PDA

View Full Version : If You Want Lightwave For Linux Post Comment



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

Stingslang
09-20-2006, 01:51 PM
I Want Lightwave For Linux!

Bog
09-20-2006, 01:55 PM
It's tempting to just keep posting "Yes" as often as the forum would let me. But I'll restrict myself to "Yes, and I will personally drag everyone at NewTek out for dinner, or on the lash, or for a trip to Knob Creek to launch grenades at things depending on their preference if we get this"

Weetos
09-20-2006, 02:26 PM
I'd say yes - I really do
The fact that LW would ported to intel code on newest Macs (running Mac OSX - a BSD/Unix based OS) lets me think we're closer than we have ever been to a linux version (although there was a linux render node available before LW8)

Please NT?

habañero
09-20-2006, 02:42 PM
yes, one that can read plugins.

Newtek should look into helping LW9 for wine. It'd help mac users as well!

doimus
09-20-2006, 02:58 PM
Yes! Give us LW_on_Linux or give us death!

Bliz
09-20-2006, 03:19 PM
I'm glad this thread came up...


I think the obviously sparse development resources at NT will be better spent on getting LightWave "up there" again on Windows and OSX.

I do to BUT I think a Linux version of LW is going to be needed relatively soon for when MS Vista alienates a lot of 3D Guerillas. ( i.e. I ain't upgrading to Vista)

As an example/explaination. I have two workstations and a laptop. I run LW, Maya and a host of other content creation software. Two of these machines run WinXP, the other runs Win2kpro. I've only got WinXp because it came with the machines, Win2k does everything for me I need [except run some Adobe software :grumpy: ]
I have no need for Vista but MS will at some point stop releasing security patches and support for Win2K & then XP, which in a practical sense means they'll inevitably become infested with Malware, trojans etc. as soon as they go near a network cable.
I might be premature with my predictions but I can see at some point I'll be parting ways with Microsoft OS's and that means installing Linux (if I don't want to swap all my hardware for Apple hardware).
Once on Linux I'll be able to continue using Maya and if there isn't a Linux version of LW available then I'll get into Blender.

I don't know, maybe I'm putting too much thought into this but I think a Linux version of Lightwave would help Newtek a lot. As we know Maya and Houdini have Linux versions and I think a linux LW would give Newtek some of that highend ethos. Also I think all commercial 3D apps need to keep an eye on Blender's development and try and place their products ahead of Blender in the 'percieved value' chain i.e. at some point Blender is going to be good enough for customers to think "why am I paying for 3D software when this one is free?". A version of LW that has some Linux history behind it will, like Maya and Houdini, be better placed to appear as a more compelling, mature purchase to potential Linux-based customers.

wp_capozzi
09-20-2006, 04:51 PM
I'd love to see Linux lwsn render nodes with full plugin support. Having plugin support is probably the hard part. I'm pretty happy with Layout and Modeler along side all of the other software I use on Windows. Linux render nodes that support plugins would be quite nice.

Regards,
Bill C.
Dedicated Digital

Lito
09-20-2006, 04:51 PM
I'd like to just have NT make it just compatible enough to use with wine. I think that would be a better first step than just making a Linux native version. If NT can get it that far then when Linux does become the defacto desktop standard they can do a real port then. IIRC people have said LW runs under linux already but cannot see the dongle or something like that.

stevecullum
09-20-2006, 06:13 PM
Eyeon have seen the wisdom of a Linux version of my compositing app of choice, so yes please for my 3D app of choice too.

Earl
09-20-2006, 07:57 PM
Of course I would. But first I'd like to see LightWave catch up to the pack.

Phil
09-21-2006, 01:25 AM
All they need to do is kill the dongle and provide a workaround that is usable for 3rd party dongle-locked plugins. LW on Wine works, in Discovery mode, right now.

From Wine's point of view, the remaining niggle is bug 2398 in Wine (bugs.winehq.org). There is a problem with OpenGL in child windows (e.g. viewports) that has been unfixed for a while. There are efforts underway to get this addressed, hopefully before the end of the year (and it may also need X.org to incorporate some changes to their code), but for now, your best bet is Wine code from before 31st January 2005.

There are minor cosmetic issues under Wine, but nothing fatal. The menus don't close if they lose focus - you have to click on a blank area to trigger them to close; fonts can be a little odd unless you bring them over from your Windows partition. Wine will even give you hardware acceleration for OpenGL (assuming you installed drivers for your ATI or nVidia hardware) - unlike running it in Parallels or VMWare Player.

Again, the dongle shows its 'value' to both developers and users. Hurray for the dongle! Long may it continue to limit the reliability and portability of LW.

Bliz
09-21-2006, 04:07 AM
I'm not sure of the benefits of a WINE version save for getting 'market' penetration. I want a proper Linux version that can handle larger scenes than the equivilent Windows version.

I worked on Captain Scarlet for nearly two years, in a studio that had a roughly 50/50 split of XP and Linux (redhat) workstations. Linux simply handles memory better (or doesn't use as much of it). We had some Maya scenes that were created in Linux Maya that were too big to load in Windows Maya (on identical hardware).
Of course this was on 32bit hardware and the 64bit hardware landscape will make a lot of these considerations irrelevant but I can't see Microsoft changing it's habit of making each version of it's OS more resource hungry than the previous one. So I predict that a 64bit Vista will be enough of a resource and processor hog that the end user will benefit less from 64bit computing than a 64bit Linux user.

As for Newtek programming resources, I thought I read somewhere that 80-90% of the Lightwave code is identical between Windows and OSX? Which is how they are able to maintain identical release schedules for both versions of LW. If true then they would just just is a naughty word] be able to get one or two coders to handle a Linux port? Even if a Linux port was half a version behind the other two, that would be preferable than no Linux version at all.

starbase1
09-21-2006, 05:18 AM
I want a full linux version - I am about to upgrade my PC, and I intend it to be the last version of &%!£ing windows I ever buy.

I will settle for one that runs under WINE, and as others have remarked, all that needs is a different dongle driver.Whiole I agree that the current platfiorms must remain a priority, to open up an entire new oplatform with one device driver makes a lot of sense to me.

Nick

Phil
09-21-2006, 05:33 AM
The issue that makes a full port less attractive is 3rd party support. Mac folks already know that Win32 gets the toys sooner, whilst Mac support is delayed or never appears at all. How much attention would a linux port get?

Being able to have a linux version out there with almost the entire Win32 plugin library behind it is not to be sniffed at. You also inherit the better linux memory handling via Wine as well (My doctoral thesis caused Windows' print spooler to die horribly on printing, but using Office on top of Wine showed no such problems. It's the only datapoint I have, but it is something that you tend to pay no small amount of attention to at 2 AM on submission day :) ).

mrunion
09-21-2006, 05:53 AM
I completely agree with Bliz. I'm a Microsoft Certified Professional, and I won't be upgrading to Vista unless I have no other alternative in life. My goal is to be "MS free" by December. I will keep a couple of WinXP partitions around for the gaming my son and I do (frag fests!)

Also, everyone has their own opinions and that's great. But anyone who thinks Linux is less stable than Windows hasn't done very much with one (or the other) OS. Linux usually has software that is VERY compatible with the needs of most users as well.

Finally, Blender was my app of choice for a long time. I may be going back! Hair solutions has alsot to do with this for me.

Cageman
09-21-2006, 06:03 AM
Sounds cool...so, yes from me too... :)

parazis
09-21-2006, 06:11 AM
I second Bliz, Windows just become more hardware hungry with every version. I'm not talking about stability issues (the most stable version of Windows was 2k IMHO), but if you compare 2k and xp, the only real difference I can see is visual "improvements". And I disabled them instantly after first install of Xp. I used to use Linux quite often but the only real reason I can not turn from Windows is lack of my favorite softwares: Newtek Lightwave and Adobe Photoshop/After Effects.
So, my vote is for Lightwave for Linux.

starbase1
09-21-2006, 06:28 AM
The main reason I want it is the sheer pain of upgrading a windows PC.

All I actually want is a faster processor in a new motherboard, but as the current PC has an OEM copy of XP, I will apparently need to get a new copy of XP, (it's not 100% sure, but I need to be braced for it).

When that goes in, a whole bunch of paid for stuff will decide it's been installed on a new machine, and refuse to run.

Now although the dongle might be seen as the bad guy here, in practice I think its a very fair system - when I move Lightwave onto a new box, the various add ons look for the dongle, and don't complain if they find it. So in practice I have one portable copy and as long as I only want to run one copy at a time, everything is great - fair enough.

Anyway, end result is I am getting an entirely new box, and will go through all the pain of trying to move a mass of applications over to it.

But this one will be dual boot ubuntu from the word go, and I intend to start refusing to buy anything that won't work the way I want it to. (Not so much the prioblem with the LW approach to authenticating copies as I said, but with the objective of eliminating windows, that will change).

Far too many companies, (particularly Microsoft, not Newtek), punish me for being a legitimate customer on the windows platform. It's poisoned the platform for me.

I don't mind paying for software, I don't mind relatively pain free authentication. I consider the fair thing is to treat a piece of software like a physical object - i.e. I have one, but I can move it around.

There are also some awesome possibilities with a free operating system that are just not possible with something like windows.

Linux people can have their OS and apps on a USB key, and use it ANYWHERE! With no extra charges for the OS, virtualisation becomes a doddle. We have been speaking of running windows under Linux, but virtualise pretty much any unix prog, and it will run as an appliance under windows or anything else... And when you can bundle the aps with the OS as a VM, you have extraordinary portability.

Maybe this is the true future of platform portable lightwave - make a version that runs as a virtual machine, and that will therefore run on any platform with a VM Player.

Nick

Phil
09-21-2006, 07:51 AM
The main reason I want it is the sheer pain of upgrading a windows PC.

All I actually want is a faster processor in a new motherboard, but as the current PC has an OEM copy of XP, I will apparently need to get a new copy of XP, (it's not 100% sure, but I need to be braced for it).


Should be valid if you claim the old component malfunctioned and fried itself. It's a white lie, but seems justified. It's also somewhat strange that, with Vista lurking and 5 years under its belt, Windows XP has yet to see a price drop. Gives you warm fuzzy feelings, doesn't it? With no cheaper, supported version of Windows around these days, those warm fuzzies are here to stay :)



When that goes in, a whole bunch of paid for stuff will decide it's been installed on a new machine, and refuse to run.


The joys of activation. PointOven is also rather tedious in this respect, sadly. It does allow you to hop back and forth without needing the vendor, but it is definitely irritating. It's generally becoming easier to buy the software, fire up Google and hunt down the crack or keygen and then use that than it is to jump through all the hoops that vendors feel entitled to demand you to jump through.

NewTek have experienced the sharp end of this with LW 9 + Vue. The debacle, sadly, doesn't seem to have given them pause for thought, at least publically.



Now although the dongle might be seen as the bad guy here, in practice I think its a very fair system - when I move Lightwave onto a new box, the various add ons look for the dongle, and don't complain if they find it. So in practice I have one portable copy and as long as I only want to run one copy at a time, everything is great - fair enough.


If Wine could use either the Windows or linux dongle drivers, we'd be good to go, but that does not appear to be possible (possibly due to a technical issue - that used to be true, but not sure about the current status). I do question the reason the dongle has to exist, though, on several levels. Feel free to skip past the next bit, but I couldn't help myself......

When did the copy protection device (which only deters the most casual of pirates given these days of Google like search facilities) become the noose from which to hang the entire fate of the product?

NewTek seem so determined to lock their product up from the hordes of pirates rushing to shore, that they seem to unwilling to even consider the possibility that removing the dongle might actually grow their market. With the jackboots of the BSA ready to audit any business, the only conceivable threat is from folks using unlicensed single copies. I've yet to see data to prove that this is likely to result in any major increase in true revenue loss, given said ease of access to cracks right now.

I suspect many of those paying customers who were crippled by the red dongle are really grateful to NewTek for shipping said dongle and impacting their own businesses for weeks on end.</sarcasm> In return for this suffering, they get a replacement dongle and then get asked to jump through the same hoops again, adding insult to injury.
After all of that, NewTek should be counting themselves extremely lucky that every single new user didn't immediately demand a refund and pick up a copy of XSI Foundation whilst swearing off all NewTek products for the rest of time. Instead, not a word of thanks or any sign of lessons learnt. I cannot imagine how much developer time was lost to this red dongle problem - was it really worth it to do such damage to the first impression people will get of the product and the company behind it? Not even timebombed versions of the app were shipped to affected folks, despite weeks of screwing around.

For those who upgraded, many also didn't get a smooth ride. Various people were hopelessly confused by the registration dance, wrong license.key files and other irritations that are all tied to the copy protection system. By contrast, it could have been as simple as download, install, run, taking 1 hour at most.

What a wonderful situation this turns in to. Take the legit route, reward the developer and suffer weeks of downtime with no recourse....or, well, get on and use the product you did or didn't pay for.

Having got this far, though, it doesn't stop there. If your dongle gets damaged, lost or stolen you are once more royally shafted until you somehow secure a replacement. At this point, rather tortured logic and/or a perverse sense of humour seems to be needed in order to justify the dongle's presence.

If the dongle is really needed, though, for some provable backed-by-data reason(s) that I am unaware of, then the copy protection should serve the aims of the product, rather than cripple it from entering new markets. The dongle is certainly not doing this in its current form. I'd also prefer some extremely dumb, cheap bit of hardware to be the dongle, rather than some twitchy EPROM that can be corrupted. An ethernet dongle with a license server would seem to do the job.



Anyway, end result is I am getting an entirely new box, and will go through all the pain of trying to move a mass of applications over to it.


You can take your Windows apps and install them into a VMWare image, if that helps. This should be activation immune. Wine won't be an option because it currently doesn't support the particularly invasive DRM on Adobe CS2 type products, though.

It might be worth looking at CodeWeavers' CrossOver Office application as well. It has no activation, thankfully.



But this one will be dual boot ubuntu from the word go, and I intend to start refusing to buy anything that won't work the way I want it to. (Not so much the prioblem with the LW approach to authenticating copies as I said, but with the objective of eliminating windows, that will change).

Far too many companies, (particularly Microsoft, not Newtek), punish me for being a legitimate customer on the windows platform. It's poisoned the platform for me.


Activation did that for me, although MS do provide security updates for hacked copies of Windows, which is at least something. Novell doesn't provide any updates for its enterprise products unless you activate, which seems rather poor form. I have avoided all Adobe upgrades that required activation, for example.

The obscene hardware requirements of Vista also sealed the deal. For what you get out of the box, the price is exorbitant and the performance of the test releases has not exactly been stellar. When the OS needs more resources than Maya or 3ds max, it's time to start worrying.



I don't mind paying for software, I don't mind relatively pain free authentication. I consider the fair thing is to treat a piece of software like a physical object - i.e. I have one, but I can move it around.


I object because if the vendor disappears, or is otherwise unresponsive, I'm screwed. Consider the impact of this when the core part of your workflow is based on that product and the need to have it working. This is DRM at its worst. Without dongle cracks, etc. even LW is in this situation. I'm at the mercy of NewTek providing activation keys for my old copies of LW, from 5.5 upwards. If they cannot or will not supply them, you cannot use the software you paid them for without nominally breaking the law (depending on fair use provisions).

MotionBuilder 5.x users had a similar shock earlier this year when Alias wanted to pull the plug on them unless they upgraded to the shiny(TM) new(TM) version of their product, for a not insignificant chunk of change.



Maybe this is the true future of platform portable lightwave - make a version that runs as a virtual machine, and that will therefore run on any platform with a VM Player.

Nick

The VM player loses you hardware accleration, though. Important to note that. ;) Wine has the upper hand in this respect, with performance somewhere between 60 and 90% of the Windows approach.

DiscoBurgess
09-21-2006, 11:56 AM
I've used the same OEM copy of WinXP pro on the last three machines I've used. Sure I have to reactivate over teh intarweb, but it's pretty painless. It's as easy as pressing the activate button.

I think the whole activation idea is extremely annoying for me as a paying customer. But usually it's smooth and painless.



It also apparentrly doesn't work! You aren't supposed to use OEM software on anything but the hardware it was bought with. That's why it's cheaper, its a more limited license. That's also why Microsoft give you a sticker with the serial to stick on the hardware. Nice of them, isn't it? :thumbsdown:

I'd like to see Lightwave on Linux. I tried out Ubuntu for a few months on a dual boot, and my machine finally FELT like the 2.0+Ghz it was supposed to be. It's depressing that under XP my 2.0GHz+ machine performs about the same as my PII400 did under Windows 98.

With Ubuntu, my machine felt fast and responsive, it was wonderful. The only reason I stopped using it was because it was too much trouble going back and forth for apps that were Windows-only. And that's not just LW, unfortunately. Paint Shop Pro (hey, it does everything I want, I don't need Photoshop... DON'T JUDGE ME!) is a pretty important part of my work as well, and with a few other apps and Win32 plugins (and when I buy Fprime, will there be a Linux version?? who knows?). With that in mind, I can't in good faith say that I will use a Linux version of Lightwave, much as I desperately want to see one.

Having said all that, if the only issue under Wine is the dongle driver, the for the love of all that is good and holy, get onto Sentinel. Are you kidding, one driver? Is that all it would take? I guess it's all up to Sentinel, though. Maybe there's nothing in it for them.

Phil
09-21-2006, 12:09 PM
It's not, strictly, a driver issue in the classic sense. You can get native drivers for the dongle for both Windows and Linux. The problem is that these both require direct access to the dongle via the kernel. Wine has no ability to provide this access because it isn't running in kernel space (it's a user application, with no kernel drivers) and the linux drivers cannot be made to talk to an application running in Wine because there's no bridge to the application, either.

That's at least how I understand the system. VMWare works because it has kernel hooks so it can directly allow the dongle drivers to talk to the hardware, but then you have no OpenGL acceleration.

It doesn't preclude other forms of copyright protection, such as flexlm, though, because those are network-hardware based. You can have the license server running on the linux system, and simply point the Win32 application at that server. It's a lot more flexible, with the same 'remarkable protection' that the current dongle approach provides. I'd probably be willing pay the premium LightWolf (?) noted for flexlm over Sentinel if it gave me this option (at least within a reasonable definition of 'premium').

mrunion
09-21-2006, 12:12 PM
Hey, Novell is trying to get feedback on what people want in Linux. Here's a 2-minute, one page survey that you can tell them what you'd like to see in Linux that's currently Windows only. Then THEY will take the top requests and approch the companies and offer to help them!

http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/tip/16646.html

Phil
09-21-2006, 12:23 PM
Well....various people have been asking NewTek directly for *years* to make a change. If this thread alone isn't enough for them, they deserve to lose the market entirely. I have not much sympathy for a company that is so beholden to a stupid bit of plastic that reduces piracy -><- that much.

Revenue protection goes hand in hand with revenue generation. They are missing a potentially large part of that second part.....*shrug*

Other vendors seem to have figured it out : Avid, Alias, NextLimit, Luxology, Maxon, Eyeon, D2 software, Apple/NothingReal (Shake). Meanwhile NewTek is doing diddly squat. Blender is hoovering up all the hobbyists that are on linux, who might have persuaded to drop cash on LW, as is XSI Foundation. By the time NewTek wake up, the market will have gone entirely away from them to vendors who have been responsive to customer requests.

NewTek offers.....LWSN on Wine. Wonderful.

Phil
09-21-2006, 01:21 PM
Well the vendors noted above see a market. Unless you're suggesting they do this for the fun of it.

starbase1
09-21-2006, 01:27 PM
With Ubuntu, my machine felt fast and responsive, it was wonderful. The only reason I stopped using it was because it was too much trouble going back and forth for apps that were Windows-only. And that's not just LW, unfortunately. Paint Shop Pro (hey, it does everything I want, I don't need Photoshop... DON'T JUDGE ME!) is a pretty important part of my work as well, and with a few other apps and Win32 plugins (and when I buy Fprime, will there be a Linux version?? who knows?). With that in mind, I can't in good faith say that I will use a Linux version of Lightwave, much as I desperately want to see one.


Well, there is Gimp... I have started trying to use that in the windows version. I think it s oversold as a full photoshop substitute - not least because it does not do 16 bit channels, or is fully compatible with all plugins.

But is is (as seems normal for Linux aps) clean, fast, and light. I really hope it will get better...

Nick

Bliz
09-21-2006, 01:28 PM
I have lots of friends working in Soho (London) on feature films and TV series at places like FramestoreCFC, MPC, DNeg etc. and I can assure you a whole lot of Linux boxes are in place, being used everyday.
When SGI fell over and Irix became untennable, Linux generally filled the gap.

It definately isn't just a few enthusiasts using it.

starbase1
09-21-2006, 01:32 PM
Take a look at this:

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34523

Now apparently MS are planning on deleting media files they don't like the look of on your PC! (Including those ripped from your own CD's). And any TV shows that are over 3 days old! This sounds remarkably like the worst case for DRM.

I for one am now turning off automatic updates, right now.

As the author observes, as far as microsoft are concerned "you are a wallet with legs waiting to be raped".

toby
09-21-2006, 08:09 PM
I'd love a Linux version... but not as much as something like.. up-to-date radiosity... it's years behind

mrunion
09-21-2006, 08:23 PM
starbase1:

FWIW, GIMP isn't suppose to be a photoshop replacement. The makers say that. Now, for someone like *me* PERSONALLY, it does all I need to do. But yeah, it's no Photoshop.

Foomandoonian
10-10-2006, 11:46 AM
I vote yes for Lightwave on Linux. Yes please very much thankyou!

In fact until reading this thread I hadn't realised that XSI Foundation was avaliable on Linux - it's only the lask of a decent Photoshop alternative really keeping me tied to Windows now (and I can't learn to love the Gimp).

Phil
10-10-2006, 11:53 AM
You can run Photoshop under Wine. CS2 won't work, but version 7 does. Not sure about CS. One can try :) Check http://www.codeweavers.com

CF01
10-10-2006, 01:06 PM
I'd use it.

RedBull
10-10-2006, 01:57 PM
The problem of course is LW for linux would render 30% faster than our current windows machines and handle memory better....

The downside is OGL performance is substansially worse than windows.
From what i understand this is a hardware drivers issue, and Nvidia would rather make good D3D/OGL compliant windows drivers than Linux OGL drivers.

So really, while i too would like to switch to Linux, until OGL is as fast in Linux
and we have a bunch of commericial industry software compatible applications (i.e Photoshop) than Linux has just as many downsides in my opinion....

lilrayray77
10-10-2006, 02:52 PM
Ill try CS under WINE in a bit. If lightwave were under linux, id never have to spend hundreds of otherwise usefull dollars on MS.

mrunion
10-10-2006, 04:11 PM
REDBULL:

Never noticed an OpenGL problem in Linux. My nVidia card actually runs better than in Windows' vast overhead of nonsenseical code.

YMMV.

lilrayray77
10-10-2006, 07:00 PM
No dice with PS CS under wine here. It froze as it loaded the presets and then unexpectedly quit. Hopefully this will be fixed in the upcoming versions of wine.

RedBull
10-10-2006, 08:13 PM
REDBULL:

Never noticed an OpenGL problem in Linux. My nVidia card actually runs better than in Windows' vast overhead of nonsenseical code.

YMMV.

Blender, Houdini and XSI all show me signifigantly slower OGL under Linux than they do under windows. With a range of Nvidia cards All of them are faster and more responsive elsewhere.

With companies like Nvidia being fond of D3D, and only wanting to push Quadro cards for professionals. Good fast OGL on linux i think may be a pipedream. I'd love to be wrong however... I could most likely try some OGL framerate tests in Houdini or something to give actual numbers.

slow67
10-10-2006, 08:48 PM
ack double post

slow67
10-10-2006, 08:52 PM
I guess I must have had real good luck with nvidia drivers under linux. Not as many driver updates as you see for windows and of course their primary concern with new cards is to get the drivers right on windows first so newer cards are bound to have issues for a few months after a new card is released.

Im all for a Lightwave on Linux "show me where to sign".

Of course I would. But first I'd like to see LightWave catch up to the pack.

then you agree, having your application run on an alternative os,not alternative hardware is a feature most of the "pack" have had for quite some time.



The issue that makes a full port less attractive is 3rd party support. Mac folks already know that Win32 gets the toys sooner, whilst Mac support is delayed or never appears at all. How much attention would a linux port get?


well if there was a lightwave on linux version at least the developer would not have to buy a whole new machine(which he may not even want) to get his plugin compiled, I beleive that is the real reason Mac users get left out.

parazis
10-11-2006, 02:40 AM
Not a single problem with OGL on linux. It's even more stable and reliable on my NVIDIA FX 7600.
By the way, I think it would be great to develope universal plugins, not needed to recompile them first. Like in Fusion 5 Linux version.

Phil
10-11-2006, 03:03 AM
Not a single problem with OGL on linux. It's even more stable and reliable on my NVIDIA FX 7600.
By the way, I think it would be great to develope universal plugins, not needed to recompile them first. Like in Fusion 5 Linux version.

That should be possible through LScript, but NewTek keep breaking it. It's also slower than natively compiled plugins, but I have no idea whether this is improvable.

DarkLight
10-11-2006, 03:45 AM
Looks like it's possible to run CS2 on linux now.
http://blog.publicidadpixelada.com/2006/10/10/how-to-adobe-photoshop-cs2-on-ubuntu-10-steps/

starbase1
10-11-2006, 05:04 AM
Q: What doesn't rattle, and won't fit up your ar$e?
A: Microsoft ar$e rattle 2.0

Foomandoonian
10-11-2006, 11:08 AM
Q: What doesn't rattle, and won't fit up your ar$e?
A: Microsoft ar$e rattle 2.0
:thumbsup: :agree:

kmaas
10-11-2006, 06:43 PM
One of the biggest +'s of Linux for me is all the free GPL stuff you can get for it. There's a lot of really cool stuff that just doesn't get ported to Windows.

mrunion
10-11-2006, 08:35 PM
neverko:

I'm glad you're happy with XP. Seriously, I hope eeryone is satisifed where they're at in their "PC life. I guess I'm more anti-MS BECAUSE ofmy profession --I'm a software developer/consultant and have to do MS stuff all day long. I get to see the nitty gritty and seejust how bad the world has been blinded into thinking MS is the best at stuff.

XP is VERY stable -- no issue there. but Linux -- for ME at least -- is no less stable. AND it makes better use of the machine. Of course this is being spoken by someone whose knee-deep in code all day. Linux is just more elegant.

To each his own.

Dexter2999
10-11-2006, 08:44 PM
Linux version of LW please.

MS is turning into everything I never liked about Mac....and previews of Vista say it only gets worse.

DarkLight
10-12-2006, 03:36 AM
mrunion:

I'm a software developer as well and i never have problems with stability of XP on my machines. I'm not very keen on where microsoft is going with Vista but given the nature of my job i'm probably going to have to use it anyway.

I do have a linux running on a spare box at home but i don't really use it that often.

mrunion
10-12-2006, 04:18 PM
@DarkLight:

Heard that. "They"are moving to Vista at the location I consult for. I'll haveto use it there. But for me and mine --non-MS is the goal. The end of 2006 should be the end of MS in our house -- except for two installs to play games with my 9-year-old son. FPSs are cool!

@Everyone:

But LW on Linux would seem to suit a great many. Just because it's on Linux also doesn't mean it'sNOT on Windows any more, so I hope no one is thinking that's what this thread is after.

toby
10-12-2006, 06:00 PM
So DD will be switching to XP just in time for Vista! :D

The only drawback to giving us LW on Linux is that Newtek would be supporting 3 platforms instead of 2... which means less manpower left for development...

Exception
10-12-2006, 07:42 PM
Linux for Ubuntu please...


er...

LW for linux please.

Bog
10-12-2006, 08:05 PM
Linux for Ubuntu please...

*snort*

The converter that RegularFry and myself concocted from a LightWave scene to Vista's native format was originally hacked up in Ruby on a Ubuntu laptop.

You can imagine why they don't invite us to their parties.

How we'll live without seeing all those people wearing synthetic fibre, I'll never know.

Phil
10-12-2006, 11:59 PM
So DD will be switching to XP just in time for Vista! :D

The only drawback to giving us LW on Linux is that Newtek would be supporting 3 platforms instead of 2... which means less manpower left for development...

Again, that largely depends on how they would do it. My honest opinion would be to use Wine as a base to deliver a 'port' of LW to Linux users.

The blocking point for LW is the dongle - Wine has no kernel to speak of so Windows kernel drivers cannot be used. Use of the linux kernel drivers would require Wine to somehow be able to talk to them; again this seems difficult. For commercial plugins, the difficulties lie in the various license control systems that involve the dongle (Worley, Dynamite, etc.) or some other control (e.g. PointOven, Fiber Factory) to manage licenses. It may be that the fabled network license setup for LW 9.x will be able to address the first, but the second may be awkward without direct support in Wine. Nonetheless, Wine will provide almost the full Win32 plugin catalog for LW-on-linux and give it a running start that a native port would not have. It also means that you don't require developers to run multiple systems or operating systems.

There also remains an obstacle in Wine due to busted child window handling. That is being worked on; Wine from January 2005 will run LW fine in the meantime.

Support should be no different to the Win32 version. You can compile in Wine (via Winelib) so runtime differences should not matter. *shrug*

It seems possible to make this all work. It just depends on NewTek deciding to dip a toe in the water.

starbase1
10-13-2006, 05:28 AM
I smile at how people love to bash MS, while probably writing the stuff from a windows install. If it's that horrible, then delete it ASAP and get on with your bright Linux futures :D

I'm no lover of MS and I don't approve of many of the things they do as a company. But I've never used an OS as stable and rock solid as Win XP pro.

Well, the new machine that arrived is windows, but I am making it dual boot with Suse from the word go, and the older one is dual boot with Ubuntu.

The thing that really upset me is the way MS are shifting on DRM and digital media.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34523

The latest version of media player can delete files you ripped from your own CD's, and delete TV recordings over 3 days old.

If they can do that deliberately what happens when MS software displays it's normal reliability, and decides to delete stuff by accident?

Therefore I intend to start by migrating all my music collection off of windows and onto Linux, something that can be done 100% right now. I reckon everything I do on the internet can be moved off 100% too.

Most of my photo editing can move over painlessly, though the rest of the graphics stuff is a lot more problematic. I really feel that if I don't give this stuff a serious go, then I have no grounds for complaint later.

Nick

Titus
11-11-2006, 10:04 AM
It seems window.forms is now fully supported by Mono framework. This makes possible to port C# Windows application into Linux with the help of Mono and almost no change.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061109-8190.html

Speedmonk42
11-11-2006, 07:45 PM
I don't really mind MS all that much. I think there is a lot of misplaced anger at them. Going to Linux is not about XP being unstable. It is the best OS I have ever had, as has been said many times.

It is more a philisophical question than a technical one.

Freedom, that is it.

Our time is an investment, and no other kind of software requires a larger investment of time than 3D animation.

I am not just for a Linux version, I am for an open source version where Newtek makes money in different ways. Subscription based development support, technical support, customization, education, conferences, ect.... How much money? Don't know.

But if the future is polarized between Blender and software no one can afford....

Jirapong
11-14-2006, 12:20 AM
Ubuntu 6.10 is great. Will learn Blender if there id no Lightwave of Modo in linus. It depends on who come to linux first. I will go for it.

Cheer Linux

Phil
11-14-2006, 03:16 AM
Modo was promised for linux, but so far I have not seen any sign of movement. For intel hardware and commercial software, you have the option of Houdini, Maya and XSI (including Foundation) on linux, all supported and working. Other architectures (e.g. PowerPC) are not so fortunate - in general, it seems that anything marked 'linux', for commercial software, implies i386 and nothing else (64-bit intel is possibly valid as well).

LW on linux is cursed by the dongle (primarily). There is a viewport OpenGL bug in Wine that is now finally being fixed, but even with this addressed, the dongle scuppers LW on linux (via Wine). My hope is that the network dongle/license control system that was supposed to surface with 9.0 will finally allow LW on Wine (on Linux) to be viable without dongle cracks. Whether commercial plugins will be compatible with the network license control system.....who can tell?

Phil
11-14-2006, 04:08 AM
I don't really mind MS all that much. I think there is a lot of misplaced anger at them. Going to Linux is not about XP being unstable. It is the best OS I have ever had, as has been said many times.


I would argue that a lot of people find the MS price point rather objectionable. For those small percentage of folks who buy retail versions of Windows, Microsoft could and should offer a family pack (like Apple manages to do, despite less money in their bank account and a smaller market).

For business, the issue tends to be deliberate moves by Microsoft to obstruct interoperation. Buggering around with things like networking protocols, refusing to document filesystem (NTFS) implementations, etc. means that you either have to invest a shedload of cash in Windows licenses for all your servers or rendernodes, or apply a significant effort in labour to get things to run or to talk to each other. Vista makes no improvements here and I suspect there are further changes that break things.

Software Assurance has also seemed rather like a con job in recent years, with the licensing screws being tightened ever more and with less return on the outlay.

You also have WGA. A wonderful idea on paper, but causing a lot of pain in the real world, with false positives being unacceptably common. Then there is the 'high priority' Internet Explorer 7 update that can only be blocked by system administrators intervening. The disregard of the impact of delivering feature-updates with bug fixes is rather telling. I really, really hate bundling of features and fixes - it is simply bad form to tie the two things together.

Vista will also require activation for Volume License customers. That's just nuts and will put a real dent in deployment within most corporate environments. The hardware requirements are also prohibitive, meaning substantial investment in new hardware to be able to cope. Most office machines have 512 MB of RAM. Vista wants 2 GB to be productive and 1 GB to stop swapping to disk for any period of time.

For LW, I know that I'd rather have that 1+ GB of RAM back for models, textures, etc.

For the record, I grumble about the increasing requirements for recent linux distributions as well. Requiring 512 MB of RAM for the SUSE installer to run is unacceptable. Requiring 192 MB for the text-based SUSE installer to run is nuts. A file server doesn't need that much RAM so why does the installer?



I am not just for a Linux version, I am for an open source version where Newtek makes money in different ways. Subscription based development support, technical support, customization, education, conferences, ect.... How much money? Don't know.


Not enough. Very, very few companies can make ends meet with this business model. Community support will always undercut your commercial efforts for Joe User. For larger sites, support contracts are valid, but tend not to be hugely profitable either - you can always be undercut for training, etc. Education and conferences are not generally big cash generators in any case. This is also relatively niche software, unlike operating systems (everyone needs one) or office software (most people use it).

Note that Sun has open sourced a lot of its products. Despite this, OpenOffice remains a Sun project. Most of the development comes from Sun engineers or from Novell. Very few others touch it. Open sourcing something is not a free-ride to getting more (free of cost) developers on board. Especially if the code is crusty and documentation is inaccurate/missing.

Bear in mind also that WaveFilter was open sourced by NewTek when they found that they couldn't squeeze the functionality into the LW interface toolkit. They had bought it, it was sitting idle, so they open sourced it. End result of this.....zero. Nada. WaveFilter remains just as it was several years ago. No one has provided a Mac version, for example. http://www.wavefilter.com

Another issue is patent litigation. It's very difficult to avoid patents when writing software. Most developers don't check because this compromises their ability to defend themselves when issues are raised. If NewTek opensource LW, there is a risk of patent litigation as a consequence. Especially because they are based in the US.

The final point to make is the license. Assume that NewTek went with an established license like GPL. We'll ignore the deficiencies in version 2 and assume that version 3 is used (despite not being finished yet). This avoids any patent related nasties, maybe.
The issue here comes from the derivative code aspect of things like plugins. This is significant because it causes issues with redistribution. In theory, it's illegal to distribute the linux kernel and non-open-source kernel drivers at the same time. Usage is different - the GPL triggers with distribution and makes no condition about use (it's not an EULA).
For things like the Kaydara FBX loaders, or plugins that use 3rd party libraries that are not open source, this would be a problem. For any 3rd party closed source plugins, this would also be a problem. It's also never been legally tested as to whether closed source modules that plug into GPL software are legal, so plugin vendors may be a little twitchy. Opinions on this are simply opinions. It would take a court ruling to resolve all of this.

fgreen
11-22-2006, 08:32 AM
In my limited experience Linux = faster performance than either Windows or Mac OS on the same hardware. How fast would an app light Lightwave be on a really fast box running Linux?!

mrunion
11-22-2006, 12:37 PM
In my limited experience Linux = faster performance than either Windows or Mac OS on the same hardware. How fast would an app light Lightwave be on a really fast box running Linux?!

I tend to agree. For example, the same Blender code, compiled with the same optimizations for similar processor, etc. will render faster when running on Linux as when running on Windows.

stib
12-06-2006, 08:22 PM
hey a weird thing just happened to me. Another mailing list I'm on (I won't name), was discussing Vista and whether it's going to be what turns a lot of 3D animators on to Linux, and I posted a comment about LW not having a native linux version. Then someone else on the list (a senior person at a biggish animation house) said, "yeah sure they do, I played with a native linux version sometime before the 8.5 release.." When I quizzed him about it his words were


So I have obviously tripped an NDA or 2... it's been around for a while. I have played with it... It's clearly not released. Think it was also 8.5 or below. no sign of it in the lw9 arena.

So there you go. Either he's been at the whacky backy, or at some stage there was a Linux beta of LW 8.x.

Newtek? are you listening? we know your guilty secret. Fess up!

Foomandoonian
12-07-2006, 12:37 AM
hey a weird thing just happened to me. Another mailing list I'm on (I won't name), was discussing Vista and whether it's going to be what turns a lot of 3D animators on to Linux, and I posted a comment about LW not having a native linux version. Then someone else on the list (a senior person at a biggish animation house) said, "yeah sure they do, I played with a native linux version sometime before the 8.5 release.." When I quizzed him about it his words were



So there you go. Either he's been at the whacky backy, or at some stage there was a Linux beta of LW 8.x.

Newtek? are you listening? we know your guilty secret. Fess up!


If that's true, then doesn't it seem less likely that we will see LW for Linux any time soon? Otherwise we would have heard about it by now...

stib
12-07-2006, 05:08 PM
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.. *sigh* I just wish NT would get their act together. It's like watching a slow motion train wreck.

dlbird
12-08-2006, 07:57 AM
Modo open their linux beta gate to some of beta testers several months before.:lwicon:





Modo was promised for linux, but so far I have not seen any sign of movement. For intel hardware and commercial software, you have the option of Houdini, Maya and XSI (including Foundation) on linux, all supported and working. Other architectures (e.g. PowerPC) are not so fortunate - in general, it seems that anything marked 'linux', for commercial software, implies i386 and nothing else (64-bit intel is possibly valid as well).

LW on linux is cursed by the dongle (primarily). There is a viewport OpenGL bug in Wine that is now finally being fixed, but even with this addressed, the dongle scuppers LW on linux (via Wine). My hope is that the network dongle/license control system that was supposed to surface with 9.0 will finally allow LW on Wine (on Linux) to be viable without dongle cracks. Whether commercial plugins will be compatible with the network license control system.....who can tell?

dlbird
12-08-2006, 07:59 AM
enm,
in fact i still think eyeonline guys do it in a "wine" way although claimed not to be.

see eyeonline's new site www.vfxpedia.com you'll know what i mean




Not a single problem with OGL on linux. It's even more stable and reliable on my NVIDIA FX 7600.
By the way, I think it would be great to develope universal plugins, not needed to recompile them first. Like in Fusion 5 Linux version.

tonyg
12-08-2006, 08:20 AM
Goodbye Windows!

(I wish)

rjp42
12-23-2006, 08:20 AM
I'm new to Linux, but I have found it much more stable than Windoze!:agree:

mattclary
12-23-2006, 01:26 PM
Other vendors seem to have figured it out : Avid, Alias, NextLimit, Luxology, Maxon, Eyeon...

:gotpics:

That's funny. You should go do a search on the word "linux" on the Lux fora...

ghaledev
12-24-2006, 01:10 AM
LW on Linux has been a dream of mine for years. I do a lot of CAD work on Windows. Using Windows is depressing. I really look forward to opportunities to use Linux software, it is just so much more fun.

starbase1
12-24-2006, 04:52 AM
I am really beginning to think that Vista will mark the point at which Microsoft gets into serious trouble. The more I read about its DRM,

http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/1908

and the product activation stuff, which sounds pretty unpleasant even when it works correctly... (And I think every Windows user has had enough experience of it not working as intended...)

It's actually designed to fail into a non-functional state.

This makes it a spectacularly easy target for virus writers - change anything vista does not know about, and the system shuts down!

Most people here will just get it on their next computer I suspect. But put yourself in the position of someone in a different country, say pretty much any Islamic country... You you want to use a computer that the Americans can switch off any time you like?

You don't even need to go that far - I'd be amazed if any European government department found it acceptable, or any major company leaves itself exposed in this manner.

The Chinese have a long track record of developing alternatives to western technology rather than give control.

I'm using XP right now. But if someone gave me a new super shiny PC right now, with Vista on it, I'd format the hard drive.

Nick

lilrayray77
12-24-2006, 01:46 PM
Im hoping Microsoft feels a little pain here. They are doing everything in their power to force people to use Vista. Let's take DX10 for example. They are not making this supposedly amazing API for XP, and only for Vista.

Interesting story on the topic of evil Microsoft and Vista. My brother recently purchased Microsoft Flight Simulator X. Unfortunately, Microsoft neglected to print anywhere on the product that MSFSX will run slowly and with poor graphics on XP. This really goes to show how Microsoft is going to run themselves into the ground.

Anyway, I think my next computer will probably be a Macbook Pro, or similar Mac.

Cageman
12-24-2006, 02:44 PM
Windows Vista seems to be a huge pile of bloat and a resource hungry beast. Our sysadmin have installed Vista on one of his developement machines. It looks really nice, but boy, it eats alot of system resources to maintain the beauty. He spent a day to "clean up" all the bloat so now when he starts it it looks like Win2000.

This kind of bloat reminds me of the glory AmigaOS days, and I can't stop wondering why there aren't any OS that is written to use as little resources as possible?

Ohhh... wait... Linux of course! :)

toby
12-24-2006, 02:51 PM
I wonder how much manpower NT is using for compatibilty with Vista?

*None* would be a great answer...

starbase1
12-24-2006, 04:35 PM
Interesting story on the topic of evil Microsoft and Vista. My brother recently purchased Microsoft Flight Simulator X. Unfortunately, Microsoft neglected to print anywhere on the product that MSFSX will run slowly and with poor graphics on XP. This really goes to show how Microsoft is going to run themselves into the ground.


I think this is a little unfair on Microsoft.

Experience suggests they are perfectly capable of writing software that runs like a one legged granny with emphysema by accident, so no malice is required...

Nick

Speedmonk42
12-24-2006, 11:36 PM
Saying it will run slower on XP, is a given.

Because it will, without a doubt run faster on Vista and have better graphics with Directx 10.

Why? Becuase Directx 10 is faster and better.

Anyone who bought a game that is programmed to run on both API's can't really complain when it runs slower on the older less shiney one.

toby
12-25-2006, 12:35 AM
I don't think the point of that post was to complain that XP doesn't run the flight simulator *as fast*, no one expects that if it's built for Vista.

I think the point was that it plays *badly*, as in, worse than something designed with DX9, or that you can't put DX10 on XP. Or that you can't get a BLT at McD's.

lilrayray77
12-25-2006, 06:01 AM
Well no, the point is that Microsoft advertised no where that it was written for Vista as far as I could tell.

emilc
12-26-2006, 11:30 PM
Anybody tried the demo with Wine 0.9.28 ?

"OpenGL in child windows should work again"

I'm not gonna be able to try it out until Dec 30.

lots
12-27-2006, 03:38 AM
In defense of DirectX 10, its not backwards compatible because it is fundamentally different from all versions before it. The way the video card is handled in Vista is very different from XP, and thus DX needed to be different as well. This is the primary reason that DX10 doesn't exist on XP. Because it isn't compatible.

It also doesn't make sense to develop two versions of DirectX 10, as its in thier best interests to have everyone upgrade to vista and it would be a waste of money to develop for XP and have two separate code branches. That's alot to keep up with. Could you imagine having to keep up with all the hardware releases for two different versions of the same API? :P

Bog
12-27-2006, 06:52 AM
Crikey. Thanks for the heads-up on Flight Sim X. I was drooling over that in Gamestation t'other day, but I'm not putting Vista on my mainbox for at least a year.

MiniFireDragon
12-27-2006, 08:27 AM
Well, since Lightwave 9.x was re-written from the ground up, lets hope they have made it more Linux friendly. After all they are going all out to use OpenGL in their programming maybe at the end of the Lightwave 9.0 Cycle a version for Linux will appear.

mrunion
12-28-2006, 12:11 PM
Well, when the new particles for Blender is ready (http://mediawiki.blender.org/index.php/Particles_rewrite), I may be moving to Linux anyway. Heck, I build the CVS release of Blender on my own machine every day. With the ZBrush-like (limited features at present) stuff that's been added, the fluid enhancements and now the new particles in the upcoming months, I think I am leaving Windows behind.

BTW, this is NOT an advertisement to get people to switch apps! Just *my* reasonings. Use what you like!

toby
12-28-2006, 09:36 PM
Well, since Lightwave 9.x was re-written from the ground up,
I think someone's having a laugh at your expense...

Speedmonk42
12-28-2006, 11:49 PM
Try this for the wiki on the Blender particle rewrite, the link above is a bit hooky.

http://mediawiki.blender.org/index.php/BlenderDev/Particles_Rewrite

habañero
12-29-2006, 07:04 AM
Just out of curiosity, what would a linux LW be worth to you people? As I am sure you are aware, Newtek would not only need to earn money on this to make it happen but it should probably defend its developer hours against projects that say, reduce render time or add fluids or the like. OS licences isn't after all a very big slice of even a render farm setup, and on workstations its neglible. How much would it be worth to you people to rid yourself of microsoft? Further, what level of support, speed of bugfixing and fullness of features would you expect with the mentioned price tag?

Also, obviously there are the issues with plugin support, dongle drivers, and likely a whole new set of graphic driver issues etc etc. How much brokeness would you stand to get rid of windows?

Bog
12-29-2006, 07:31 AM
How much brokeness would you stand to get rid of windows?

To be honest? Quite a bit. The amount of my life I spend mucking around with keeping my Windows boxen working is non-trivial. Most installs of XP require about a half-gig of RAM just to tick over, let alone do anything, leaving a maximum of a gig-and-a-half that you can actually, y'know, use. Unless you're using XP64, in which case all of your points about plugin availability, driver issues and whatnot apply there, as well.

A person's 3D productivity is largely a product of their rig - how much speed can you squeeze out of your hardware? How much of your actual resources can you use? Windows boxen are profoundly inefficient on that front, and are further burdened with virus-checkers, spyware-scanners, Office, and all the other barnacles on the hull that slow it right down.

Being able to have a stripped-down xnix OS that's basically a LightWave loader and OpenGL driver would let me have a lot more of the benefit of my PC hardware. It's not even like LightWave takes advantage of the One Good Thing about Windows - DirectX. It's an OpenGL app, so all it's display calls are being routed through a 3rd party driver, 'cause Windows dropped internal OpenGL support ages ago. Given that most graphics card vendors are building for the game market, which is fairly solidly Not OpenGL for PC games anymore, it's a bit of a rough road ahead on that score anyway.

So, uh, yeah I'd be quite tolerant of a third NewTek dev cycle.

SplineGod
12-29-2006, 08:04 AM
Id be more interested in using linux boxes as render nodes. :)

mrunion
12-29-2006, 12:02 PM
Thanks Speedmonk42. The link musta got the shaft when I copied and pasted too much!

@habanero: I'd pay what I'm paying now for a Linux version. If you mean "would I pay extra?", I *might* do that for a "first release", but I'd think it should be the same price as their other offerings. As of this point in time, and because of the "new" security in Vista being aggravating (not to mention them forcing hardware manufacturers to jump through hoops at the expense of us all), Vista will not touch my machines. I'll go Mac before I go back!

Bog
12-29-2006, 12:25 PM
Is this the right thread in which to say "To the bowels of Hades with Windows and Macs, I want a quad-core 3.8GHz Amiga!"

I do hope so. ;)

Bog
12-29-2006, 12:31 PM
Ooops, double-post. How shameful.

MiniFireDragon
12-29-2006, 08:01 PM
I think someone's having a laugh at your expense...

I am good for a good laugh now and then.

starbase1
12-30-2006, 11:41 AM
Robert Cringley on why Vista is a rip off:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20061229_001403.html

Register, Vista as a suicide note:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/28/vista_drm_analysis/

habañero
12-30-2006, 06:51 PM
http://os4.hyperion-entertainment.biz/

Bog
12-31-2006, 07:48 AM
I have a burgeoning desire to release all my prior work under the Creative Commons licence... *cringe*

The DRM thing is just getting insane. Thing is, though, that it's about 3% (generous estimate) of computing users who're sufficiently enclued and involved who actually cavail about this stuff. Most folk don't know, don't care, and don't care to know. Hence, there's not real non-totalitarian movement that I can detect - if anyone knows about one, please let me know.

I'm aware of folk like Cory Doctorow and Larry Lessig, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, but the phrase that pays is "Effective, Organised Resistance". If there is such a thing, where do I sign?

starbase1
01-01-2007, 03:37 AM
I have a burgeoning desire to release all my prior work under the Creative Commons licence... *cringe*

The DRM thing is just getting insane. Thing is, though, that it's about 3% (generous estimate) of computing users who're sufficiently enclued and involved who actually cavail about this stuff. Most folk don't know, don't care, and don't care to know. Hence, there's not real non-totalitarian movement that I can detect - if anyone knows about one, please let me know.

I'm aware of folk like Cory Doctorow and Larry Lessig, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, but the phrase that pays is "Effective, Organised Resistance". If there is such a thing, where do I sign?

Good points. But?

Well, I think I am seeing the first reaction against DRM by Joe Public, primarily in the way that those who bought iPods are finding problems in moving their stuff onto new players and new PC's. These are the people who are also not techie enough to work around it.

Because they do not understand the guts of it the response is to avoid buying music online, in any form.

I also note that quite a few of these people have now got the hang of file sharing networks, despite a lack of technical savvy. So it does seem that the music industry has driven people into the arms of the pirates.

The current fight is with the various high definition video stuff, which has unfortunately spilled over onto our platforms. I am absolutely confident that this will fall flat on its face. At the moment there are loads of reports that the hardware frequently does not work, even if you buy screens, players and disks from Sony (for example). Then there is key revocation - how are people going to react when their players stop working? Not a good time to be a Dixons assistant! Mind you there are already reports that the AACS system has been broken, with source code promised tomorrow.

But I think the fundamental problem is price - the content owners are clearly determined to push the price up, and hope that people replace all their DVD's at great expense.

But isn't DVD quality good enough for most people? And if the choice is between free DVD's on newspapers and 25 quid a pop for something marginally better, I think people will stick with DVD, just as all the attempts to launch formats superior to CD's fell utterly flat.

And the current situation will definitely put off a very large percentage of early adopters, (who often are technically aware, like us).

No, I really think that this is the point at which things change.

For software, the way MS stuff will now deactivate itself if it sees something it doesn't like will be unacceptable to any business which has mission critical
applications, it is 100% no go, and I speak for the organization I work for. And how many countries will find it acceptable that a US government could lean on MS and get all the windows systems deactivated? My guess is not one outside of the USA.

I would bet good money that you will see China and Russia start on their own high def video systems, and that you will see a big push to anything other than windows in governments everywhere, after a long stalling.

Nice note on the high def stuff here:
http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=36574

Nick

Speedmonk42
01-01-2007, 12:27 PM
Excellent post Starbase.

So many people have been ripped off on the HD front it is really sad.

Most have an inkling something is wrong, but don't really have the technical understanding why.

The term 'HD Compatible' should be scrubbed as it is almost pure deception.

Thats only scratching the surface.

Bog
01-01-2007, 01:22 PM
Excellent stuff, Nick.

For the record, as a content creator, I am not going to touch any OS which offers the possibility of "locking myself out of my own lab". That's just bunkum.

StereoMike
01-01-2007, 02:59 PM
Before I would have to go that Vista route I will switch to a Mac.
Only thing that bugs me is, that Apple has even more control on its own hardware than MS has on 3rd party. Worst case would be, Apple joining all this madness and closing the Macs similar to the Vista regulations.
I guess they will try...

Mike

Speedmonk42
01-01-2007, 03:36 PM
In many ways have they not always been worse?

Microsoft is closed at one end, Apple has been closed at both.

Linux is the alternative.

Apple is just a wolf in sheeps clothing, only the sheep is an espresso sipping wanker with thick rim glasses.

starbase1
01-01-2007, 04:03 PM
In many ways have they not always been worse?

Microsoft is closed at one end, Apple has been closed at both.
Linux is the alternative. Apple is just a wolf in sheep's clothing, only the sheep is an espresso sipping winker with thick rim glasses.

Well, I don't have a Mac, and it is true they are more expensive. But if you talk to Mac users, their machines don't crash, they don't get spyware or viruses... I can certainly understand why swear by their machines not at them...

Both my home machines are now dual boot XP and Linux, one Suse, One Ubuntu. I figure I can get used to it slowly.

Nick

Foomandoonian
01-01-2007, 04:04 PM
Apple is just a wolf in sheeps clothing, only the sheep is an espresso sipping wanker with thick rim glasses.
:ohmy: :bowdown:

Has anyone here had any luck running Linux on a laptop here BTW? I'm seriously tempted to get one of the new Apple laptops and running Linux on it too (and maybe XP).

RedBull
01-01-2007, 04:11 PM
I do refuse to use Vista, it will not be loaded on any machines this year or next. I do want out of Windows.....

Windows is crap!

Linux is also complete crap, i mean until Google take my idea of a unified, standardised, ratified version of Linux, that is championed by Google, and is supported by Nvidia, AMD, SUN, ADOBE. Add on top of that ILM, R&H, Dreamworks and a slew of other industry giants. That need to make a commercially viable open linux variant.

It needs to be pushed through standards organizations so there is a complete standard made for LinuxOS. GOOGLE is the only company that could achieve this miracle, the only company with big enough pockets to take Linux mainstream. It would offer Google a huge advantage in their quest for power and controlling the worlds OS, this has worked well for Microsoft.
Also enables them to push Google Desktop, Google Search, GE, SketchUp and many more of their software buyups.

GoogleOS should also champion OGL or make a DXWrapper.
Vista and the XBox are pulling the OGL rug from underneath us....

Anyway i live in hope that Google grows some gonads, and takes on the others in an OpensourceOS, that is given away for free to the masses with possibly a small fee for support. Also similar to what Apple have done, a Virtualization or Windows emulation like Wine or Bootcamp, would make it a sure fire winner.

This becomes a bridge to all of the other industry supported players, Like Adobe and Newtek, who would ensure compiles for GOS...

Anyway that's my dream, i would love Linux LW, but Gentoo and Ubuntu will never get that mainstream, Suse, Redhat just too many flavours of Linux for commercial companies to support. Google needs to lead the next OS race.
to make a Linux viable..... I just need it quick before XP support is cut-off.

Well it's always nice to dream.... ;)

Jim_C
01-01-2007, 04:20 PM
But if you talk to Mac users, their machines don't crash, they don't get spyware or viruses... I can certainly understand why swear by their machines not at them...

Macs can and do get viruses and spyware. They are not magically prone to them.

It's just that the coders who write the malware don't bother wasting their time writing evil doings for a system only 10% or so of the computing public uses.

As Mactels sell more and more you will see the same virus/malware start to proliferate into the Mac OS.

I have a couple Macs and they crash now and then, and some PCs that do too. But I also have a couple rock solid PCs with XP on them that never crash. Guess it depends on the software installed and how you pound on them.

In the end, they are just a couple different kind of hammers in the tool box.
Albeit controlled by money grubbing, stingy, control freak tool makers.

Jim

Speedmonk42
01-01-2007, 04:37 PM
Sorry I didn't mean to start a platform debate.

I too had the fantasy of Google starting/championing a linux. However, now I think it would be more valuable if it continues to grow the way it has. The support needs to come from the ground up, not the top down.

Microsoft and Apple are cut from the same MBA crowd of @$$holes. If they could make you pay for turning your computer on they would.

Linux(or whatever) isn't about viruses and computer crashes.

Bog
01-01-2007, 04:38 PM
Apple is just a wolf in sheeps clothing, only the sheep is an espresso sipping wanker with thick rim glasses.

Ummmm! I'm reporting you and trying to get you banned! You un-Spoke the Jobs! He made $848 million last year, you're not allowed to diss him!

;)

Turtleneck wearing tosser.

shemp
01-01-2007, 04:57 PM
Macs can and do get viruses and spyware. They are not magically prone to them.

It's just that the coders who write the malware don't bother wasting their time writing evil doings for a system only 10% or so of the computing public uses.

As Mactels sell more and more you will see the same virus/malware start to proliferate into the Mac OS.

I have a couple Macs and they crash now and then, and some PCs that do too. But I also have a couple rock solid PCs with XP on them that never crash. Guess it depends on the software installed and how you pound on them.

In the end, they are just a couple different kind of hammers in the tool box.
Albeit controlled by money grubbing, stingy, control freak tool makers.

Jim


I agree with you Jim_C 100%. I used to do tech support for Adobe for both PC & Mac. My calls were about 70/30 PC just because of the install ratio & not necessarily for “crashes." I did get my fair share of “Well, my machine was fine until I installed your application.” In my experience supporting Adobe Pagemaker, Macs had problems - or "issues" as Adobe liked to call them, just as much as PCs did, they just did it for different reasons.

Oh yes, I’d love to have a Linux version of LightWave.

Shemp

Jim_C
01-01-2007, 05:07 PM
Sorry I didn't mean to start a platform debate.

I too had the fantasy of Google starting/championing a linux. However, now I think it would be more valuable if it continues to grow the way it has. The support needs to come from the ground up, not the top down.

Microsoft and Apple are cut from the same MBA crowd of @$$holes. If they could make you pay for turning your computer on they would.

Linux(or whatever) isn't about viruses and computer crashes.

Yea sorry for wondering OT, and not meaning to do the Platform War thing either, cause in my eyes, they are both the same thing.

Code on machines made of hardware. Sometimes they work sometimes they don't. One works better for some people at certain things , the other works better at other things for other people.

And although I don't know that much about it, it seems most things would benfit from having a Linux version. Given proper resources and r&d at the source to provide it. But I would hate to see current versions of the software suffer due to splitting staff to work on a Linux version.

Happy New Year, I leave this to those who actually know of what they speak.

Jim

stib
01-01-2007, 05:39 PM
And the award for the worst mixed metaphor goes toooooo.. *opens envelope*

In many ways have they not always been worse?
Apple is just a wolf in sheeps clothing, only the sheep is an espresso sipping wanker with thick rim glasses.

But you're right, apple are no heroes here, they're quietly happy to share the dirty DRM syringe with Microsoft, and they're even more fervently anti linux, because they're terrified that anything else might become the alternative OS of choice.

But since MS and Apple both turn out to be evil money grubbing corporations, is the answer going to be relying on Google? Purleese. Google is just as evil as the rest of them, it's just got a different Evil World Domination Business Plan that involves supporting OSS.

StereoMike
01-01-2007, 05:59 PM
I feel so lost and sad...
No one will safe us from the greedy corporations. That sounds too simplified and ironic, but I really think that. In fact you could write worse things (like "every corporation tries only to gain profit and gives nothing on customers and employees") and it would still apply. But what to do?
Relying on Linux won't get you far in our business (application support) and it will prolly never do (too many versions, too complicated, drivers, companies seems to think, you can't make money with apps for a GPL OS).
MS and Apple don't seem to be reasonable options either.

See why I feel lost? argh...

Speedmonk42
01-01-2007, 08:51 PM
But since MS and Apple both turn out to be evil money grubbing corporations, is the answer going to be relying on Google? Purleese. Google is just as evil as the rest of them,
-----------------------

But I just said Google was not the answer. I think the OS needs to be built the way it is now, from the ground up.

stib
01-01-2007, 09:09 PM
sorry, I should have made it clearer that when I talked about google I was commenting on redBull's post about google stepping in and pwning linux.

(the comments about the atrocious mixed metaphor still stand though;))

mrunion
01-02-2007, 10:20 AM
No, RedBull. That's not the FUNDAMENTAL reasoning behind Linux. The reason you label it crap is the sole reason for it's existence in many respects -- individuality. I use Ubuntu. Before that I used SUSE.

If you want "one" Linux -- I'd say get Fedora and follow RedHat around. Truly, ONE Linux would be a devastating thing in my opinion. the way things are now, YOU pick YOUR flavor and everyone's happy.

And nVidia and ATI (now that AMD got involved) do support a great many flavors of Linux.

Oh, and I'm not attacking you or anything. I'm just disagreeing with the root result of what your desires would cause -- in MY opinion.



I do refuse to use Vista, it will not be loaded on any machines this year or next. I do want out of Windows.....

Windows is crap!

Linux is also complete crap, i mean until Google take my idea of a unified, standardised, ratified version of Linux, that is championed by Google, and is supported by Nvidia, AMD, SUN, ADOBE....

mrunion
01-02-2007, 10:23 AM
:ohmy: :bowdown:

Has anyone here had any luck running Linux on a laptop here BTW? I'm seriously tempted to get one of the new Apple laptops and running Linux on it too (and maybe XP).

Linux is running on my HP dv8230us as we speak! The nVidia 7400, wireless nic, DVD burner, etc. all work fine. I haven't tried the TV-out card, but I probably never will. I've never had a problem running Linux on a laptop with an nVidia card. Sometimes you fight an ATI -- but AMD seems to be changing that! The other laptop (a dv8125nr) has an ATI card and is running Linux as well.

Oh, and I'm running Ubuntu 6.10 on one and 6.06 on the other.

Intuition
01-02-2007, 10:44 AM
Well, I for one have no problem with greedy corporations.

They produce things like computers, software, BMWs, guns, airplanes, etc.

They make everything I like to buy in this world that makes my life better and more convienient and confortable.

What I dislike is when a big company loses sight of the innovation that made if big in the first place.

Microsoft is doing this with Vista. I have never really paid much attention to Linux because too many times I need the latest stuff and a linux port is never on tap. Sorry, got my beer drinker lingo out..... :beerchug:

SO at this point any software company that makes a minimalist OS with the smallest resource footprint is going to break both microsoft and apple in half.

Its amazing the opportunity that exists now because of Vista for an up and coming OS design dreamer/programer.

I remember thinking BeOS was going somewhere but haven't seen it for some time. I think a google is in order.

I really am liking xp64 since it seems like such a small footprint OS.

Maybe after vista flops, Microsoft will at least patch up xp64?

Naw, I am just dreaming.... :D

Well, Maybe the Vista flop is just the opportunity Linux was waiting for.

See, thats the beauty of corporations. If one gets too big and starts to fail the people vote with their dollar elsewhere. Perhaps Linux maybe be getting my vote in 07.

Only if Modo gets ported to Linux though. ;)

lilrayray77
01-02-2007, 01:09 PM
I doubt linux will ever get much attention. The majority of computer users in the world just aren't computer savvy enough to install and maintain linux (at the moment). Then again, there are distros like Ubuntu that are beginning to bridge that gap. I personally, use linux for internet and tinkering, although if ever Lightwave or Zbrush go linux, or blender gets a nice interface makeover, I may consider going all linux.



Truly, ONE Linux would be a devastating thing in my opinion. the way things are now, YOU pick YOUR flavor and everyone's happy.

I very much agree with this. There shouldn't be one standard linux, but rather things like a standard package/executable/zip format.

RedBull
01-02-2007, 01:33 PM
No, RedBull. That's not the FUNDAMENTAL reasoning behind Linux. The reason you label it crap is the sole reason for it's existence in many respects -- individuality. I use Ubuntu. Before that I used SUSE.

If you want "one" Linux -- I'd say get Fedora and follow RedHat around. Truly, ONE Linux would be a devastating thing in my opinion. the way things are now, YOU pick YOUR flavor and everyone's happy.

And nVidia and ATI (now that AMD got involved) do support a great many flavors of Linux.

Oh, and I'm not attacking you or anything. I'm just disagreeing with the root result of what your desires would cause -- in MY opinion.

Your opinion is very valid, and welcomed.
I didn't say there needs to be one Linux, just one standard....
Individual makers can make individual kernel changes and updates, and this should be encouraged. Changes that are considered smart/safe/efficient and benefit the many companies involved in a consortium could propose a direction, for which other others could copy for their kernel.

I want Google to use Linux and use a GPL for the OS, but i do want it pushed in a commercial direction.

The problem is Adobe, Newtek and every other software doesn't provide Linux compiles. And why should they, 50 differen't distributions that all do something differently making them harder to release commerically than a Mac and PC version. And break on the very next kernel update.

I'm not stopping individuallity, Suse and Redhat, Gentoo, Fedora, will always be the same massively under supported, fairly useless OS that you will be free to choose. Linux needs a champion, and Linus torfold can go get bitten by penguins. :)

Industry is all about standards, without design stanadards and implentation standards ratified proposed levels of undetstanding that form a direction for commercial companies to move to, Linux is not a good thing to support commercially. It's also getting the FREE/Non commercial crowds only...
Sourceforge is cool, but Linux needs real customers.

Mac/PC have these standards and that's why they are commerically viable.
Linux has had too many years and has not impacted the industry apart from Intenet and general tinkering.

We know Linux can be 40% faster for some rendering things.
I can't beleive a commercially viable version can't be made with those kind of
performance improvements over Windows.

Having one commercial leader of Linux, would see many of the other Linux distro's either pick up on many of the standards or make it comparable, or suit others who wanted niche's that the GOS did not follow or support.

As for picking a flavour and everyone's happy.....

This thread didn't exist because everybody is happy, i will not choose any version of Linux, because apart from general internet and crapping around, Linux is nowhere near a production capable OS. Still making Windows a far better bet.

Anyway my idea is closer to what Lilray77, it's the standards that need to be standardized.
in the same way the OGL consortium, was a good idea, if it didn't make changes 10 years after MS made DX standards.

mrunion
01-02-2007, 01:47 PM
Yeah, I'll agree with that. Standards and a way of judging a distro's "compliance" with those would be good. Something like "98% compatible" or some other way of knowing you have a much better chance of running what you want.

I see what you guys are driving at and that'd help Linux.

toby
01-02-2007, 10:24 PM
I doubt linux will ever get much attention. The majority of computer users in the world just aren't computer savvy enough to install and maintain linux (at the moment).
Like they know how to maintain Windows! Pssh - I don't even know how to maintain Windows!

But seriously, how much and what kind of maintainance does Linux need?

stib
01-02-2007, 11:12 PM
Distributions like Ubuntu are as easy to set up as winders. Easier, in fact; I'd rate it up with Mac OSX for ease of install. And a lot of the mainteneance is automatic, and you don't have to worry about virii, security holes and the registry constantly filling up with kruft.

It's only when you go to install something that needs libraries that aren't available for your distro that the wheels completely fall off. I'm a pretty fearless hackker, but the dependency nightmare that ensued after I tried to set up Cinelerra on my AMD 64 machine was enough to have me throwing stuff around the room.

But for the great unwashed who use their 'puters for web browsing, email and word processing it's a matter of put in the CD and click ok.

starbase1
01-03-2007, 12:17 AM
Distributions like Ubuntu are as easy to set up as winders. Easier, in fact; I'd rate it up with Mac OSX for ease of install.

But for the great unwashed who use their 'puters for web browsing, email and word processing it's a matter of put in the CD and click ok.

Well, not far off. But driver support is still a major issue, (from what I have seen USB modems are poorly supported in general, and mine in particular! Which is a bit of a killer).

But in general yes, a live CD is a wonderful thing. And it is even perfectly practical, (and legal!), to put everything you need, os, aps, and data onto a memory stick, and take it with you everywhere.

I reckon that we will see a big push though - I see this at work.Virtualisation is a huge plus, and it is possible to do a lot more of this stuff with an OS that is not locked down, and may be freely copied. It's still young technology, with relatively poor device support, but it offers the chance to effectively separate the application from the OS.

The cost of maintaining and managing large windows estates is huge - at work we have something like 7000 windows servers, and heaven knows how many PC's. Keeping everything talking to everything is a huge task, and very fragile. The data centre type costs along are vast. They want to get this stuff virtualised as fast as possible - and it t worth remembering that these kind of big organisations are notoriously slow to adopt new technology, (my desktop at work moved from NT to XP in December!!!).

If you can write for one OS, and have it run on a virtual machine on any hardware, the OS becomes largely irrelevant.

Nick

lots
01-03-2007, 12:54 PM
Ubuntu, and similarly Fedora, Suse, Redhat, etc, are all quite a bit easier to install than Windows XP. They all have point and click "ok" installers that are easy to read, and easy to follow. Additionally out of the box, they have more functionality.

Using linux with something like Ubuntu, really becomes more of a learning a new OS experience (like moving from Windows to OSX) rather than being overwhelmed with overly technical text and command lines like it was in the passed, or is with some distros (Debian, Gentoo). The real advantage here is that its linux, and if you want to get nitty and gritty and tinker, you can. If you don't Ubuntu and the like all have graphical interfaces for nearly all aspects of using a computer for every day tasks.

A bit on drivers: In my experience, Ubuntu is great in terms of drivers. After installing it on my laptop, EVERYTHING on my laptop worked right off the bat. Even the random PCMCIA cards I use (from wireless to lan cards and other useful things). Video, sound, and everything worked perfectly. The odd thing here is Windows, doesn't do this initially. And even after some tinkering, not everything works quite as well as it does in linux (sound for example is quite nice on Ubuntu, but staticy in Windows). Video drivers are difficult to find for windows (thanks to it being a laptop). Ubuntu really worked out quite nicely for my laptop, so my confidence in its driver support is pretty high.

Granted I'm more of a Gentoo user, Ubuntu IMO is a good choice for people who just need something that works. And it works quite well from my experience. My only issue is my main software usage usually keeps me using windows rather than linux :) If I just surfed the net, and all that basic stuff, I'd be using linux constantly. But my software (games and lightwave) dictate I use windows :P

lilrayray77
01-03-2007, 01:36 PM
Like they know how to maintain Windows! Pssh - I don't even know how to maintain Windows!

But seriously, how much and what kind of maintainance does Linux need?

Now that I think about it, there is less maintenance to linux. But the installation process/es are much more brutal then windows. For example, although the initial Ubuntu installation is quite easy, getting all of you hardware is not. Finding and installing drivers can be a pain and a might unpredictable in my experiences. Also, installing individual applications can sometimes be trivial (that is when not using repos).

lots
01-03-2007, 02:38 PM
Installing drivers in linux is quite easy, then again I am a computer engineer, and my opinion of easy is different than others :)

Anyway, Ubuntu has a whole slew of driver support out of the box. You should be able to get most common hardware working without problem, and without any hassle from the user. There is some work for less common hardware. But research is always your friend. And will help with the difficult parts.

habañero
01-03-2007, 04:55 PM
Careful with the partition tools of ubuntu combined with extended partions. Or Xps partition tool for that sake, they can be about equally brutal with your precious data ... Normally though it is about entirely safe to install linux, its far more forgiving than XP.

You can use ndiswrapper to wrap windrivers in Linux -- with a little help it could be we could get a dongle driver for at least a wine Linux LW that would also work with crossover under OSX ... Well, or not hehe.

lilrayray77
01-03-2007, 06:31 PM
Installing drivers in linux is quite easy, then again I am a computer engineer, and my opinion of easy is different than others :)

Anyway, Ubuntu has a whole slew of driver support out of the box. You should be able to get most common hardware working without problem, and without any hassle from the user. There is some work for less common hardware. But research is always your friend. And will help with the difficult parts.

Most of the drivers are easy to install, and with google and IRC, there is little you cant find help on. I think my worst experience installing a piece of hardware goes to my sound card. I spent and entire day trying to find drivers for my sound card and install them. It wasn't untill I checked a couple of boxes in my sound menu that I discovered that a couple of the audio channels were muted. I felt like such an idiot. ;)

habañero
01-03-2007, 06:45 PM
As late as of yesterday I was fixing firewire on my dads machine -- for every single thing I know about computers rule one in computer problem is check the cables and that stuff actually is turned on ... No less than 50% of issues ...

reelcash
01-28-2007, 03:45 AM
the only thing which keeps me using windoze is lack of lightwave, photoshop and decent vector graphics app for linux
linux (especially idiot-ready distros like ubuntu) has everything for a desktop workstation - except software we are all used to work with
i really don't get why companies like newtek, adobe etc don't port their stuff to linux
someone wrote that linux is not used by professionals so it's no need to port the apps - that's the most ridiculous thing i've ever read ;)
professionals don't use linux becouse they don't have software!
as far as i can see in company i work - if only there is software for linux we switch to linux in one day :)

eagleeyed
01-28-2007, 05:20 AM
I would love a render node for 9 but I honestly dont think I would use layout or modeller on a linux comp.

habañero
01-28-2007, 05:56 AM
" idiot-ready distros like ubuntu"

this is simply not yet the case -- ubuntu or all the stuff that is simple is still far more complicated to set up than say, xp64 was in the beginning. Its just a year since I tried it last and lot sof the tutorials and documentation worked with the pretense that the user knew in what folders Ubuntu would keep different types of files ... And it still relies heavily on users copying and pasting lines from a web browser to the command line for a lot of installations, when there quite obviously is no security or other advantage over a script or a one click solution for people that don't know what the wiggedy it is they are copying and pasting ...

lilrayray77
01-28-2007, 06:35 AM
" idiot-ready distros like ubuntu"

this is simply not yet the case -- ubuntu or all the stuff that is simple is still far more complicated to set up than say, xp64 was in the beginning....

I do not agree. Have you ever tried installing ubuntu on a common laptop (thinkpad for example)? It just works! Literally, you pop in the live cd and everything functions as it would in widows after the hour or two of installing drivers. And then there is the installation process. Easier, in my opinion, then installing windows. And a h*ll of a lot faster.

Now this is isnt the case so much with desktops. There is a much wider combo of hardware put into desktops which can make the linux installation a wee bit more bumpy.

just my view on the topic

mrunion
01-28-2007, 09:30 AM
I agree with lilrayray77. Video drivers and wireless network cards still seem to be the "biggest" issues. Most PCs will work fine with moderately date hardware. Really old stuff or sometimes "Bleeding Edge" gives trouble.

But nVidia and recently ATI are on board writing their own Linux drivers. That's a plus! As always, YMMV but with some persistence most people can get it going -- and oe you learn it ONCE, you know how to do it! Then you can get the Bill-Monkey off your back!

kilvano
01-28-2007, 09:33 AM
I do not agree. Have you ever tried installing ubuntu on a common laptop (thinkpad for example)? It just works! Literally, you pop in the live cd and everything functions as it would in widows after the hour or two of installing drivers. And then there is the installation process. Easier, in my opinion, then installing windows. And a h*ll of a lot faster.

Now this is isnt the case so much with desktops. There is a much wider combo of hardware put into desktops which can make the linux installation a wee bit more bumpy.

just my view on the topic


The touchpad on my Toshiba never worked with Ubuntu. Did work with OpenSuse tho.

The Linux thread is one which gets started every few months (heck...ive even started on e about a year ago) but i just dont see Newtek going for it any time soon.

I wish i was wrong but its simply a case of staffing, costs and their furious upgrade schedules for the 9.x updates

habañero
01-28-2007, 03:02 PM
My point isn't that there aint cases that will work very fine and simple and dandy, it is what you are in for when they don't.

starbase1
01-28-2007, 04:18 PM
Yes, there is still a way to go...

The big development in recent years is that you can try it on a boot dis, and that's well worth a go. Apart from anything else it's very handy to check if your hardware is OK when windoze goes t1ts up.

But there is still a long way to go - USB modems in general are very poorly supported for example, and without a web connection you are crippled.

But stuff is coming along at an impressive speed, and I have high hopes for the future.

Should Newtek start investing in a Linux conversion? No - too much work for too little reward.

Should they look at a different dongle system, so the existing software will run under Wine on Linux? Now that seems to give a LOT more for much less effort...

Speedmonk42
01-28-2007, 05:29 PM
Out of curiousity, what is the Linux count on other 3D apps? And what was the rational behind them going to it? Was it successful?

toby
01-28-2007, 07:33 PM
I know Maya has a Linux version. Big studios like it because most of them started with Unix, it's more stable, and it's *free*, which is a big plus for 1000 node render farms!

don_culbertson
01-28-2007, 07:39 PM
I know Maya has a Linux version.

XSI also supports Linux.
[edit] not that I have it :)

Don

starbase1
01-29-2007, 12:39 AM
I get the impression that most pro Linux support here are small users, typically running on a home computer.

I would have thought that there was a distinct possibility that some of the big boys would very much like to render under Unix / Linux. Mainly because you would not get all the mess of rendering across a render farm of multiple machines and re-assembly, but could use one seriously meaty box to do your rendering.

doimus
01-29-2007, 06:10 AM
I know Maya has a Linux version. Big studios like it because most of them started with Unix, it's more stable, and it's *free*, which is a big plus for 1000 node render farms!


Not only that(since license is a one-off thing, pay-and-forget), but it's the matter of rationality an common sense, after all.

Does one have to have Win Media Player 11 or MS Messenger consuming memory and CPU time on each and every node?
Not to mention that latest Win versions require multi-GB hard drive just to boot and since hard drives consume power, paying electricity bills for 1000+ node farm is most certainly not one-off, pay-and-forget affair.
And then, there are perfectly usable Linux-distros that can boot off a 128MB USB drive.

kilvano
01-29-2007, 06:15 AM
Out of curiousity, what is the Linux count on other 3D apps? And what was the rational behind them going to it? Was it successful?

A lot of studios have heavily edited linux distros like Redhat that run Maya and a few other Matchmoving software but at the end of the day there really isnt a great availabilty of image editing (Yes GIMP is good but is nothing like Photoshop) or Video editing (Although i liked that Jashaka or whatever it was called)

stib
01-29-2007, 07:07 AM
Does one have to have Win Media Player 11 or MS Messenger consuming memory and CPU time on each and every node?
You can get rid of all the windows kruft if you know what you're doing (and even if you don't, like me) I have a windows box with no explorer.exe, iexplorer, outlook etc.. Took a bit of doing, and several reinstalls when I'd totally bolloxed the system, but it can be done. not that I'm bragging..

stib
01-29-2007, 05:44 PM
>>fatuous remarks removed here<<

creativecontrol
01-29-2007, 10:05 PM
I think the obviously sparse development resources at NT will be better spent on getting LightWave "up there" again on Windows and OSX.

I have to agree with Neverko. Every company has finite resources. Any major effor spent on a Linix version would obviously take away from development and refinement of the current versions. I'm sure supporting the current two systems is a major headache. Just look at all the differing issues between PC and Mac.

Would your rather have a buggy Linix version or one that works on the current systems? I'm sure Newtek doesn't have an infinite budget and reality often crushes many dreams of what a perfect world would be like but I for one would like so see a focused effort on Lightwave, not the OS it runs on.

mattclary
01-30-2007, 08:02 AM
I have a windows box with no explorer.exe...

So what did you do, replace your shell with something else?

No explorer.exe=no GUI. Try killing that task...

mattclary
01-30-2007, 08:06 AM
I have to agree with Neverko. Every company has finite resources. Any major effor spent on a Linix version would obviously take away from development and refinement of the current versions. I'm sure supporting the current two systems is a major headache. Just look at all the differing issues between PC and Mac.

Would your rather have a buggy Linix version or one that works on the current systems? I'm sure Newtek doesn't have an infinite budget and reality often crushes many dreams of what a perfect world would be like but I for one would like so see a focused effort on Lightwave, not the OS it runs on.

Agreed. I love NewTek, but they struggle to keep up with current code. Adding a Linux version would be very hard for them.

I would love to see a Linux version of LW, but just don't think it will ever happen. I also have to have my computer games, so between that and LW, I am stuck with the evil that is MicroSoft for the foreseeable future. :devil:

mrunion
01-30-2007, 08:42 AM
I agree with Starbase1 -- just lookt at a solution for the Dongle for people wanting Linux. That's all that's needed. Wine runs LW fine last I heard, it's just the Dongle issue that's causing problems.

(Oh, and SafeNet DOES have a few Linux drivers. But I'm guessing that those won't work when using LW in Wine. Haven't tried though.....)

stib
01-30-2007, 04:05 PM
So what did you do, replace your shell with something else?

No explorer.exe=no GUI. Try killing that task...

Yup no explorer.exe = no Windows shell. There are heaps of others (http://shells.loose-screws.com/). I use Litestep (http://www.shellfront.org/), which is one of the oldest. It's incredibly customisable, which means that I have configured my shell exactly as I want it. I've set up a minimalist theme, with absolutely no on-screen controls (no taskbar, systray or start menu) and all the functionality replaced by a popup menu that appears wherever my mouse is when I hit a hotkey (user definable of course). This menu has my running tasks, system info, folder trees for all the folders I need to get to, all my apps sorted Just Like I Like em, batch scripts that can do useful things like start up render nodes etc etc. It's modular so if I want extra functions I can add them on (like mouse gestures or multiple desktops for example), but if I want to keep it lean I don't need to add unnecessary bits. And there's heaps of themes out there, so if you don't like tweaking you can just download whatever tickles your fancy. But this is a linux thread, you wouldn't be reading it if you didn't like tweaking..

For file management I use Dopus, which can completely replace all the windows explorer file management capabilities and then some. Once again there are heaps of different file managers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_managers)

You can work without any shell running, as an experiment you can kill it then use taskmgr as your shell. Hit windows+r when you want to run an app, and alt tab to switch between them. Uber minimal but fun for a larf.

The hardest part was getting rid of the explorer.exe etc files, until I found out about how System Restore works. Then a few edits to filelist.xml (http://users.iafrica.com/c/cq/cquirke/sr-sfp.htm) and you have control again. Of course you don't have to delete explorer to use an alternative shell, you can run them side by side.

Honestly it's kinda like having linux but with all my windows apps. Well except for the security, and speed and all the other stuff.. sheesh am I a Litestep fanboy or what?

stib
01-30-2007, 04:11 PM
Adding a Linux version would be very hard for them.

Earlier on in the thread I posted that I'd talked to a senior person at a largish animation house here who told me he had used a native linux LW(and then realised that he'd breached the NDA). He said it was an 8.x version.

I know, I know there are alien corpses in area 51 too, and Elvis and Lady Di are secretly married and working in a milk bar in Melton, but I swear: it's real I tell you!

Speedmonk42
01-30-2007, 06:02 PM
So what does it take to make Win/Linux app like LW?

I mean in the cross breading sort of sense. Seeing that I completely misunderstood what a universal binary was......

Are large chunks the same and you work on the interface or does it amount to starting over?

When can I have LW for my cell phone?

Bog
01-30-2007, 06:12 PM
"Universal Binary" is an Apple buzzword meaning "Runs on legacy and current". It's not Universal. Sometimes it's not in Binary. Please do not use marketing terms in technical speech. Thank you.

An accurate term would be "Cross-compiled with common libraries", but Apple don't like using that many syllables.

By the same token, saying "The first 64-Bit Render was on Windows XP 64!" is a bit harsh on people who used Deskstation Raptors and other DEC Alpha based systems back in, oooh, 92.

Speedmonk42
01-30-2007, 07:16 PM
"Universal Binary" is an Apple buzzword meaning "Runs on legacy and current". It's not Universal. Sometimes it's not in Binary. Please do not use marketing terms in technical speech. Thank you.
-----------------

I don't think I was using it in that sense. I was in fact stating I misunderstood what it was for perhaps the same reason.

automan25
01-31-2007, 11:13 AM
I would love to have Lightwave for Linux...Photoshop too. Incidentally, has anyone tried running Lightwave on Linux through a Windows emulator?

starbase1
01-31-2007, 12:33 PM
Automan, read the thread...

Foomandoonian
02-01-2007, 03:57 PM
Does anyone know of a website or other campaign to get certain software ported to Linux?

I was wondering if there was any merit in putting together such a site. You know, make some noise, let Adobe, NewTek, Autodesk and others know we want this option...

Firestar3D
02-03-2007, 02:26 AM
Foo, I was wondering about all of this myself...

I know there are sites that document the "features" of Vista and what they're going to do to us as legit users. I also know there are efforts to get corps to port their apps to Linux. There may even be a few organised petition sites (I can't remember any of the top of my head). The problem I see is that no-one is likely to take notice of them... At least not the companies that hold the purse strings.

Example: The Vista Debacle, there's a site with sources and notations, in well thought out detail that gives us the bad news on Vista, but how many people are actually going to read it? I doubt very much the expected Vista userbase will. I spoke with someone at the local pub and found that he had no clue what was going on in the Windows world. Admittedly he hasn't got a PC yet (one of the few who don't these days), but people who own PC's are just as ignorant. Most of them are only going to get their first experience of anything Vista when they buy a new PC and find it's pre-installed. They'll certainly have no clue about it... And they'll probably never come across the aforementioned site.

It's a sad reality and I wish it weren't so, but I can't see anything really happening with this.

For my part, I'd love to see a Linux port, or at least the WINE issues fixed (I've heard of ongoing OpenGL viewport problems, menu issues and of course, the dongle driver issue) so that we can run it that way. I personally run a dual boot XP/Ubuntu Edgy Eft system with X2 Dual Core etcetc, so I'd love to see my HW being taken advantage of in an efficient manner (as Linux has always been famous for). Ubuntu recognised almost all of my HW straight off the bat (except I had to update my gfx card drivers for my 6600GT), though I'm interested in trying out SuSe and Gentoo if I can find up to date x64 DVD images for them.

Although of course, I did wonder why the installs for many new distros had suddenly required half a gig of RAM just to install (Windows anyone?).

DiedonD
02-03-2007, 03:15 AM
The only good thing about Linux is that its humanities last hope against Microsoft. And its one of them softwares that lives in mountains throughout their lives, with box shorts throughout winter, and never catch a cold Virus.

So with that in mind having LW for Linux would be great, but first Linux itself should be widespread. I mean I dont have Linux. And out here whoever does is working as Tech Support at some Computer shop.

starbase1
02-03-2007, 03:29 AM
Ah but if LW (or even its renderer only) was done as a virtual machine, you could plonk it on anything from a 486 running Linux to an E25K monster!

Ah well, those who enjoy Mr Gates experiencing discomfort can take great pleasure in his encounter with the president of Romania, in which the prez told Bill how wonderful pirated software was!

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/archives/2007/02/02/pirating_windows_worked_for_us_says_romanias_presi dent.html

(Not that I support such a statement, of course...)

Nick

DiedonD
02-03-2007, 03:46 AM
Isnt Rumania under countries that honor US patented products? How can the President speak like that?! How can he say "My whole country has pirated your software and theres nothing you can do about it MNUHAHA HA HA AH AH AHA HA HAAH AAA" :jester:

Speedmonk42
02-03-2007, 10:03 AM
Isnt Rumania under countries that honor US patented products? How can the President speak like that?! How can he say "My whole country has pirated your software and theres nothing you can do about it MNUHAHA HA HA AH AH AHA HA HAAH AAA" :jester:


It is hard to say exactly what the context was.

It could have been part of a discussion about access to technology and concerns about piracy. The president was right, but it may not have been as crass a statement as it is made out to be, in fact it almost certainly wasn't given that MS were opening up a center there.

CAClark
02-03-2007, 10:30 AM
I agree that we need NT to concentrate on fixing what they have already (they aren't too bright sometimes as it is).

Cheers!

gaetan
02-28-2007, 08:36 PM
please lw9.2 for linux

roboanarchy
03-01-2007, 10:08 AM
Please god.
Let them hear our cries.
Vista is the demon spawn of satan.
Lightwave for linux is the only thing that can save me now.

kilvano
03-01-2007, 11:44 AM
Actually having used LW9.0, LW9.2, Maya 8.5 and Photoshop CS 3 Beta on Vista...i rather like it.

It interface is rather annoying at times but all in all its a flashy version of XP. If you get it free on upgrade or with a new PC then go for it. If you dont...spend the money on more RAM or another hard drive.....or in the pub

mattclary
03-01-2007, 12:14 PM
its a flashy version of XP

You can spend $19 on Windowblinds and get all the bling your heart desires.

I've had to do support work for 2 Vista machines so far, and it pretty much sucks, IMO.

I'm thinking about buying a laptop some time later this year, I imagine it will come with Vista, but I can pretty much promise you the first time I power up the machine, there will be a Linux install CD in the drive. I may dual boot between XP and Linux, but I have no use for Vista.

Other than eye candy, I haven't seen that Vista brings anything compelling to the table.

kilvano
03-01-2007, 12:19 PM
but I can pretty much promise you the first time I power up the machine, there will be a Linux install CD in the drive.

I totally agree. My new machine had Ubuntu on it before Vista but the fact remains that for Photoshop and LW we need windows.

I read somewhere (perhaps earlier on this thread?) that PS is going to Linux too.

So if i decide to move to Maya and PS is on Linux then Vista can kiss my *****.

My point is that it isnt any worse that XP. If you can get it for free i would use it

kmacphail
03-01-2007, 12:56 PM
I totally agree. My new machine had Ubuntu on it before Vista but the fact remains that for Photoshop and LW we need windows.

I read somewhere (perhaps earlier on this thread?) that PS is going to Linux too.

So if i decide to move to Maya and PS is on Linux then Vista can kiss my *****.

My point is that it isnt any worse that XP. If you can get it for free i would use it

This may interest you if you've not seen it already...

http://26bits.com/2007/photoshop-cs2-on-linux-ubuntu/

As for me, I'd love to have Lightwave on Linux and would use it at home. Professionally I'd be happy if Newtek worked to ensure the render nodes were fully compatible with wine, I've got 450 quad core servers running SUSE that would benefit.

-Kevin

stib
03-01-2007, 04:32 PM
That screenshot of Potatoshop running on Ubuntu made me smile. Another thing that gave me Happy Thoughts recently was finding ReactOS (http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html). It's an open source remake of windows, so it's an operating system that's designed to be windows compatible, but entirely free (speech/beer).

Oh here it is running PS (version 3 though) (http://www.reactos.org/media/screenshots/2006/ros_029_photoshop3_mini.jpg)

it's in Alpha at the moment, so it's probably not quite up to running LW, but as soon as I get a minute I'll give it a burl. I had a go of the live CD and it seemed pretty nifty. Pity it looked kinda like win98, but I'm sure when there's a stable release the kids who like to customise will be doing what they like to do.

I didn't hesitate, I headed straight for the donate button. If you're sick of windoze, but you have apps that aren't linux enabled yet then I'd encourage you to do the same.

Riza
03-02-2007, 12:11 AM
I'm joining da club!
me want LW for Linux!
(do we need blood signed petition?...:p)

jlyon
03-02-2007, 11:05 AM
Hey sign me up!
I won't be upgrading to Vista, so a linux version of LW would be great!

Alliante
03-26-2007, 12:27 PM
Sorry to resurrect this thread again, but better than starting a new thread.

Please, please please. Lightwave and/or Screamernet for linux! :)

LW_jackn
03-26-2007, 10:40 PM
I had heard about this thread but couldn't find it.

And now, without further adue...

I cast my vote in for a Linux version of Lightwave, cause I too will never use Vista or likely anything else that comes out from that dog-forsaken company.

XP is my last OS from them, and I'm not too thrilled with it either.

ubuntu kicks butt...

nough said.

Bog
03-27-2007, 01:21 AM
Repeat shout for LW for Linux here. A machine running effectively nothing but LW, and getting full benefit of the machine's power? "Boot to LightWave" if you will? Sign me up.

stib
03-27-2007, 10:21 PM
has anyone had any success with LWSN under wine? I had a burl, but couldn't work out what to do with the -c etc switches. I got it to load a scene, but because it was looking for the windows path to all the objects and plugins it didn't actually contain anything.

I'm hoping there are some wine gurus out there..

lots
03-28-2007, 12:11 AM
If a linux version of LW is in our future, I'd much appreciate it if it worked on as wide a range of linux distros as possible. I'd also like it a great deal, if the "official supported distro" was _NOT_ a redhat derived OS.

It would also be a great deal of help if it wasn't tied to any particular WM/DE (like KDE or Gnome). Linux's power lies in the ability to customize it to whatever I like. In fact, if LW ever became Linux native, I'd much prefer that NT just post the list of libraries and kernel modules I need to make it work, rather than the distro it was designed for. Seeing as I don't run redhat based distros (fedora, redhat, CentOS, etc) making LW tightly integrated with that OS is pointless to me.

So many 3D companies have linux versions of their apps, but in my opinion, they did it all wrong. If an opensource developer can make his app work on multiple distros, at the cost of his time, a paid group of developers should be able to make one app work on all major linux distros :) Afterall, blender does...

Unfortunately, our dongles don't have linux drivers that I am aware of, so I dont see this happening any time soon (unless drivers are made).

Exception
03-28-2007, 09:27 PM
A floating, dongleless license would fix this. Other companies can do this and succeed, so why not NewTek?

They probably can.
But there's 17 people working full time on LW as far as I know, and they might have other priorities.

Like... a light class plugin :)

And...

I think they've been working on a network license... :)

starbase1
03-29-2007, 12:00 PM
Nope, DO NOT develop a version for a specific Linux distribution.

For a quick and dirty, all we need is a Linux compatible dongle. (Or a driver for the existing one). Tiny effort, huge benefit.

If there is to be significant development effort, develop it as a virtual machine, wrapped up in whatever distro is easiest. That way it will work on a VAST range of OS platforms, anything supported by VM Ware.

Oh, and while we are wishing, please combine the VM LW with the dongle, and sell it as a U3 memory stick, that I can carry with me on a key ring.

:D :thumbsup:

Nick

Bog
03-29-2007, 01:13 PM
An' I wanna pony ;)

But yeah, please not for a specific distro. Or, alternatively, wrap a specific distro around it, so we can Boot Straight to LightWave :D

starbase1
03-29-2007, 02:08 PM
Boot Straight to LightWave :D

Let that be our mantra! Other applications? ha! We spit on your other applications!

Boot Straight to LightWave!
Boot Straight to LightWave!
Boot Straight to LightWave!

LW_jackn
03-29-2007, 08:33 PM
I may be ignorant about this, but couldn't lightwave basically be it's own window manager for xFree or whatever is being used now days?

Just curious

lots
03-29-2007, 11:48 PM
Well that would require NT to develop the window management (boarders, handles on those boarders for resizing, etc). Try starting X without a window manager or DE. You quickly see what all NT would have to write in order to make things work. That's basically re inventing the wheel. I don't see this as a viable option. NT should take advantage of the WMs already in place on linux.

Unfortunately key bindings in LW would need to change for a linux version because many of the short cut keys in LW are already reserved for many window managers (example: alt+LMB/RMB usually calls move window/resize window, but also calls the tumble commands in LW). I suppose LW could disable those WM keys when active *shrug* but there are little things like that..

IMO all NT needs to do with a linux version of LW is to make it work with standard linux libraries, and standard linux kernels (the vanilla ones for example). That should hit the widest range of linux based distros. And then listing all the libraries and kernel modules LW needs, anyone else can modify their distro to support LW.

To be honest, I only use Windows for two things. Lightwave and video games. If it weren't for that, I'd be straight up linux. Gentoo to be exact. I actually spend 90% of my time at work in Gentoo and really only use Windows at home. The other 10% of my time at work is spent in Unix, Windows and the occasional OSX.

Bog
03-30-2007, 02:12 AM
Theoretically, it'd just be a recompile.

Then, of course, there'd be the huge pod-trail of plugins that'd either need to be recompiled or run under emulation. That bit would stink.

TBH, I'm not keen on just running LW under WINE. The point - to me - of running LW under Linux is to get rid of the overhead of the OS - then going and running the blessed thing under emulation seems to defeat the purpose.

regularfry
03-30-2007, 03:13 AM
dp deleted

regularfry
03-30-2007, 03:15 AM
TBH, I'm not keen on just running LW under WINE. The point - to me - of running LW under Linux is to get rid of the overhead of the OS - then going and running the blessed thing under emulation seems to defeat the purpose.
WINE Is Not an Emulator. It's a reimplementation of the system libraries, so there isn't an OS overhead. It's actually faster under certain circumstances. Read this (http://winehq.org/site/myths#slow) and be enlightened. This is not nit-picking - there's a solid technical difference.

The *only* drawbacks to LightWave under WINE that I'm aware of are the Sentinel drivers (which load, but don't function (yet) under ndiswrapper), and patchy ATI graphics driver support, and I'm not sure about the latter.

regularfry
03-30-2007, 03:43 AM
Bugger, forgot one - there's also currently a GL child window redraw bug in WINE, but that looks relatively trivial to fix.

lots
03-30-2007, 07:48 AM
Gotta love that ndiswrapper :)

As for ATI's support, I doubt we'll see a change for quite a while. But hopefully AMD will be a good influence on ATI's drivers in linux one day...

ben martin
03-30-2007, 10:18 AM
Yes!yes!yes! LINUX LW Pleaseeeeee! Yes!

Phil
03-31-2007, 02:12 PM
Bugger, forgot one - there's also currently a GL child window redraw bug in WINE, but that looks relatively trivial to fix.

Nope. It's not that trivial, sadly. The issue is now over 2 years old. There is a hack to display properly, but interaction remains awkward. They are still to deliver a final fix as far as I know.

Bug 2398 tracks it all. www.winehq.org

Phil
03-31-2007, 02:16 PM
Unfortunately key bindings in LW would need to change for a linux version because many of the short cut keys in LW are already reserved for many window managers (example: alt+LMB/RMB usually calls move window/resize window, but also calls the tumble commands in LW). I suppose LW could disable those WM keys when active *shrug* but there are little things like that..

Same issue affects Maya and XSI. There's no universal way to stop this happening, so you have to dig around in GNOME's (limited) control panel and KDE's (excessive) control panel to figure out how to restore these hotkeys. Other environments will probably need a google search.

*shrug*

I used to be a fan of the idea of LightWave on linux. Then I decided life was too short and went Mac instead. Most of the render nodes run linux with LWSN running under Wine here, though. Works quite well.

Phil
03-31-2007, 02:19 PM
A floating, dongleless license would fix this. Other companies can do this and succeed, so why not NewTek?

Given that many commercial plugins for LW require a dongle for the limited copy protection it provides, a floating dongleless license system may end up giving you a LW that is rather similar to that shipping with the Toaster. Ask the VT owners how they feel about not being able to take advantage of plugins like Worley's.

habañero
03-31-2007, 03:55 PM
I love the idea about a Linux LW but people keep in mind the problems;

* Minor plugin support, forget about things like Xdof. Might get the worley plugins with time, and probably some of the new plugins but probably also not others. As pointed our above, how would it feel not to get that new fluid solution or fur that is all the rave? What if the client shows you a picture where it was used? Maintaining several platforms can be a very expensive solution and I mean its certainly worth something to get rid of bill gates' farty smell but do you notice it that hard really when you are doing 3D work? Several of the tools from an average pipeline are not there for Linux.

* Lack of support from Newtek or rather support in proportion to the userbase. This would probably lead to;

* Lack of bug fixing. Again, Newtek would have to spend developer hours on the Linux version in proportion to the *additional* income it would generate. What would it feel like to still have the modeler selection bug half a year after everyone on mac or windows had it fixed (I realise its an unlikely example, but try and get what is my point no matter).

I must say the idea about boot directly to lightwave sounds sweet -- if you could get less setup, things like self update and zero hour render farm setup with it, it could actually be worth paying extra for and could likely be sold as a separate product with a separate budget and so on.

I suspect a linux LW would need a slightly different business model where you would one way or the other generate useful things for Newtek and the rest of the community, like *code*, to make up for the likely smaller cash flow from the linux platform compared to the others. That would help the project that I must say I suspect wouldn't pay for itself in years with the current model. Lscript comes to mind, if the Linux crowd could have that as their pet project and perhaps their route to plugins goodness, the rest of the LW community could gain lots more news on flay and perhaps some of the stuff that have been developed as open source for blender.

I mean that is probably the main sale point of a linux LW right there, if it couldn't draw on the back catalog of and lack important professional LW plugins, then if you could get free implementations of open source physics models, blenders' fluids etc etc it'd be completely worth it.

A point to keep in mind is that although I aint completely sure, a linux LW version/licence could likely run on OSX too ...

How would the developement and maintenance of Linux LW be paid for? Should Lw be more expensive for all the people that will have about zero benefit (and interest) for the linux distro? Will it really be that much of a competitive advantage over say, modo or XSI that you could go and increase the price of LW substantially enough to cover a whole new platforms' worth of driver issues, bugs, possibly issues in a VM that is developed as open source, and finally there would likely be cost with getting a solution for the dongle?

The about only pricing I can think of that I believe would work would be to have it be sold as a separate package on a basically "make your own support" or paid support deal, at a lower price point than LW. I am not sure if the plugin situation would be enough to separate it from the full package, or if it would still cannibalize sales of the full package. Could be it would have to be sold only as an addon to full licences to make sure Newtek wouldn't be getting far less money from much the same crowd while giving them far more. Which in short time would mean we would get less of the other stuff we like ...

I mean, linux LW issues included or perfect 3D painting inside LW? Or Fprime and Viper support for the pixel filters and the like? Basically, there would have to be a whole different budget for it with a cashflow that would come on top of the current one, not instead of parts of it. If in addition it would mean faster development and much more development of free plugins as well, could be there is something there ... Boils down to the amount of additional licences you could sell.

lots
03-31-2007, 11:40 PM
IMO, linux is quite nice for a many things. I personally use it every day for a variety of things. It actually powers my router, fileserver, and DVR (think tivo but 10x better and free) at home. I wouldn't be against a LW version, but lack of plugins is a real issue that many wont be able to pass. If only LW's plugins could be made independently of platform :)

Hey I thought of a new feature :P platform independent plugin architecture :)

habañero
04-01-2007, 05:15 AM
"platform independent plugin architecture"

This already exist and is called Lscript ... It is though not very fast, and lacks a lot of things you would need to write last generation plugins. But both the speed issues and a bridge to everything that the SDK provides could be made to happen quite simply, it is after all just a question of making this and this short lscript command equal this and this much longer and more complicated amount of fast C code.

If there is economic opportunity for a linux LW version, then it is also opportunity for linux versions of plugins that doesn't necessarily need a lot of work, or that on the other hand could be nigh on impossible to make for things that are tied into opengl drivers or the like. Then a linux version with a different license could perhaps allow use of technology that wouldn't be possible to integrate in LW on the other versions. Such a version on a different license wouldn't necessarily need to be on Linux only for that case.

A Norwegian company called Trolltech have been very successful based on such an approach, I am buying their stock this month. Their linux based software is starting to turn up in chinese cell phones, as well as in the official skype phones and it is given away as open source version as well as a paid version.

3DBob
04-01-2007, 08:57 AM
Add me to the list for a Linux version.

I will not install VISTA with its evil DRM infection.

I would really like the Adobe apps in Linux too.

I think all things considered - It would be MUCH EASIER to get Apple OS not tied to their hardware.

I think NT should use any influence it has to get Apple to release an open x86 platform version of its OS.

I don't think that with the new Open Office and Google Apps that Apple need worry about the threat of M$ pulling the plug on Office for Apple OS.

Failing either of the above a New 9.2 Linux render node would be peachy.

3DBob

Titus
04-01-2007, 09:45 AM
Ask the VT owners how they feel about not being able to take advantage of plugins like Worley's.

It feels very frustrating. However LW is evolving again and everybody (artists and plugiin develoepers) can adapt to that change, a few months ago I wasn't sure to embrace a Linux LW (I use Linux since 1994) but today things are different.

3DBob
04-01-2007, 12:12 PM
Add me to the list for a Linux version.

I will not install VISTA with its evil DRM infection.

I would really like the Adobe apps in Linux too.

I think all things considered - It would be MUCH EASIER to get Apple OS not tied to their hardware.

I think NT should use any influence it has to get Apple to release an open x86 platform version of its OS.

I don't think that with the new Open Office and Google Apps that Apple need worry about the threat of M$ pulling the plug on Office for Apple OS.

Failing either of the above a New 9.2 Linux render node would be peachy.

3DBob

3DBob
04-01-2007, 12:23 PM
Woops double post - soz.

I did write a long edit - but it seams to have ignored it.

3DBob

habañero
04-01-2007, 01:39 PM
One thing I forgot to mention is that linux LW could have one other attraction, namely better render speed from an os with far less overhead than vista. OpenGL speed would likely be the same or maybe a little bit slower from less optimal drivers than on windows. Together with much cheaper OS licenses and simpler installation and maintenance, it could be a significant saving for people buying small and large render farms.

Bog
04-01-2007, 01:56 PM
One thing I forgot to mention is that linux LW could have one other attraction, namely better render speed from an os with far less overhead than vista. OpenGL speed would likely be the same or maybe a little bit slower from less optimal drivers than on windows. Together with much cheaper OS licenses and simpler installation and maintenance, it could be a significant saving for people buying small and large render farms.

Er. That's pretty much the point.

dglidden
04-01-2007, 02:04 PM
I've been bugging NewTek about this since ca. 1998*. I'm highly suspicious it would ever happen, although the work done to get the Mac Universal version running seems as if it would have further cross-platform implications than just Mac Universal Binary.

Pros: Lots and lots of people DON'T want to upgrade to Vista; eventual alternative is migrate to Linux or buy all-new Apple hardware. With the exceptions of Lightwave and Max, all the other major 3D apps are running on Linux. All the major studios have at least some measure of professional work done on Linux.

Cons: Dongle. No plugins. NewTek would be lost for support options.

Like I said, even with the changes at NewTek, I'm doubtful we'd ever see it happen. I stopped holding my breath years ago. I'd even be content (not quite "happy") with a Linux-native ScreamerNet node, but I wouldn't make any kind of bet on seeing even that ever happen.

* - Back in the days when LW had SGI and Sun ports lying around too, Alan/Stuart claimed they could have a Linux port up and running in about a week, but mgmt wasn't interested. Around the time Maya and Houdini and Softimage were all shipping Linux-native releases, NT official response was still "There is no market for 3d apps on Linux."

lots
04-01-2007, 02:53 PM
"platform independent plugin architecture"

This already exist and is called Lscript ...
Indeed, but like you said, its slower and not as feature-full as coding plugins via C or C++.

I was actually thinking along the same lines as Apple's UB executables. Basically packing the binaries in such a way that they're executable by many different systems, rather than just one. Granted that makes the exe big, and gives the LW dev team more work to build a plugin system that works with "fat" binaries/libraries... If something like this existed though, think of all the mac users that have always been whining for plugins :)

The alternative is to make Lscript more feature full... I could deal with the slow-ness I suppose...

ChrisH
04-01-2007, 03:42 PM
Yea most definetly

that would be nice

stib
04-01-2007, 06:08 PM
I used to be a fan of the idea of LightWave on linux. Then I decided life was too short and went Mac instead. Most of the render nodes run linux with LWSN running under Wine here, though. Works quite well.

Phil - do you have any tips on setting up LWSN nodes under wine? I've had a go, but with no luck.

Bog
04-02-2007, 01:28 AM
MMm. IIRC most of Weta Digital's workstations are linux boxen running Maya. The "No Market" thing might've held water a few years back, but it's really not the case today. I realise it'd be a pig to get there in the first place. If wishes were horses, we'd all be eatin' steak...

dlbird
04-02-2007, 04:49 AM
I've been bugging NewTek about this since ca. 1998*. I'm highly suspicious it would ever happen, although the work done to get the Mac Universal version running seems as if it would have further cross-platform implications than just Mac Universal Binary.

Pros: Lots and lots of people DON'T want to upgrade to Vista; eventual alternative is migrate to Linux or buy all-new Apple hardware. With the exceptions of Lightwave and Max, all the other major 3D apps are running on Linux. All the major studios have at least some measure of professional work done on Linux.

Cons: Dongle. No plugins. NewTek would be lost for support options.

Like I said, even with the changes at NewTek, I'm doubtful we'd ever see it happen. I stopped holding my breath years ago. I'd even be content (not quite "happy") with a Linux-native ScreamerNet node, but I wouldn't make any kind of bet on seeing even that ever happen.

* - Back in the days when LW had SGI and Sun ports lying around too, Alan/Stuart claimed they could have a Linux port up and running in about a week, but mgmt wasn't interested. Around the time Maya and Houdini and Softimage were all shipping Linux-native releases, NT official response was still "There is no market for 3d apps on Linux."



in fact, as far as i know, XSI is running ontop of some "simulation" layer like wine .

the technology is provided by Mainsoft , called Mainwin.

ppl who tried the linux version will felt the speed difference:newtek:

regularfry
04-02-2007, 05:34 AM
Nope. It's not that trivial, sadly. The issue is now over 2 years old. There is a hack to display properly, but interaction remains awkward. They are still to deliver a final fix as far as I know.

Bug 2398 tracks it all. www.winehq.org

The latest reports for that bug say that the patch for it works with LightWave. Obviously it needs more testing, but it's close.

lukasdesign
04-02-2007, 07:17 AM
I will not upgrade to Vista,
for NT a linux version is a must to keep up with maya, softimage and houdini!
companies like dell will deliver linux machines quite soon, according to their website! HP is considering the same strategy...
this means that a lot of 3d pros will consider to switch! they already have a great choice of 3d programs on linux platforms!

on linux I can work perfectly, I have enough options for my personal way of working, only rhino is missing (and LW, but as said before...there are great alternatives, also in the opensource sector, just mentioning blender!)

Phil
04-02-2007, 02:56 PM
Phil - do you have any tips on setting up LWSN nodes under wine? I've had a go, but with no luck.

If you are storing content on z:, for example you need to add a drive symlink (z:) to the CIFS mount (e.g. /mnt/content) under the dosdevices folder within your wine configuration (usually under .wine). For example :

ln -s /mnt/content z:

That was enough to get things running here. If you can mount the remote drive(s), then it's simply a matter of putting the symlinks in to appear as drives to Wine. You can then point LWSN at the drives, just like under Windows. LWSN neither knows nor cares about the Wine system. I can put a more detailed set of docs together, but it won't be for a few days.

Mounting the drives at boot can be annoying, depending on distribution. Given that my LWSN nodes are not connected to an external network, I simply embedded the authentication into /etc/fstab and have the drives mounted automatically. On a public machine, this is not wise.

Caveat emptor : I tend to run old versions of Wine simply because I'm lazy and they work fine as-is. Newer versions changed some things and I cannot be bothered to migrate everything over just yet. One issue was symlink handling. The old Wine config file needed massaging to allow symlinks to be displayed in file browsers, for example. This probably got moved into the registry for newer versions.

stib
04-02-2007, 06:05 PM
Thanks for that Phil, I'll have to read up on wine a bit more. I'll give it another go when I've got some down time and report anything I discover (I'm running the most recent(?) release of wine - I only installed it the other day).

ana027
04-04-2007, 12:35 PM
Of course I would to see lw version in linux.

Ujeen
04-07-2007, 11:19 AM
I switched from LW to Maya because I started working in linux. But if NT releases linux LW version, I'll get back to LW.

Ratteler
04-08-2007, 12:53 PM
I too am switching to Maya and Blender simply because of the Linux issue. If it can run under OS X Intel, there is no reason it can't run under Linux, except lazy programmers who want to let Microsoft do the work in exchange for also letting them call the shots.

Modo lost me when they reneged on Linux support.

LW is no longer the secret weapon in the back of every effects house that they were a few years ago.

Lightwave hasn't kept up with the Jones. Even Poser has better Displacement Map support. Modo's OGL make LW seem like it's back on the Amiga.

LW attracted a lot of attention and a seriously Expanded it's user base when it was the first Pro Quality 3D program to support OS X.

It can steal some much needed thunder once again with a true Linux Port.

But I doubt we'll see it happen before LW is in the budget bin next to Caligari. But hey... a boy can dream.

Danic101
04-08-2007, 01:34 PM
I disagree I would rather see NewTek add new features and develop and intergrated between LightWave and SpeedEDIT instead of adding support for a third OS. They already have a 64bit version that runs great on Vista 64bit.

Ratteler
04-08-2007, 02:29 PM
Vista is the problem Danic. We don't want it. We don't want to support it.
I for one have drawn my line in the sand, and will hold it like a Spartan.

If they would like to port SpeedEDIT to Linux, I'll probably end up buying that too. Linux could also use a really good Photoshop and Illustrator replacement. Gimp hasn't cut it yet, although Inkspace is workable already.

Plenty of room in Linux Land, and more than enough people to support a company who realizes that Linux isn't about lack of money, but about control of property.

Bog
04-08-2007, 05:03 PM
We're all talkin' in circles here. LightWave for PC? Airlock. Tumbling backwards, eyes bulging and piddling blood. LightWave for Mac? Drag it into the car park, I've got John Browning's finest here waiting for the nape of it's neck. LightWave for linux? Dunk it in honey and throw it to the lesbians.

GIVE ME MY SIXTEEN CORE AMIGA, DAMN YOUR EYES!

mattclary
04-08-2007, 07:46 PM
We're all talkin' in circles here. LightWave for PC? Airlock. Tumbling backwards, eyes bulging and piddling blood. LightWave for Mac? Drag it into the car park, I've got John Browning's finest here waiting for the nape of it's neck. LightWave for linux? Dunk it in honey and throw it to the lesbians.


LOL! I'm digging your sense of humor! :beerchug:

Bog
04-09-2007, 05:33 AM
Who's joking? ;)

starbase1
04-17-2007, 05:36 AM
I'm really looking forward to having a go with the next release of Ubuntu, Feisty Fawn, final version due any day now...

The improvements in network stuff sound particularly welcome...

Nick

lilrayray77
04-17-2007, 02:09 PM
After using the beta a bit, feisty is pretty nice. The networking is very simple but with the latest kernel update seems to be a bit flaky on my system. Apart from that, it has been stable and speedy.

archiea
04-18-2007, 01:13 PM
I'd like to see LW on linux because it would facilitate installing LW as a tollset onto machines in the larger studios. I'd also like to see LW expanded so that its shaders and renderer could be integrated into a larger pipeline. Perhaps a native Renderman<>LW I/0 functionality. This would, however, drive up costs becuse such development is expensive. Also, this linex version should be an uncompromised port.

starbase1
04-22-2007, 12:48 PM
Incidentally, if any of you out there have not yet tried it, I'd recommend getting yourself a new Ubuntu Linux disk, even if you don't intend to use it in anger... The new one can read windows disks straight from boot, so it could be VERY handy to have if you ever get a nasty windows crash but need to get at your data...

Not that windows ever crashes of course...

Speedmonk42
04-22-2007, 06:28 PM
Incidentally, if any of you out there have not yet tried it, I'd recommend getting yourself a new Ubuntu Linux disk, even if you don't intend to use it in anger... The new one can read windows disks straight from boot, so it could be VERY handy to have if you ever get a nasty windows crash but need to get at your data...

Not that windows ever crashes of course...


Interesting.

Quick question about this.

So if you were setting up a new windows system would you have a system HD the OS, then another HD for all you data? That way if it gorks out, you can use the data drive to read from?

I guess what I am trying ask is can UBUNTU read the data from the gorked windows system drive? As in a bootable drive with the OS on it if the data and OS are on the same drive?

Sorry for the change of topic but that sounds pretty cool.

stib
04-22-2007, 07:48 PM
A separate system and data drive (or at least partition) is recommended. Apart from anything else you'll get better performance for things that require high data throughput like playing video etc, if your system drive is separate from your media drive.

Ubuntu comes on a liveCD so you can boot from it without even installing. But why not install it if you have a free partition. It doesn't have to be a different drive, but it has to be a different partition. If you have free space but no free partitions, you can resize your partitions using something like partition magic.

Note that out of the box Linux sees all NTFS dirves as read only. Use ntfs-3g to mount them as read/write.

starbase1
04-23-2007, 12:57 AM
Stib, with the live CD you do not need to write one byte to your HD. It's slower to come up, but it's a risk free trial. If your system supports booting from a USB device, you can also have it on a USB memory stick.

A separate HD is over the top at this stage, not least because the programs are more efficient than you are used to, and take up very little space. You can share data, so there's no need to keep it with the software. This also means it's easy to reformat / repartition if you change your mind but want to keep the documents etc you created.

That one CD contains an executable spreadsheet, word processor, very serviceable graphics prog, web browser, chat client, etc etc etc. You are not dealing with MS bloatware here.

I gave it an 8 Gb partition, which is tons...

Nick

regularfry
04-23-2007, 01:04 AM
I guess what I am trying ask is can UBUNTU read the data from the gorked windows system drive? As in a bootable drive with the OS on it if the data and OS are on the same drive?

Sorry for the change of topic but that sounds pretty cool.
It depends on the nature of the gorkage. Windows will fail to be able to read a combined drive either if the OS itself suffers data corruption to the system files, or if there's a filesystem failure where the actual structure of the FS is broken. In general, a second OS on CD will only help in the former case. Now, if you've got Windows on one partition and your data on a second, there are four separate interesting failure cases: FS or data corruption on the OS partition, and FS or data corruption on the data partition. The only case here where a second OS on CD can't help is with FS corruption on the data partition, because anything can happen to the first drive and you just don't care. If anything else happens, you can still read (at least some of) your data.

stib
04-23-2007, 02:13 AM
Stib, with the live CD you do not need to write one byte to your HD.

erm, that's what I said innit?

Ubuntu comes on a liveCD so you can boot from it without even installing.

Perhaps I should clarify; a separate HD for Linux is unnecessary, but a separate HD for media and data (eg content, renders, project files, etc) might be worth considering. If you're playing a movie off your hard drive you don't want the OS to be trying to use the same hard drive at the same time (and that's the physical drive, even if it's a different partition). This is from someone who worked as an editor back in the days when you needed a SCSI RAID just to play mpeg-A movies at 6 mb/s, so take it with a grain of salt

Performance aside, the other benefit of a separate OS drive is that when you do gork it completely you can nuke it back to year zero without losing any of your work files. Good if you're mucking around with repartitioning and installing new OSes etc., particularly if you only half know what you're doing. Especially with hard drives of the size you need for your OS and applications being pretty cheap these days. My dual boot system and all my graphics etc software fits on an 80Gb drive, and all my work goes on a couple of 250 GB drives

LW_jackn
04-23-2007, 08:20 AM
"Gorkage"... Love that term... :D

DiscreetFX
04-23-2007, 10:47 AM
Maya is on Linux, Lightwave should be to, end of story.

lukasdesign
04-24-2007, 10:44 AM
...and we will get it sooner or later!
It looks like the mainstream PC supplier will help us a lot.
Dell will deliver Linux Pc soon. so I guess HP will follow...then...
more Linux OS out there means bigger markets for software producers. especially in 3d where the big players (Houdini, Maya, XSI) are already well established on Linux, a producer like NT simply can't miss the trend!

next to that Vista helps a lot (the lack of OpenGl support and driver issues)!

my next system will be dual boot machine, and WinOS is gonna be replaced sooner or later on it. for me as an industrial designer LW is important, but more important are NURBS modeller. so the first app like ALIAS, Rhino, FormZ or SolidThinking that's supports Linux will have me as their client!

I hope then NT has a Lightwave ready fior Linux otherwise I have alternatives on the market!

Alliante
04-25-2007, 01:25 PM
On the flip side (although I'm a big Linux promoter), ATI support for Linux is terrible....and there's nothing we can do. They just seem to ignore any requests to improve the driver to support fantastic OpenGL.

stib
04-25-2007, 06:10 PM
well, just as there are alternatives to LW, there are alternatives for ATI. Nvidia's linux support is getting better every day.

DiscreetFX
04-25-2007, 09:01 PM
NewTek already has a Unix version of LightWave (Mac OS X) so they could do a Linux port if they wanted.

stib
04-25-2007, 09:12 PM
I've been told they have already done a Linux version, circa LW[8], but it's now kept in a sealed room in bunker somewhere in the Nevada desert.. (read back in the thread if you want to know what I'm talking about).

Even Adobe is starting to warm to linux these days, as they've released a flash player for linux. Wonder which we'll get first: a Linux Potatoshop or a Linux Lightwave

MooseDog
05-02-2007, 05:59 PM
i've been doing some web research and found these two links:

ScreamerNet for Linux Update Announcement 3/21/05 (http://forums.awn.com/showthread.php?t=2415)

as well as this:

Newtek Europe D/L Page with SN Linux Module (http://www.newtek-europe.com/uk/support/download.html)

but found no such d/l on the u.s d/l page :(

no luck yet finding any posts/tutes/experiences doing so (but have not read this entire thread. maybe i should:) )

Dexter2999
05-02-2007, 06:26 PM
For no particular reason, I went to the safenet site and typed in "linux" in the search box. They have systems to service Redhat and Fedora and Suse. I am sure they could and would supply the LW dongle drivers if Newtek said "pretty please."

Speedmonk42
05-02-2007, 07:37 PM
Cooool

Dell will start shipping Ubuntu laptops soon.

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8661763902.html

starbase1
05-03-2007, 06:53 AM
Cooool

Dell will start shipping Ubuntu laptops soon.

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8661763902.html

yeah. Now combine that bit of news with microsoft's intention to stop selling XP on pc's by the end of the year. MS will eliminate themselves from the low end market completely, leaving a clear run for Linux.

stib
05-03-2007, 07:07 AM
Toshiba in Italy (http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS9644921792.html) are doing the same thing by the looks of it.

Yeah, I wonder why NT pulled the linux LWSN project? That was a genius decision if ever there was one.

LW_jackn
05-03-2007, 07:53 AM
i've been doing some web research and found these two links:

ScreamerNet for Linux Update Announcement 3/21/05 (http://forums.awn.com/showthread.php?t=2415)

as well as this:

Newtek Europe D/L Page with SN Linux Module (http://www.newtek-europe.com/uk/support/download.html)

but found no such d/l on the u.s d/l page :(

no luck yet finding any posts/tutes/experiences doing so (but have not read this entire thread. maybe i should:) )


Hey MooseDog!

I think the last viable version of Linux LWSN was for 7.5x.

:(

Zach
05-03-2007, 02:13 PM
Yes please. Just make it easier to install than XSI.

djlithium
05-05-2007, 05:16 AM
You can run it under wine just fine, my complaint with linux is that there still seems to be a complete lack of 64bit CPUs in most if not all of the distributions I have come across.
There are no significant speed hits running LW9 under linux in 32bit processing environments, but frankly I will take XP64bit any day over any linux option. I can't stand linux. I can't stand companies that develop for it as a marketing gag. For example, eyeon, the makers of Fusion, pissed away huge amounts of time on developing a copy for linux but didn't bother with a 64bit version for windowsXP64!
One of the biggest benefits of XP64bit is to be able to access more than 2GB of ram. Something Fusion seriously needs when working on big comps. But noooo their excuse was they could sell more copies of a linux version of fusion5 while still hitting the same problem on that os. Ram limitations. So much for being smart, and it cost them. Kind of the opposite effect.

djlithium
05-05-2007, 05:20 AM
Toshiba in Italy (http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS9644921792.html) are doing the same thing by the looks of it.

Yeah, I wonder why NT pulled the linux LWSN project? That was a genius decision if ever there was one.
Your right because linux is stupid. Choice is simple. Render farm with 64bit XP and tons of ram on 64bit procs or renderfarm with 32bit linux under wine with tons of ram on 64bit procs. You won't get any advantages out of those CPUs and the ram with linux under 32bit. It's that simple.
Our farm at BSG swallowed heavy scenes for lunch once we made the switch to XP64bit as all the systems had 64bit procs and more than 2GB of ram (most of them were upgraded or purchased new with 8GB)

Geee, that means i can load the pegasus, the galactica (notorious for being a pig) and a basestar all at once and render with out paging to disc!

BRILLIANT!
Less shots to break down into smaller scenes and less issues for compositing.

starbase1
05-05-2007, 07:38 AM
Choice is simple. Render farm with 64bit XP and tons of ram on 64bit procs

And for those of us who pay for our own hardware?

stevecullum
05-05-2007, 09:01 AM
And for those of us who pay for our own hardware?

I pay for all my own Hardware/Software, but agree with DJ, 64bit LW and Fusion and better support generally for XP64bit would be far more benefit to me in production than 32bit Linux, at this time.

However if Linux supported a 64 bit version, then that might be a different story!

Bog
05-05-2007, 09:11 AM
Another own-hardware-buyer here, and I'm really looking forward to transitioning to XP64 for my stuff. Yeah, I'd rather be properly 64-bit without paying my MSTax, but needs must to make use of the shiny 64-bit goodness that I've been awaiting since the Alpha died.

I'm not gonna wear 32-bit boots just to make a point when I can get 64-bit goodness.

MooseDog
05-05-2007, 09:27 AM
i'm not deeply familiar with the jungle of different linux distributions, but the ubuntu one does comes in a 64-bit version:

Ubuntu Documentation (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/32bit_and_64bit?highlight=%28bit%29%7C%2864%29)

...for both desktop and server versions afaik.

i'm certain there's lots i'm missing:eek:

Weetos
05-05-2007, 09:36 AM
GNU/Linux kernel has been ported to every existing architectures, including intel/AMD 64bit - All major and serious distributions provide a 64bit version

MooseDog
05-05-2007, 10:14 AM
You can run it under wine just fine...

cool!

question: by "it" are you referring to lwsn.exe?

i'm still at the research stage on this small project. i was given 7 old boxes and want to turn them into a farm. but...i want to keep them free:D and have been researching linux distributions, lw and linux, and lwsn and linux.


so far, it's looking pretty positive, but the devil is in the details:eek: .

Titus
05-05-2007, 10:30 AM
However if Linux supported a 64 bit version, then that might be a different story!

Linux supports 64 bits.

Titus
05-05-2007, 10:42 AM
Argh, my previous post should say:

Linux supports 64 bits, if we have LW on 32 and 64 bits, the same on linux should be fair.