PDA

View Full Version : Would you pay extra for a Linux version?



mattclary
05-01-2006, 11:28 AM
The common request of NewTek is for a Linux build of LW. Currently poor NewTek is providing Win32, Win64, and OS X licenses all for a very cheap price. I don't blame them for not wanting to add a fourth that I'm sure they would not feel compelled to charge extra for.

So the question is, what would you be willing to pay in addition to what you currently pay for LightWave if you could run it on Linux?

nemac4
05-01-2006, 01:43 PM
For those that don't know much about Linux, you may be interested in Knoppix, which is a cd/dvd bootable linux OS that runs in ram.
It will give you a good feel for the power of the OS.... and it is free :D

http://www.knoppix.com/

mattclary
05-01-2006, 01:55 PM
Yeah, i highly recommend downloading a live CD of Linux, most flavors of Linux have one. So far Live CDs have been the limit of my experience with it, as LW doesn't run on Linux.

I really like the feel of the OS and would love to be able to actually put it to use.

hrgiger
05-01-2006, 01:56 PM
You left out the chance for people to vote on "I'm completely indifferent to whether a Linux version is made available".

Currently, that would be my vote.

Signal to Noise
05-01-2006, 02:39 PM
I'm with hrgiger on this one. Although I've always been interested in Linux there's a couple of things making me apprehensive:

1. Open Source = Too many flavours of Linux out there. What's good? What's bad?

2. Software/driver support

pixelinfected
05-01-2006, 02:42 PM
the question is, how many studios that actually use lw need a linux version? or think to switch to linux?

Actually xsi, maya and houdini have linux version, and cinema 4d if you buy studio version you can buy that version.

how many people think to switch to linux if lw is avaible?
i think is not enought to move newtek to develop it, or they build something like a metacode like other software.

please tell me, who of you think to switch to linux if lw is avaible?

robewil
05-01-2006, 02:54 PM
You left out the chance for people to vote on "I'm completely indifferent to whether a Linux version is made available".

Currently, that would be my vote.Mine, too.

lilrayray77
05-01-2006, 02:56 PM
I have been playing with xandors (debian core). Linux is really great, I mean it boots up a lot faster and doesn't suck up ram like windows. The main disadvantage is the lack of harware support. I have a soundcard integrated into my mobo and it doesn't work with linux. But apart from that linux is truely amazing and has somewhat of a good user base.

JML
05-01-2006, 03:14 PM
You left out the chance for people to vote on "I'm completely indifferent to whether a Linux version is made available".

Currently, that would be my vote.

me too.

and I would be against, because it would mean newtek would have to work on 4 plateforms, osx, win32, win64 and linux,
which would be a lot more work for them to have LW bug-free..

in other words, if having linux make my version of LW 20% more bugy,
I'm against it.

RedBull
05-01-2006, 03:43 PM
Hmm the real benefit for Linux and 3D, is the cost of each machine is greatly reduced due to no licence for Windows OS.

For large studios who use Linux for PRMan for example, this would allow them to use LW on those machines too..

Having said that i guess that's what the Linux render node was for...
And that was underdeveloped and never updated since.

The main problem we have with Mac is plugin support....
The main problem you would have with Linux is plugin support.
And i agree it complicates the issue for NT, meaning less optmizations and development time for the Windows versions.

jeremyhardin
05-01-2006, 04:06 PM
I voted as high as I could. I would have voted for it to cost even more if I could.

This sounds crazy, but I would do so in the hopes that it would allow a linux-specific dev team. and be optimized for linux, not just a straight port. And heavily supported.

I love that LW is very friendly to the user, but a linux version would show that it wants to be even more of a studio player. And if they were more responsive to the direct requests of studios' needs, then it'd be a win-win IMHO.

I know that I'm a minority in this opinion, but if LW were to do it, they'd be joining Shake in that.

nolan
05-01-2006, 04:23 PM
I would love to see a linux version. Linux OS is rock solid and still has a relatively small footprint (unlike windows). That being said, I remember having to leave OS2 because of lack of third party support.

mmcglumphy
05-01-2006, 04:24 PM
You left out the chance for people to vote on "I'm completely indifferent to whether a Linux version is made available".

Currently, that would be my vote.

I agree - no interest in a Linux version. And, I seriously doubt there is enough market to justify a port of Lightwave to Linux. I'd rather those resources go into adding features and improvements to the existing platforms.

kmaas
05-01-2006, 04:36 PM
I'd love to see a Linux version. IMHO Linux's a better-built OS than Windows, but at about the user-friendliness level of Windows 95 (or less).

lesford
05-01-2006, 04:37 PM
I would cheer for a Linux version of Lightwave. I'm trying to knock together a low cost renderfarm and the Windows licenses are one of the biggest expenses. Even a render only version for Linux would do the trick.

It's all about cheap, fast render nodes.

Les Ford

jeremyhardin
05-01-2006, 04:38 PM
I agree - no interest in a Linux version. And, I seriously doubt there is enough market to justify a port of Lightwave to Linux. I'd rather those resources go into adding features and improvements to the existing platforms.

I'd rather those resources go into adding features and improvements to the existing platforms too. But I'd rather new resources be added for the linux stuff. Thus justifying the separate purchase and price point. :D

jeremyhardin
05-01-2006, 04:39 PM
I would cheer for a Linux version of Lightwave. I'm trying to knock together a low cost renderfarm and the Windows licenses are one of the biggest expenses. Even a render only version for Linux would do the trick.

It's all about cheap, fast render nodes.

Les Ford

there is a free render-only version of LW for linux...it's a screamernet linux node.

T-Light
05-01-2006, 04:55 PM
There was a cinema version of gimp out a while ago (think it's still in existence/development). I mention it only because when I looked into at the time, they mentioned that Hollywood studios were using it in beta AND on Linux.

As for the vote, I'm with Giger, it wouldn't affect me at all. However, if XSi and Maya are producing Linux versions then it's something for :newtek: to think about.

Personaly, I think the best (optimal) way is for Newtek to keep on developing screamer nodes for use with 9 and above (in Linux), and in the mean time keep an eye the market.

geothefaust
05-01-2006, 05:33 PM
Honestly, if Newtek had a Linux version right now, I would uninstall XP and throw away the discs. I hate using Windows, when I SHOULD be using Linux. I think with the possible impending doom of Windows (Yet another delay of LongWait), it's highly possible that OSX or Linux (or both) will gain a larger market share in the PC world.


Give me Linux, or give me death! :rock:

T-Light
05-01-2006, 05:56 PM
geothefaust-

with the possible impending doom of Windows
Man, with your icon icon and your last paragrah I keep thinking of the guys walking around London in the late 70's with 'The end is Nigh' on boards around their necks:D

Windows aint all bad (OK it's part Evil), don't love the company, but I do have respect for certain departments (Dev). MS will continue its dominance for some time to come.

hrgiger
05-01-2006, 05:59 PM
I personally wouldn't care too much about a Linux version one way or another, but if I knew that porting to Linux would take one second or more away from other development resources, I'd be entirely opposed to it.

mattclary
05-01-2006, 08:47 PM
You left out the chance for people to vote on "I'm completely indifferent to whether a Linux version is made available".

Currently, that would be my vote.

So what you are saying is, you would be willing to spend $0 on a Linux version of Lightwave? ;)

That was part of the consideration when I designed the poll.

mattclary
05-01-2006, 08:50 PM
This sounds crazy, but I would do so in the hopes that it would allow a linux-specific dev team. and be optimized for linux, not just a straight port. And heavily supported.


You are a wise man, Jeremy! :thumbsup:

The cheap version of XSI... What's it called? it sells for $495. The Linux version sells for $695.

Speedmonk42
05-02-2006, 12:30 AM
I would pay more for a linux version to support the development of Linux and applications for it. I do though want to see LW kick a$s and the thought of of well it being slowed down in some way is not a happy thought.

Linux is definately growing. S.Am govs are really pusing it. Another version of Open Office, say integrated with an email client and, well.....that would do it for a lot of small businesses, and many big businesses.

Suse 10 installs 'geek free' on pretty much any PC.

geothefaust
05-02-2006, 01:43 AM
geothefaust-

Man, with your icon icon and your last paragrah I keep thinking of the guys walking around London in the late 70's with 'The end is Nigh' on boards around their necks:D

Windows aint all bad (OK it's part Evil), don't love the company, but I do have respect for certain departments (Dev). MS will continue its dominance for some time to come.

Hehe. The end is nigh! I painted that some time ago in Painter IX, used a photo of Gandalf as a reference... ;)

As far as M$ is concerned, It really depends on how they pull through with Vista. Their stock recently dropped 11% in part due to the horrible lagging of a firm release date of Vista. I for one, was actually looking forward to it, but they just keep screwing things up.

On the topic of Linux versions of LW, I would really love to see it happen. Eventually, I think it will. I guess it really depends on what happens with Vista. M$ can't be on top forever, for better or worse, things change. :) (in this case, much better)

hrgiger
05-02-2006, 02:17 AM
So what you are saying is, you would be willing to spend $0 on a Linux version of Lightwave? ;)

That was part of the consideration when I designed the poll.

Well actually, your poll says $0 as in I think it should be developed at no cost to me which is not the same thing. In statistics, this is what is referred to as a leading poll, as in you're leading me to vote for the Linux version, no matter what I pay for it. As I implied later in the thread, if there was time to develop, I would rather have that time spent developing the app to implement new features and strengthen existing ones rather then developing the app for every Tom, Dick, and Harry OS that's out there on the market. I know that Linux is supposed to be a good OS, but I'd rather them work on existing ports, not spend time trying to please everyone because I think it's spreading itself much too thin.
Now, if they somehow had a side/supplemental program where it was voluntary to pay extra for a Linux version and with that money they brought in from those voluntary users (and not the whole userbase including Scrooges like myself) they hired a third party person to port the app to Linux, they I say hey, go for it.

mattclary
05-02-2006, 04:51 AM
Well actually, your poll says $0 as in I think it should be developed at no cost to me which is not the same thing. In statistics, this is what is referred to as a leading poll

But in real life it tells NewTek how many people would lay out additional cash for a Linux version. It's a given, that as things stand, a Linux version ain't gonna happen. The only thing that would motivate NewTek to do it is more cash flow. Vote your concience and let the chips fall where they will.

Granted, I should have worded the poll better, but I was making it up as I went while still trying to be careful not to make it to leading. I should have just put in dollar amounts and skipped the comments so people could focus a little better.

jburford
05-02-2006, 05:51 AM
Do'nt want it, Do'nt Need it! And do not want to see a Linux Version. . . .

Now flip those normals back to the front.


PS. All off my Productive Systems (ie. non-internet or office) are running smooth and stable as hades and stay that way. Be it Win2K or XP Pro. The systems have the needed programs installed for the tasks and I do not continually add or remove software or hardware, nor patch. Never touch a running horse.

Having come years ago from the Amiga camp, I was a MS hater after what they did to ruin the market for others, but since Win 2K, have been moderetly impressed, with XP Pro, really impressed and with my new X-Box 360 ****ed Amazingly impressed with them and what they can do, create or put out.......

Now, for real power, we should see a port of LW to the X-Box 360!!! Talk about power..... 1 Terraflop of power not to mention the graphics side of the house.....

starbase1
05-02-2006, 06:06 AM
I would really like to see this a lot, and if I had the money would be prapared top pay full new licence. I was recebntly planning to upgrade my motherboard and CPU to run LW faster, but this would have meant buying a new copy of windows XP.

Let's put it this way - if the cost is LESS than windows XP, I save money buy buying from Newtek!

For clean and easy try Ubuntu Unix. Those reluctant even to try a boot CD should take a look at the free VM Ware virtual machine software. Using this you can run linux in a window under XP! (Slow but a safe way to try...)

I would have thought that Unix based rendering would be of great interest to any seriously heavy duty renderer, as that tends tyo be where the most mips per buck lie...

But in my imaginary perfect world, Lightwave would run as a virtual appliance under VM ware. This would make it run on pretty much any hardware at all. Just get it working on one carefully controlled Linux release, then byundle the lot up as a virtual machine. No OS issue at all, and it would even run on bare metal with no OS! One version for macs, PC's, mainframes...

Nick

Sande
05-02-2006, 06:07 AM
I'll now probably be flamed and fried but I would rather see development resources being spent on Linux than Mac version of Lightwave. Then again I don't know how many of the current Lightwave owners use Mac...

kylekoch
05-02-2006, 07:22 AM
[QUOTE=starbase1]I would really like to see this a lot, and if I had the money would be prapared top pay full new licence. I was recebntly planning to upgrade my motherboard and CPU to run LW faster, but this would have meant buying a new copy of windows XP.

I have Built and rebuilt 4 completely new computers all using the same upgrade version of windows xp. Once or twice I couldnt do the phone mechanized activation thing and had to talk to a person, but still no prob, I just said I rebuilt my computer. Was no argument
I dont think it would be a problem to use the same copy legally
good luck
kyle

ercaxus
05-02-2006, 01:19 PM
Linux version is eventually going to be a "feature" that everyone else has( like ngons, nodes etc.) and :newtek: will have to do something.

kilvano
05-02-2006, 02:09 PM
I personally dont plan to upgrade to Vista since i reckon its gonna be the most bloated and "stupid friendly" OS ever. Ill stick with XP until windows stop supporting it.

Ive been using Linux (Suse 10.1) for a while now and have started using alternatives to a lot of software.

I would love a LW Linux version but there are still some progs which need to ported to linux also. Photoshop for example. Gimp is good but its no Photoshop.

I would just like to have the option.

Riplakish
05-02-2006, 03:29 PM
I would cheer for a Linux version of Lightwave. I'm trying to knock together a low cost renderfarm and the Windows licenses are one of the biggest expenses. Even a render only version for Linux would do the trick.

It's all about cheap, fast render nodes.


You can run LWSN.exe under Wine, _AND_ get all of the Windows plugins without needing a rewrite. There is absolutely no reason to buy Windows for a Render farm if you're even remotely Unix savvy.

When Wine gets around to dongle support, you'll get FreeBSD and most Linux platforms for free.

starbase1
05-02-2006, 04:06 PM
So the only thing between us and running LW under Unix is one device driver?

Err....


You can run LWSN.exe under Wine, _AND_ get all of the Windows plugins without needing a rewrite. There is absolutely no reason to buy Windows for a Render farm if you're even remotely Unix savvy.

When Wine gets around to dongle support, you'll get FreeBSD and most Linux platforms for free.

Verlon
05-02-2006, 04:41 PM
people were able to get the Windows version of Everquest to run onder Linux. You'd think Lightwave would be no problem at all :devil:

I wouldn't mind seeing a dedicated fund for Linux support, but Linux isn't mainstream enough for me to switch to it. Besides, I like my games.

RedBull
05-02-2006, 05:39 PM
Linux version is eventually going to be a "feature" that everyone else has( like ngons, nodes etc.) and :newtek: will have to do something.

I used to think so too, but i'm not as convinced at the moment.
even over the last few years, Linux usage and uptake has not increased
like i thought/hoped it would.

Some products like Discreet Inferno are now available on Linux though...

The problem for Linux, is the amount of changes and updates,
versions, variants and compatibility issues that it has in distribution....

Making it hard for software companies, and in particualr smaller companies
without large walletts to properly support
a version, not to mention several flavours....

Until mainstream software companies like Adobe see Linux,
there won't be an overall industry need, because too many application will still require Windows. The ones that have a need already use it, for farms and development to save money.

Maybe someone should make a dedicated 3DDOS based on a popular kernel. If a large company or large companies decided to get together and build standards from it.

OpenEXR for example from ILM, if you applied the same methodology
for a Linux based OS, backed by some names in the Audio/Video/3D fields
to create a following for a particular distribution...
This way companies like Adobe or NT for example would follow along...

I think it's been tried by smaller scale companies before.
Ratatouille was created by La Ménagerie(a movie production studio)
http://garbure.org/

Anyway just thinking out loud...

lilrayray77
05-02-2006, 06:21 PM
people were able to get the Windows version of Everquest to run onder Linux. You'd think Lightwave would be no problem at all :devil:


Youd think so wouldn't you. I tried running lightwave in crossover office (I ran it straight from the windows partition instead of installing it on my linux partition) and it ran, but the GUI was all messed up and it was in discovery mode. None the less it is a start.

Riplakish
05-02-2006, 08:48 PM
Until mainstream software companies like Adobe see Linux,
there won't be an overall industry need, because too many application will still require Windows. The ones that have a need already use it, for farms and development to save money.


Actually, I think there is a real possibility Linux is about to go *SPLAT*

From a corporate perspective, "supporting Linux" means supporting 2-3 major releases
of Linux, not all of which are compatible. This, coupled with rumbling of USL lawsuits similar to what derailed the *BSD teams for a couple of years could easily make Linux a very _unpopular_ OS on which to base your business model. Other Operating systems, such as FreeBSD that already have a Linux ABI layer and snap-in platform library support along with a relatively linear and consistent devlopment (not to mentioned free and clear of lawsuits) path is going to look very temping to embedded developers that are currently using Linux.

Speedmonk42
05-02-2006, 09:31 PM
Well I can't see it going *splat*

Is there any info on VISTA/CPU liscening? If we are going to be stuffing more and more cores/CPU's into the machines perhaps this could be a reason to go to Linux if the VISTA lisc is not favorable to this.

I was totaly amazed with Suse10. We did 4 installations of it before anything 'geeky' had to be done on the 5th. Maybe they are all like that now, it's the only one I have tried.

Yeah, if the option was there I would buy a whole seat of it, or a cross grade or something.

Qslugs
05-02-2006, 09:37 PM
It's not like they didnt have 5 versions going simultaneously previously.

Version 5.0 (if I remember correctly)

Amiga
Intel
Mac
Alpha
SGI

The only way people are going to seriously start developing for Linux is if companies take the frist couple steps foreward. Everyone needs to decide on what version and flavor they are all going to support. If I were in a position to write a app like Lightwave, I might talk to a few other companies to lock arms and make sure the OS and driver support is going to be stable.

Id probably follow the same map as Side Fx.



The common request of NewTek is for a Linux build of LW. Currently poor NewTek is providing Win32, Win64, and OS X licenses all for a very cheap price. I don't blame them for not wanting to add a fourth that I'm sure they would not feel compelled to charge extra for.

So the question is, what would you be willing to pay in addition to what you currently pay for LightWave if you could run it on Linux?

prospector
05-02-2006, 09:53 PM
we will be left with only 2 choices, Win 64 and OS(?), I would think a linux ver will be coming. And if Windows gets any worse (I have to call in when I reformat and reload XP :stumped: ) I may go to Mac.

eokeisler
05-02-2006, 10:59 PM
It's not like they didnt have 5 versions going simultaneously previously.

Version 5.0 (if I remember correctly)

Amiga
Intel
Mac
Alpha
SGI
...

And the Sparc version of Sun Solaris.

Albertdup
05-02-2006, 11:54 PM
I am seriously considering going the Mac route lately. Just tired of Windows being so bulky. Vista to me is a waste of time. Being a beta tester gives one some insights. No surprise here about the delays. It's SLOW and terribly irritating. Tired of approving everything from entering control panel to changing a screen saver. And then its waiting to get drivers to work with the os for all my hardware again.

starbase1
05-03-2006, 12:14 AM
I seriously think that virtualisation will give a HUGE boost to Linux etc. The opportunity to bundle an application with an OS exact version you know works would make support SO much easier, and then it's platform independant.

But I am also very interested in the possibioities for running the mac OS on a normal PC.

MS have become ever more sluggish, ever less responsinive to what customers want, ever more arrogant and ever less secure. Competition is desperately neeeded.

Nick

starbase1
05-03-2006, 02:57 AM
But getting back to the original point of the thread...

If the renderer already runs, and lightwave runs in Wine but in discovery mode, is it really the case that alll we need is a dongle driver to get LW running under Linux?

And if so, what can WE do to help make that happen? How can we support and encourage the development of this bit of software?

Nick

mattclary
05-03-2006, 04:55 AM
And if so, what can WE do to help make that happen? How can we support and encourage the development of this bit of software?


Well, Nick, so far, approximately 66% of us have offered cold hard cash to NewTek. ;)


Looks like there are a few Linux drivers here. I really find it hard to believe that they would work though.

http://www.pericosecurity.com/index.php?id=219113

Speedmonk42
05-03-2006, 12:40 PM
Of course, if GoOSe is real.... that could really change things.

I really hope it is.

Speedmonk42
05-03-2006, 01:01 PM
Oops apparently it is now called Goobuntu, based on Ubuntu.

lilrayray77
05-03-2006, 02:18 PM
Is wine really a good idea though? After all emulators do come with a fair loss of speed.

Elmar Moelzer
05-03-2006, 02:22 PM
WINE Is No Emulator
(which is what WINE stands for)
;)
CU
Elmar

ercaxus
05-03-2006, 02:24 PM
Of course, if GoOSe is real.... that could really change things.

I really hope it is.
Google's support would be very nice but even without it things are actually changing in the world. Open source world is getting bigger and they almost have an alternative for every application out there. If we have a linux version of :lwicon: tomorrow it will be a plus for lightwave.

If there's no linux version of a software one day a programmer ( a bored one that probably just broke up with his girlfriend) will start a project and make it happen. Please take a look at the future competitor of zbrush: SharpConstruct (http://sharp3d.sourceforge.net/) give this baby about a year and watch. It can use lightwave objects too. It is slowly attracting more users and programmers. Actually I just saw kursad karatas (http://www.plecxus.com/gallery/3d) posting in sharp forums. He is my favorite LW'er.

starbase1
05-04-2006, 04:03 AM
My expectation, (not sure if it is true) would be that the actual rendering would not be a lot slower under emulation - this would seem to be backed up by the observation that the actual renderer already runs OK...

The place you are more likely to have pain is where there are many calls to the Windows API, which would most likely be the interface area. Up to date fast graphics drivers for the latest viddeo cards would also be a potential problem.

But the other big advantage of running under emulation should be that plugins and other utilities should work fine. Look how irritated Mac users get when some plug-in or add-on is not available for them.

The google backed distro based on Ubuntu has been comprehensively rubbished by Ubuntu and Google - and do we really need another Linux variant anyway? I think it's also worth noting that Google have an appalling track record of getting major products out of beta. So even if the rumours were true, I'd bet on us seeing LW 11.0 (not 10) before Google finished their distro.

Nick

Speedmonk42
05-04-2006, 12:05 PM
The google backed distro based on Ubuntu has been comprehensively rubbished by Ubuntu and Google - and do we really need another Linux variant anyway?
-----------------

Really? That's too bad :(

The important part of it would be a 'tipping point' for Linux. Try making sense out of Red Hats website or Suse's and imagine yourself being joe blow small business guy.

Google would put the stamp of acceptibility on it. Boom.