This is true. As much as i admire open source initiatives and appreciate their products, the whole scheme doesn't seem to have much survival value.

No offense, but I don't think you understand one of the major points of Open Source software. Sure, the "core" people might leave and start working on other things. But that doesn't matter, because the code is open to anyone. There will be other people who move in to pick up the "slack".

I write software for my paying job, and in my experience projects have been more successful -- in terms of getting what the customer wants AND in money terms -- with open source software than with even the supposed best commercial solutions. So don't mistake the reduction in press coverage that came after the dotcom bubble burst with a collapse in open source.

Agreed: I've been on the client end of software development for web apps, where open source is fairly mainstream. We got much better results using open source than paying for proprietary software. And take a look at the ways IBM & HP for example are committing themselves to Linux right now.

The business model for open source focuses more on the guys that use the software; in piecing together a small production house, I'm hoping to hire a good coder or two -- guys who can customize & contribute to open source projects -- rather than pay licensing fees. Since there are now some well-developed OS projects that extend beyond web apps, that gets me custom software pretty cheap. So there's sustainability for open source software, at least in certain areas. It's just a different model for software development.

Agreed. I develop and use open source, and we have a great profitable Business model.

VERY old news. Corel had a Linux version of that OS a couple years ago and it was a total flop. They also ported their two flagship applications Corel Draw and the purchased Word Perfect. Two more flops.

Corel isn't what it once was, say ten years ago. To say they lost their way would be a gross understatement.

Linux itself is YESTERDAY'S news. It was something that could have been that obviously isn't going to be.

Its a Windows world, learn to live with it. You know how much I "love" MicroCrap.

Oh billyboy, your comments are eveyrday news for the last 7 years. Sure linux isnt going to be on the desktop anytime soon, but, saying that linux is yesterday news is so off .In the multitudes of Big business corporation's i deal with on a daily basis, Linux is not only there, its growing. Linux server side products are robust,secure, expandable etc etc. The business i deal with dont use linux becasue its free, but becasue it is a better product. And am i a Microsoft hatter, nope. I Like to use the best product for the job. Oh by the way i am a MCSE, MCDBA, so i do unsersatand Windows in the enterprise. As far as the video media world, One of our customers, in SLC,( they know you spot), Uses linux for all of the rendering, Cant do what they do with windows boxes effectivly.

Anyway. linux is here and will stay, becasue it is so entrenced in Big business, and the internet.

Its not ready to be a desktop NLE,

In 3 to 7 years, we will find that MS has some form of serious competition on the desktop, either Linux, Linux/Unix derived, or something totally new, being worked on in someone's garage. There have been reports that MS is already creating strategy for this.

Having plans ready to port software to a new operating systems is a good investment for any company.

-Travis

Well, there's GOTTA be something good with Linux/Unix if all computers except PC's use a version of it (well, most do).

But, it's the same with RISC & SISC CPU's. PC's have always used SISC. Sun, SGI, Apple, AMD (pre-Athlon), Sony (for the Playstation's), Nintendo (for their consoles) and now Microsoft (for the X-Box 2) all use RISC (SGI might of switched to Intel Itanium chips, but I'm not 100% sure).

AS ALWAYS, my comments are in the context for the SOFTWARE we're using. Vegas doesn't run on Linux. Enough said about the topic except to say I've seen all kinds of OS's come and go. Linux isn't anything special. Never was... likely never will be. It may be the darling of the corporate crowd now, but main stream it isn't and probably never will be.

If you want to discuss the BEST OS presently for graphic use think BeOS, it runs circles around both Winodows and Linux... but it is poorly supported.

Is BeOS still even AROUND? They made a huge push at NAMM a few years ago, and a number of musicians jumped, and jumped back out with the underwhelming support. I have an old BeOS disk around here somewhere...
<mumbling from under my desk, finding dust kitties>

BillyBoy, your post is not in the context of the software we are using. By mentioning other software that has failed you totaly brought out of context of this software

I’ve been using Linux since 1995 when you had to re-compile the kernel to get the features you needed to support your hardware. (I’m am old Slackware user) Linux has come a long way from those days and major corporations like IBM have it running on ALL of their mainframe hardware. (That’s right the largest System 390’s (zSeries) run zOS that hosts multiple Linux logical partitions (LPARS) and customers love it) It is a growing business that shows no sign of stopping.

Linux and Open Source are the basis for GRID computing, the next paradigm in computing. In fact, if there were a Linux version of Vegas you could use the Globus Toolkit and a GRID to form a Vegas rendering farm with 100’s/1000’s of computers.

Will it ever take over the desktop? It’s anyone’s guess but if we learned anything from IBM OS/2 (the “other” superior operating system to Windoz) is that lack of application support will kill an OS faster than any bugs or instability. If Sony ported their SoFo software suite to Linux I would buy it in a heart beat.

My copy of Knoppix boots Linux from a CD on a laptop (or desktop) that doesn’t have a Linux partition! I fix problems with Windoz by booting Linux to fix locked files in NTFS partitions all the time. It is much more stable platform than Windoz will ever be. It will take some gutsy application vendors to really make it take off. Only time will tell.

~jr

Ahh... BeOS is still around, but barely. I brought it up as a point of illustration. Its a superior OS, (64 bit) but like Linux, it never had or likely will get main street support.

Like Johnny said, Linux originally required you to re-compile the kernel and do all kinds of geek things just to get the damn thing installed. Till this day it still is clumsy (I've tried five different flavors of Linux, including Corel's orignal attempt) one version forget who's even switched from English instructions to German in the middle of the install after feeding it five CD's full of junk, just to install the OS. So sorry, no sale.

With all its bumps and warts Windows is still far superior, ie "user friendly" which is why love it or hate it, its here to stay. For sure Windows has many near fatal faults, but as far as installing it, its a fairly painless process compared to Linux which still can be a real pain even if you are a geek.

Id have to disagree with you on installation of linux versus windows. As a demo at a Lan party with over 500 attendes, i had my mother(who is about as technical as a frog) install 3 OS's office software, and all critical updates. The 3 os's were XP PRO, Mandrake 9.,2, and W2k. In Her Own Words "MAndrake was the easiest to setup. I installed everything you asked me too during the install. XP wasnt bad, but it took a while for me to install all of the updates and it asked me a lot of questions i dint understand, and 2000 was hard. I didnt understand everything that was going on, and it took a long time to do all of those updates. If i was to choose one based on the instalation, i would pick MAndrake.

The OS ITSELF is what's typically hard for Joe Average to install, not the application software.

BillyBoy,

I don’t think you’ve installed Linux in a while or at least not RedHat Linux. There aren’t many options anymore. The installation is pretty much, 1. Select the type of usage (A) Workstation, (B) Developer, (C) Server and then 2. press OK to start the installation. It’s all prepackaged now. You just wait for it to complete. You actually have to do some magic incantation to get to a screen where you can say, “Hey. I know what I’m doing, please let me pick the tools I want to install”. It really is that easy now AND unlike Windoz, you can query RPM packages to tell what their dependencies are and have them automatically install any dependencies it needs. Try that with Windoz... NOT! It’s a whole new penguin.

~jr

As i mentioned in the previos post, my mom installed the OS from scratch

Nope, haven't tried in about two years. Remember three strikes and you're out. I gave Linux FIVE chances and each time it fell on its face. Hell will freeze over before I try a sixth time unless they make MAJOR inprovements, like running ALL Windows software flawlessly. I mean the actual Windows software, not some gimpy knock-off.

Besides, the number one reason for not using Linux is NONE of your favorite software runs on it, ie. Vegas doesn't, neither does, Photoshop, most other major titles I could mention.

I know already, there are Linux wannabe applications. I've mentioned GIMP many times in this forum. Still the number one reason why Linux is going nowhere is no major software developers supports it. That's simply how it is.

Actually what's happening now with Linux is what happened with flavors of UNIX a couple decades ago. Same BS. Diehard fans till this day still claim UNIX is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

It isn't that I can't install Linux. I installed five different versions. I simply don't like it. It offers nothing new or better. Yes, it is a bit more stable. Until you push it, then too it can crash just like good old Windows.

Since you answered that you havent installed it or tried to install it in the last two years, then you are in no way able to comment on what linux is, How easy it is to install, what it supports, how stable it is. Just becuase you dont use it doesnt mean others dont use it. Ive never in any of my corporate consulting, heard a client say" well BillyBoy doesn't use so it must mean that we have no use for it becasue Billyboy knows everything". Last time i checked IBM, DELL, HP, SUN, Oracle arent just "diehard fans".
You stated
"Besides, the number one reason for not using Linux is NONE of your favorite software runs on it"
Last time i checked you dont know what my favorite software is. You may think the world thinks likes you billyboy, but the whole world doesnt.

I don't care to venture into the area of opinions about Linux on the desktop or not, but...

In some MAJOR areas of computing, Linux is definitely coming on stronger very day. One huge example is the emergence of "grid" computing -- clusters of hundreds of computers, with distributed storage running into the terabytes and petabytes, all acting as a single, integrated system. F'r example, in rendering animated films. Linux is the OS of choice in scaling up systems like that. (Visit, for example, the website of Network Appliance, to see some of what's going on in the Grid computing world.)

THIS forum is suppose to be about Vegas. I don't give a rat's ass about Linux "discussion" since you can't run Vegas on Linux. Get it yet?

Apparently some don't.

Now who has a good recipe for eggnog or fruitcake?

> Now who has a good recipe for eggnog or fruitcake?

Eggnog has far too much cholesterol for me. :(

Do people still make fruitcake? I though the same fruitcake just keeps on getting passed on from year to year. ;-)

~jr