PDA

View Full Version : LW under Linux ROCKS!!!



Xorlium
09-06-2004, 09:13 PM
Hey, I just tested LW under linux (wine), and it not only works perfectly, but in some cases, it works BETTER THAN IN WINDOWS.
The few tests I've done show the following.
Pentium4 3.06Ghz, 1gig RAM, GeforceFX 5900.

Benchmarks:
DOF under linux - 9.4 secs.
DOF under windows - 7.2 secs.

Texture under linux - 4.7 secs
Texture under windows - 4.1 secs

BUT

Raytrace under linux - 112 secs.
Raytrace under windows - 122 secs!!!!!!!!!!

Now, that is something... right?
I mean, considering LW has to pass through the slow down process of wine...
And it runs great, with every shortcut and everything...

Architook
09-06-2004, 09:30 PM
Now, that is something... right?
I mean, considering LW has to pass through the slow down process of wine...
And it runs great, with every shortcut and everything...

No, WINE doesn't necessarily slow down anything! WINE= Wine Is Not an Emulator. So code goes at full speed.

The differences in timings tend to be due to different efficiencies of LIBRARIES, especially memory management. Linux's core memory handling is cleaner and faster than Windows, especially when swapping, and this can give you speed boosts. Linux also handles threading better (less overhead).
So it's 50/50 about speed changes.. GUI intensive things tend to be slower on Linux mostly because the replacement libraries aren't as tuned as the Windows native ones.

But it's Great that it works! I would have thought the dongle drivers and Sentinel support would have been a problem, but I guess not.

Ade
09-06-2004, 10:31 PM
Do some thorough tests like raytracing etc.. lets see this...

Alliante
09-06-2004, 11:55 PM
How did you install your Rainbow Dongle driver? ;)

Para
09-07-2004, 12:45 AM
Since looking at straight numbers can create distorted results (in the eyes of viewers), I decided to turn those render times to percentages (Windows being 100% in all cases). So, here they are:
DOF
Windows 100%
Linux 131%

Texture
Windows 100%
Linux 115%

Raytrace
Windows 100%
Linux 92%

As you can see, the difference is from whopping 31% for Windows to 8% for Linux. Unfortunately these differences can be caused by just about anything. For example if you run out of physical memory in the middle of rendering, there will be a few extra seconds because the memory is cleared to be used again. The inconsistency of numbers also indicate what has already been said by Architook is true. Linux handles memory more efficient than Windows, which shows especially in speed of heavy calculations. So I wouldn't hop to this bandwagon of yours just yet.

If you really want to get into this, get a program called End-It-All, boot the computer, jack off network connections, uninstall/disable sound cards etc. "extra" hardware, run End-It-All twice and run the benchmarks again.

Grendel_T_Troll
09-07-2004, 12:55 AM
Could you send your WINE config to me? I am attempting to run LW 5.6 under Mandrake 10.0 atm. I have next to no experience with WINE. I was thinking about investing in VMWARE and seeing how well that works.

Xorlium
09-07-2004, 07:34 PM
Hi again.


Could you send your WINE config to me? I am attempting to run LW 5.6 under Mandrake 10.0 atm. I have next to no experience with WINE. I was thinking about investing in VMWARE and seeing how well that works.

I'd be glad to, but I'm not using real "wine". I have a partition of windows (dual boot machine), and LW is installed in windows. I use 'crosover', a commercial version of wine (that to my opinion, runs better), to run it, so don't get so excited yet :)

I'm not at that comp right now, so I'll do more tests when I get there.

Cheers all...

Phil
09-08-2004, 02:44 PM
But it's Great that it works! I would have thought the dongle drivers and Sentinel support would have been a problem, but I guess not.

Dongle support is not available so you're forced to using the Discovery Edition unless you resort to nefarious means. That said, if you are just loading standard scenes off the disk, the comparisons are valid.

NT have already stated that the dongle is their main roadblock to bringing winelib-based LW to linux. To me this seems absurd - the dongle is there to prevent piracy, not prevent your product from entering new markets. If it no longer does the first (arguable that it ever has) and is doing the second, it's time to dump it for a better solution or commit some coders to get the drivers working via Wine. There *are* native dongle drivers for both HASP and Rainbow dongles for linux after all.

In addition to this though, my brief foray with LW 7.x and 8.0 under wine was pretty near perfect. The builds after June screw up the interface for me (I filed a bug report with screenshots over at the wineHQ site), but it renders my 7.x scenes out fine and, bar some minor UI glitches, works as reliably as the Windows versions (although I can only try out 8.0 in discovery mode since I haven't opted to upgrade my LW license yet).

Alliante
09-08-2004, 03:13 PM
Phil I agree on all points, except the fact there is a Sentinel driver for Linux.

http://www.safenet-inc.com/support/sentinelESC.asp

I love to shoot down the people allegedly running the full version of Lightwave on this board and alluding to the fact they're not using a cracked version.

Piracy is not only illegal, it's also dangerous thanks to trojans and other nasties that the script kiddies like to put in.

NanoGator
09-08-2004, 05:48 PM
Piracy is not only illegal

Downloading a cracked copy of software that you legitimately have purchased is not illegal. Giving that cracked copy to your friends is illegal. If this guy was using a cracked version of the software, but he legitimately owns it, he's not breaking the law.

Honestly guys, lighten up.

Xorlium
09-08-2004, 06:31 PM
Hmpf...
So the dongle doesn't work under linux??
Arg, and I got excited...

I am using discovery edition on that machine, both under windows and linux. The benchmarks are the standard "benchmarks" scenes, and yes, you can load any scene that's there... You can even model and everything (and save, just an annoying restriction than can be overcome by saving different parts to different layers)
I installed it on that machine under windows to test it out under linux...

I do have a commercial version of LW, but I use it in another comp (that doesn't have linux).

And cracking isn't illegal, but it is dangerous...

Skritter
09-08-2004, 10:02 PM
Its not about the software thats illegal. It about the license.

We purchase the license to use the software, more than purchasing the software.

So if our freind has more seats operating than he is licensed for, then IT IS illegal. :cool:

NanoGator
09-09-2004, 12:01 AM
So if our freind has more seats operating than he is licensed for, then IT IS illegal. :cool:

Only if the other seat is open and running. If LW is closed, then there's no illegality.

Skritter
09-09-2004, 03:35 AM
Only if the other seat is open and running. If LW is closed, then there's no illegality.

......thats what I said!

[ open and running = operating ]

Xorlium
09-09-2004, 12:39 PM
We purchase the license to use the software, more than purchasing the software.
Hm.... then I'm not sure I'm not doing something illegal (easy, newtek :)).
And maybe asking at the newtek forums is kinda stupid, but hey, it's not like they could track me or anything :P

My cousin has a small 3d studio/programming house. I sometimes work there (but not in 3d) He has a complete version of LW, and he keeps his dongle attached at all times to the computer. On my free time, I like to use that computer (u know, when other people aren't using it). A lot of people use that computer, actually, not always for LW.

I took his LW cd's and installed it in my computer (the one I posted about, with linux and everything), in discovery mode, to test it out. I was going to recommend him to 'upgrade' to linux (u know, from windows), since linux rules...

Lately he has switched a lot more to maya, though, so I'm the only one (i think) that uses that LW...

Am I doing something illegal? I don't 'own' a commercial version of LW, I just use it sometimes... for non-commercial purposes (just learning right now) :)

mrunion
09-09-2004, 01:49 PM
If you don't have the dongle, you are running in Discovery Edition. I don't believe that is illegal. If you have cracked his version and are running in "full mode" and do not have the dongle, that is illegal. If he doesn't use it now, but uses Maya, maybe he could loan you the dongle and solve the issue completely.

Skritter
09-09-2004, 02:33 PM
Hm.... then I'm not sure I'm not doing something illegal (easy, newtek :)).
Am I doing something illegal? I don't 'own' a commercial version of LW, I just use it sometimes... for non-commercial purposes (just learning right now) :)

No! Because a Licenced Seat is being used. It dosn't matter who uses it.

He is allowed to employ people (paid or unpaid) and let them use the software or let friends jump on and try it out, but if that 'SEAT' is a lisecened seat, then any body can sit in it an use it for the purpose its been licenced for. ....and If it is not a licensed seat it is not a licensed seat.

benhaines
09-10-2004, 05:12 AM
Piracy aside...

I'm really looking forward to the day Lightwave will be available under Linux, 64-bit or not. At this moment in time it is one of the only reasons I keep a Windows XP partition.

In the last few years I have dumped the following which I use on a day to day basis:

- Photoshop ---> Gimp
- IE --> Firefox
- Outlook --> Thunderbird
- Afx --> Jahshaka (growing day by day)
- for video I use transcode (even has cluster mode!!!)
-....

One day ;)

Regards, Ben

Xorlium
09-10-2004, 08:20 AM
Come on newtek, you've heard this guy... :)
Linux is the future!

Alias ported maya to linux since the stone age, and since LW does run under linux with wine (apparently without the dongle), how hard could it be to do that one last step?
You wouldn't lose money, I mean, it's not like you'd have to launch a whole new product, just add better wine compatibility (the dongle?) and distribute wine's source code in the LW cd's (you still got space)

Check out www.netcraft.com
Newtek is using Linux for their web server...

So you already know how powerful it is, right?

benhaines: what is 'transcode'?? is it any good?

prospector
09-10-2004, 08:28 AM
Is it really illegal to run a program in an OS that the program was not written for?

LW doesn't run on Linux, so if someone can get it to run on Linux, legal or not, Newtek isn't out of any money by using it as they don't sell for Linux anyways.

Once Newtek DOES sell a Linux version then I could see a theft being done.

mrunion
09-10-2004, 09:10 AM
Though I am by no means a scholar of NewTek's licensing agreement, I don't think a legal, registered user of LW running it on Linux under Wine (or any other such software -- such as VMWare, etc.) is contradictory to the license agreement.

Now, if said user reverse engineered the code TO GET IT TO RUN, then that's different.

Phil
09-11-2004, 11:06 AM
Phil I agree on all points, except the fact there is a Sentinel driver for Linux.

http://www.safenet-inc.com/support/sentinelESC.asp


I am aware of this, and mentioned as much in my post (Rainbow dongle drivers are Sentinel dongle drivers). I had a discussion by email about this with Deuce and passed him all this information, hence my note that NT are aware that the dongle is their major issue in getting LW on linux.

To my mind there are a few options. Since Wine cannot currently (ever?) use Windows-native drivers and doesn't support services, you cannot just use the Windows drivers. The options then become hacking the Wine code around to allow the dongle to be used via the linux-native drivers *or* to drop the dongle and find a different licensing control scheme (e.g. FlexLM or SPM).

The issue with the latter is that plugins referencing the dongle ID (e.g. Worley products) would have to be updated or some form of dongle ID kludge be internally generated by LW based on the license information and exported to those plugins. *shrug*

None of these problems are insurmountable and a little effort from NT in this area would be greatly appreciated.

prospector
09-11-2004, 03:02 PM
for video I use transcode (even has cluster mode!!!)
-....

Mmmmmmmmmm clussterrrrrrrrrr

Even does subtitles.........
C'mon Newtek

How bout a VT4 Linux ver? Subtitles?

I really like the cluster mode.....
LW running on a 21 GHz cluster.......I would just probably kneel down and cry.
a 3 million HV particle scene rendering in under 30 sec and each one reflecting off the other........

benhaines
09-12-2004, 10:00 AM
;) http://www.theorie.physik.uni-goettingen.de/~ostreich/transcode/

JML
09-12-2004, 12:51 PM
I don't understand how lightwave "rocks" with linux when it's only faster
in raytrace renderings and not by a lot..
are you going to use linux when you use raytrace and reboot in windows
to render textures ?!

if you want to make your render go faster in texture,DOF and raytrace by a
few seconds, just overclock your computer!

i have a P4 3ghz and overclocked to 3.4,
here are the benchmarks:

your benchmarks:
DOF under linux - 9.4 secs.
DOF under windows - 7.2 secs.

Texture under linux - 4.7 secs
Texture under windows - 4.1 secs

Raytrace under linux - 112 secs.
Raytrace under windows - 122 secs!!!!!!!!!!

mine (under winXP):
DOF : 6.1 secs
texture : 3.6 secs
raytrace : 97.4 secs

not bad for a 30$ fan upgrade :D

Xorlium
09-12-2004, 01:58 PM
My benchmarks were just tests. I didn't optimize comp, nor closed everything. My point was that linux LW was competitive, even though LW is NOT optimized for linux, it's optimized for windows.

So maybe not use linux for everything LW, but maybe you got a few linux boxes that you'd like to use for network rendering?

JML
09-12-2004, 03:23 PM
it would be good to see the speed difference in big projects with lot of textures
and raytrace stuff
benchmarks are more accurate on long renders..

Architook
09-12-2004, 09:21 PM
I am aware of this, and mentioned as much in my post (Rainbow dongle drivers are Sentinel dongle drivers). I had a discussion by email about this with Deuce and passed him all this information, hence my note that NT are aware that the dongle is their major issue in getting LW on linux.




Remember that Newtek already has native X Windows code for LightWave on UNIX! They have shipped versions both for SGI IRIX and Sun Solaris, both with native X Windows... though they might have only been version 6 and not 7. So that code, assuming it's still around, should make a NATIVE Linux version easier...

I would love a native Linux LightWave, 32 and 64 bit.

Phil
09-25-2004, 12:07 PM
Remember that Newtek already has native X Windows code for LightWave on UNIX! They have shipped versions both for SGI IRIX and Sun Solaris, both with native X Windows... though they might have only been version 6 and not 7. So that code, assuming it's still around, should make a NATIVE Linux version easier...

I would love a native Linux LightWave, 32 and 64 bit.

AFAIK, the last IRIX and Sun releases were made with the old pre-6.0 code. It didn't sell, so they got dumped (like the Alpha release). From memory, the old LW on these systems used a keyfile to run rather than a dongle. This was locked to the specific machine (rather like flexLM allows for).

I'm incredibly frustrated that we cannot get any word on this issue from NewTek - it's as though they want you to move to a competitor's package (XSI or Maya) rather than taking advantage of a potentially broad new market. Even if it was going to take them 6 months, it would be good to know.

Elmar Moelzer
09-25-2004, 03:34 PM
Hello!
Supporting a new OS opens a whole new can of worms.
If LW officially supported Linux, then NewTek would have to support that as much as all the other platforms.
That means dealing with installers, drivers for dongles and graphic- cards. Make sure, that there is good plugin- support, etc, etc. And if a customer has a problem with his Linux- install, NewTek has to be able to help him with that.
All this adds a lot of overhead. Now, the Linux- market is not a whole new market, it is mainly PC- users, that would use Linux instead of Windows.
Now, WINE is a different beast, since users could just install the Windows-version of LW under WINE.
However, Linux- drivers dont really work under WINE (at least, thats what I understood), so you need special WINE- dongle- drivers that do not exist currently.
CU
Elmar

Karmacop
09-25-2004, 09:25 PM
Elmar, what about an unsupported version for Linux? Atleast then it gives the linux folk an option (it could be the first big commercial 3d software that was natively coded for Linux), and from that you could guage if it's worth putting more effort into a linux version.

I know that if there was a linux version I could at least try and convince my brother to start making plugins for me :p

But Elmar, thanks for replying, sometimes we don't get to hear enough from Newtek staff. :)

erk
09-28-2004, 06:12 PM
Elmar, what about an unsupported version for Linux? Atleast then it gives the linux folk an option (it could be the first big commercial 3d software that was natively coded for Linux), and from that you could guage if it's worth putting more effort into a linux version.

I know that if there was a linux version I could at least try and convince my brother to start making plugins for me :p

But Elmar, thanks for replying, sometimes we don't get to hear enough from Newtek staff. :)

If there was a proper linux plugin SDK that ran with gcc or similar, I bet a lot of linux programmers would start writing plugins. There are many linux 3D programmers out there already that just need a new focus point like Lightwave plugins.

Karmacop
09-28-2004, 10:06 PM
The SDK is cross platform, so unless you put some platform dependant code into a plugin there shouldn't need to be any rewrites across platforms. My Brother has compiled some Lightwave SDK example code on Linux and it compiled fine with no changes from what I remember. All he needs now is a client to run it on :p

Exper
09-29-2004, 02:37 AM
I just remeber when LW was the most cross-platform application... :cool:
many years ago! :eek:

Lynx3d
09-29-2004, 10:32 PM
If there was a proper linux plugin SDK that ran with gcc or similar, I bet a lot of linux programmers would start writing plugins. There are many linux 3D programmers out there already that just need a new focus point like Lightwave plugins.

The SDK works just fine with GCC, guess what i am using to compile my plugins ;)
Well it is the MinGW port, but that doesn't change the code it accepts.
With some minor tweaks you even get a clean 0 warnigs...
I definitely could compile them under linux, but there is no LW to launch them :D
Same with Xcode/Mac OSX, but apparently that is going to change, think making LW native OSX is even more important than Linux.

Speaking of display drivers, does ATI finally offer some working ones? ATi owners don't seem to be particularly happy with the ones available...or why else do they start petitions?

Karmacop
09-30-2004, 02:29 AM
My brother has an ATi card and it seems to work fine. I just don't think they're as good as Nvidias.

EDIT: I am talking about linux here :)

erk
09-30-2004, 08:21 PM
The SDK works just fine with GCC, guess what i am using to compile my plugins ;)
Well it is the MinGW port, but that doesn't change the code it accepts.
With some minor tweaks you even get a clean 0 warnigs...
I definitely could compile them under linux, but there is no LW to launch them :D
Same with Xcode/Mac OSX, but apparently that is going to change, think making LW native OSX is even more important than Linux.

Speaking of display drivers, does ATI finally offer some working ones? ATi owners don't seem to be particularly happy with the ones available...or why else do they start petitions?
I don't understand then, I have read many times where people say there are little or no plugins that work with LWSN under Linux, therfore you should run wine and windows plugins. Perhaps someone can explain?

Lynx3d
09-30-2004, 09:22 PM
Oh LWSN...totally forget about that one.
I have to admit that i never tried the Linux LWSN, because i upgraded from 6.5 to 8.0, and unless i missed something there is no LW8 LWSN (yet/anymore whatever applies), and i still don't use Linux on my workstation, only messing with it on my Notebook...(actually none of the distros managed to boot the setup on my workstation last time i tried...seems to be the SCSI-Controller :( )

But i could give it a try to compile one of my plugins for it, can't be that hard, if i have to change anything at all. The SDK headers themselver are definitely no problem with GCC.
-edit- does LWSN for Linux actually support plugins at all?