Renzatic on 15/9/2016 at 07:06
It was a more smugly self satisfied fire. The type of fire that can only be stoked by dedicating yourself to FOS software that's free as in libre.
Al_B on 15/9/2016 at 07:09
If you pour beer on it then from what I understand it should burn brighter.
Renzatic on 15/9/2016 at 08:06
Does the beer have to be libre?
Renzatic on 15/9/2016 at 17:28
Quote Posted by Abysmal
Outside of Blender, the Linux landscape for content creation is pretty bleak.
D'wuh? I'd say that's probably one of it's bigger strengths, especially recently. It has access to all of The Foundry's catalog, Maya, the Substance suite (minus bitmap2material, but it's probably coming), 3DCoat, Mudbox, and blah blah blah. It's missing Max, Zbrush, and Photoshop, which does hurt, but it's far from dire.
hedonicflux~~ on 15/9/2016 at 17:52
The only, and I repeat ONLY disadvantage Linux has to Windows for content creation is the piece of shit known as Gimp.
I wish Blender Foundation would just release a 2D art program with the same (sane and not frustrating as hell) interface.
Nameless Voice on 15/9/2016 at 19:52
On the bright side, UE4 IS supposed to have full support for Linux, including the editor. The only thing it can't do is cross-compile for Windows (though you can cross-compile to Linux from Windows.)
Renzatic on 15/9/2016 at 19:56
Quote Posted by Abysmal
You're all mostly naming off 3D modeling and art programs, which are a bit more well-served due to Linux users being heavily interested in games. But pro video, pro audio, photography, publishing, scoring, vector art, etc are all extremely wanting, don't kid yourself. That's in addition to all the other pro/scientific/medical/business markets I'm definitely forgetting (such as flow cytometry, polysomnography, other things in my past careers).
Yeah, good point.
Though the dearth of applications in the pro video, photography, publishing, and vector art categories would be solved in if the Creative Suite released on Linux. That's the great and scary thing about Adobe. In certain fields, they pretty much ARE the industry.
Quote Posted by Nameless Voice
On the bright side, UE4 IS supposed to have full support for Linux, including the editor. The only thing it can't do is cross-compile for Windows (though you can cross-compile to Linux from Windows.)
Well, it's 3/4ths of the way there. Unlike Unity, Epic doesn't provide a straight binary for UE4 on Linux. You have to compile it all yourself.
mensch on 16/9/2016 at 08:17
Quote Posted by Renzatic
Though the dearth of applications in the pro video, photography, publishing, and vector art categories would be solved in if the Creative Suite released on Linux. That's the great and scary thing about Adobe. In certain fields, they pretty much ARE the industry.
Certainly, I tried working with Gimp, Inkscape and Scribus professionally and while it can be done, it requires no small amount of effort. For me, the biggest problem in this case was (and probably is) the interoperability of file formats. Working on an Illustrator file created by another designer in Inkscape, for example, yielded very mixed results. Illustrator (using ai) supports various features Inkscape (using svg) doesn't and vice versa. Opening an InDesign file in Scribus isn't even possible, although there are efforts to reverse engineer the file format. Of course such problems can be overcome, especially when everybody uses the same workflow, but it's a lot of extra work and the benefits (using free, open software) might not be all that enticing.
heywood on 16/9/2016 at 11:38
Quote Posted by Abysmal
Outside of Blender, the Linux landscape for content creation is pretty bleak. Also, it's kinda rather obvious when your software is made by a motley group of amateurs and hobbyists, and not a funded, timely, professional team.
You are so wrong.
Linux kernel developers are almost all professionals, paid to work on Linux full time by companies such as Intel, Red Hat, IBM, SuSE, Samsung, Linaro, Google or the government (NCSA, NCAR, national labs, etc.). Most Linux distributions tend to fall into one of two categories: professionally developed by a company as a product (Red Hat/Fedora, SuSE, Ubuntu,...) or developed as a hobby/side community project (Mint, Arch,...), although there are a few in between e.g. Debian. Most of the major open source applications are/were professionally developed as a product by a company. StarOffice/OpenOffice/LibreOffice is an example. Blender is another. On the other hand, some started as a university project (Gimp) or government (Apache).
Quote:
Linux does have a use as the underpinnings for closed-source, professionally made operating systems (and admin of course)
Obviously, you don't even know what open source means.
heywood on 16/9/2016 at 17:16
First of all, you can't take Linux and make a closed-source operating system out of it. The Linux kernel and the vast majority of the other software that makes up the base of any Linux distribution are released under open source licenses which were written specifically to prevent that.
Second, your complaint seems to be with open source desktop productivity software and not Linux.
Third, I consider LibreOffice to be high quality software. It has 90% of the functionality of Microsoft Office and fewer bugs and faster performance. My only real complaint with it as an Office alternative is compatibility. Also, it started out as a commercial, proprietary office suite called StarOffice, so it doesn't really fit your narrative of open source = shitty hobbyist work anyway.
