other commercial flavor of unix), just that Irix is GONE. So your idea of NT resuming Irix support is a bit, well, insane.

Nakia
01-09-2004, 03:18 AM
I agree that it is insane. But IRIX was so good at what it did. SGI made bade Businesss moves.
:D
LW do run good on the two platforms its for now.