[linuxrants7xpg]

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 10:38 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 02 May 2012 - 09:16 PM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

Once more, 100% of the applications in use were CUSTOM APPLICATIONS.

Not true. "Then, an animatic movie is created by artists using custom plugins in Alias|Wavefront's 3-D animation package Maya." Maya is now owned by Autodesk, and is available for Windows, OSX, and Linux. It's not a custom application.

OK, so sorry - 99% of them. Your point was so well received.

Going through the article, these are the numbers I found:

Maya - Not custom
ToonShooter - custom
ToonSketch - Probably custom, not mentioned in the article
ScanLevel - Not custom
ProcessLevels - custom
InkAndPaint - custom
Studio Paint - Not custom


Custom Apps: 4
Not Custom: 3

Apps mentioned are 57% custom, 43% not.

[waldojim]

linuxrants7xpg, on 03 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 10:38 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 02 May 2012 - 09:16 PM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

Once more, 100% of the applications in use were CUSTOM APPLICATIONS.

Not true. "Then, an animatic movie is created by artists using custom plugins in Alias|Wavefront's 3-D animation package Maya." Maya is now owned by Autodesk, and is available for Windows, OSX, and Linux. It's not a custom application.

OK, so sorry - 99% of them. Your point was so well received.

Going through the article, these are the numbers I found:

Maya - Not custom
ToonShooter - custom
ToonSketch - Probably custom, not mentioned in the article
ScanLevel - Not custom
ProcessLevels - custom
InkAndPaint - custom
Studio Paint - Not custom


Custom Apps: 4
Not Custom: 3

Apps mentioned are 57% custom, 43% not.

And your reading skills aren't up to par - Scan Level, for example, IS custom. It is an IRIX based tool that is being ported for Dreamworks.
And studio paint is being replaced: "But, they are switching to wpaint, a proprietary Linux application developed at PDI/DreamWorks."

That means that ALL of their software apart from Maya is custom software, and MAYA is using plugins well beyond the realm of what the common man can get their hands on.

This post has been edited by waldojim: 03 May 2012 - 12:50 PM

[nonseq]

waldojim, on 03 May 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

That means that ALL of their software apart from Maya is custom software, and MAYA is using plugins well beyond the realm of what the common man can get their hands on.

And I suspect that there have been significant mods in Maya itself to meet animation/special effects needs. I also suspect that each seat costs a great deal more than $6,500.

This post has been edited by nonseq: 03 May 2012 - 01:18 PM

[waldojim]

nonseq, on 03 May 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

waldojim, on 03 May 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

That means that ALL of their software apart from Maya is custom software, and MAYA is using plugins well beyond the realm of what the common man can get their hands on.

And I suspect that there have been significant mods in Maya itself to meet animation/special effects needs. I also suspect that each seat costs a great deal more than $6,500.

So how does any of this represent "Linux on the desktop"? There is nothing about these machines that fits the usage of the common man... Once more we have people citing specialty cases and waving a flag of triumph.

[linuxrants7xpg]

waldojim, on 03 May 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 03 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

Going through the article, these are the numbers I found:

Maya - Not custom
ToonShooter - custom
ToonSketch - Probably custom, not mentioned in the article
ScanLevel - Not custom
ProcessLevels - custom
InkAndPaint - custom
Studio Paint - Not custom


Custom Apps: 4
Not Custom: 3

Apps mentioned are 57% custom, 43% not.

And your reading skills aren't up to par - Scan Level, for example, IS custom. It is an IRIX based tool that is being ported for Dreamworks.
And studio paint is being replaced: "But, they are switching to wpaint, a proprietary Linux application developed at PDI/DreamWorks."

That means that ALL of their software apart from Maya is custom software, and MAYA is using plugins well beyond the realm of what the common man can get their hands on.

No need to be confrontational about it Jim. I could have been a jerk and noted that even if you were correct about every app other than Maya being custom you'd still be wrong about 99% (your math skills aren't up to par), but I didn't. ScanLevel is custom? The article doesn't state that and I've seen no proof that that is the case. Studio Paint was being replaced? The article was from 2001. The odds that any of those applications are still in use is extremely low. The fact of the matter is, they used Studio Paint. Studio Paint from Alias|Wavefront. They used Mayafrom Alias|Wavefront. No, 100% of their applications are not custom. No, 99% of their applications are not custom. That's fact. Moving on.

[waldojim]

linuxrants7xpg, on 03 May 2012 - 01:47 PM, said:

No need to be confrontational about it Jim. I could have been a jerk and noted that even if you were correct about every app other than Maya being custom you'd still be wrong about 99% (your math skills aren't up to par), but I didn't. ScanLevel is custom? The article doesn't state that and I've seen no proof that that is the case. Studio Paint was being replaced? The article was from 2001. The odds that any of those applications are still in use is extremely low. The fact of the matter is, they used Studio Paint. Studio Paint from Alias|Wavefront. They used Mayafrom Alias|Wavefront. No, 100% of their applications are not custom. No, 99% of their applications are not custom. That's fact. Moving on.

You might consider moving on yourself. Find a new poster child. The fact that they "did use" any application is irrelevant. The fact that they made the point CLEAR at the time that the software needed replaced - meaning it wasn't doing what they wanted. As for the 99%, you apparently never heard of "figure of speech". You MIGHT want to consider looking it up. Also, since a good portion of MAYA will be custom code as well - yes, I would call it custom software. And that you missed the Scanlevel comments in the article, go re-read it.

[nonseq]

linuxrants7xpg, on 03 May 2012 - 01:47 PM, said:

waldojim, on 03 May 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 03 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

Going through the article, these are the numbers I found:

Maya - Not custom
ToonShooter - custom
ToonSketch - Probably custom, not mentioned in the article
ScanLevel - Not custom
ProcessLevels - custom
InkAndPaint - custom
Studio Paint - Not custom


Custom Apps: 4
Not Custom: 3

Apps mentioned are 57% custom, 43% not.

And your reading skills aren't up to par - Scan Level, for example, IS custom. It is an IRIX based tool that is being ported for Dreamworks.
And studio paint is being replaced: "But, they are switching to wpaint, a proprietary Linux application developed at PDI/DreamWorks."

That means that ALL of their software apart from Maya is custom software, and MAYA is using plugins well beyond the realm of what the common man can get their hands on.

No need to be confrontational about it Jim. I could have been a jerk and noted that even if you were correct about every app other than Maya being custom you'd still be wrong about 99% (your math skills aren't up to par), but I didn't. ScanLevel is custom? The article doesn't state that and I've seen no proof that that is the case. Studio Paint was being replaced? The article was from 2001. The odds that any of those applications are still in use is extremely low. The fact of the matter is, they used Studio Paint. Studio Paint from Alias|Wavefront. They used Mayafrom Alias|Wavefront. No, 100% of their applications are not custom. No, 99% of their applications are not custom. That's fact. Moving on.

I guess we can't move on without addressing the misrepresentation of Maya. Maya is not provided off the shelf to operations of this scope and Autodesk does not support Maya on Linux versions except for RedHat, RedHat Enterprise, and some Fedora variants. The popular distros for Linux on the desktop (Ubuntu, Mint, and the myriad of other variants) are not supported for Linux 2013 or in prior versions going back to 2004. So it is disingenuous to try to link Maya to those versions. Beyond that Maya makes use of custom plugins in order to meet the needs of high end animation houses so to argue that it's not custom is naive at best.

Quote

Maya was originally a next-generation animation product under development at Alias Research, Inc. based on code from The Advanced Visualizer, PowerAnimator and Alias Sketch!. The code was ported to IRIX and animation features were added. The codename for this porting project was Maya. Walt Disney Feature Animation collaborated closely with Maya's development during its production of Dinosaur. Disney requested that the User interface of the application be customizable so that a personalized workflow could be created. This was a particular influence in the open architecture of Maya, and partly responsible for it becoming so popular in the industry.

After Silicon Graphics Inc. acquired both Alias and Wavefront Technologies, Inc., Wavefront's next-generation technology (then under development) was merged into Maya. SGI's acquisition was a response to Microsoft Corporation acquiring Softimage, Co.. The new wholly owned subsidiary was named "Alias|Wavefront".

In the early days of development, Maya started with Tcl as the scripting language, in order to leverage its similarity to a Unix shell language. But after the merger with Wavefront Sophia, the scripting language in Wavefront's Dynamation, was chosen as the basis of MEL (Maya embedded language).

Maya 1.0 was released in February 1998. Following a series of acquisitions, Maya was bought by Autodesk in 2005. Under the name of the new parent company, Maya was renamed Autodesk Maya. However, the name "Maya" continues to be the dominant name used for the product...

Autodesk supports the Windows, Mac and Linux platforms; XP SP3 or later, respectively. As of Maya 2011, the software is 64-bit under Mac OS X. On Linux, the supported distributions are Red Hat and Fedora, 64-bit. While Autodesk acknowledges that the application is not limited to the aforementioned releases, such as the specific Linux distributions, it does not support them. Autodesk Maya 2012 does not support Mac OSX Version 10.7 and above ("Lion") yet.
http://en.wikipedia....i/Autodesk_Maya

[MattWoodward]

I'm sorry but that "you have to install a new version every year" is pure unadulterated horse hooey. The LTS releases are supported for 5 years. As usual, the guy from Gartner doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

[MattWoodward]

I'm sorry but the "you have to install a new version every year" is pure unadulterated horse hooey. As usual, the guy from Gartner doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. LTS versions of desktop Ubuntu are supported 3 years, and the server version is supported for 5 years.

I suppose we should be surprised that Gartner is once again acting as the mouthpiece of Microsoft. I've never heard an intelligent, unbiased word come out of anyone from Gartner.

[CoastingOregon]

Once again we get the same old "Linux has failed on the desktop" story that trots out month in, month out, year in year out.

The measurement of success of a business hiring people to make software that they turn around and sell is sales and profits. Think Adobe or Microsoft.

Success of the linux desktop is not measured that way. It is measured by who uses it more than how many use it. It is measured by how useful it is to those users and how stable is the development system (which translates into "will it be around next year for me to use"). By those measures Linux on the desktop is no flop at all.

Scientists, engineers, writers, artists and my wife and I use Linux and find it works for us. Not because it is cheap, but because of other attributes. It is more secure. It is more extensible. It is more suited to working with multiple applications simultaneously. For the technically adept, the nuts and bolts are easily exposed and tweaked instead of being hidden inside of impenetrable black or gray boxes.

Do more people find that using the OS that came with their hardware is easier and satisfactory? Sure. Do some people have an overwhelming craving to play games that only work with Windows? Yep. This is not a conflict between success of operating systems. It is a dispute over false equivalences.

[JustinReide1qx]

The article is right about the app issue, but as other posters have stated, you don't need to "upgrade Linux every year". Has the author heard of the Ubuntu LTS cycle even before being revised to 5 years (I didn't even know that!). Heck there are even Linux distros made for older computers (Lubuntu for example). Some people I think neglect to realize the advantages of desktop Linux such as the elegant LibreOffice apps and especially GIMP, Inkscape, and Blender which are all quality pro applications in their own right. And in terms of stability and security, Linux wins hands down. I mean sure there are still big apps that aren't compatible with Linux (DirectX based things etc.) but still what Linux offers on the desktop cannot be discounted.

[JustinReide1qx]

waldojim, on 03 May 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 03 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 10:38 PM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 02 May 2012 - 09:16 PM, said:

waldojim, on 02 May 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

Once more, 100% of the applications in use were CUSTOM APPLICATIONS.

Not true. "Then, an animatic movie is created by artists using custom plugins in Alias|Wavefront's 3-D animation package Maya." Maya is now owned by Autodesk, and is available for Windows, OSX, and Linux. It's not a custom application.

OK, so sorry - 99% of them. Your point was so well received.

Going through the article, these are the numbers I found:

Maya - Not custom
ToonShooter - custom
ToonSketch - Probably custom, not mentioned in the article
ScanLevel - Not custom
ProcessLevels - custom
InkAndPaint - custom
Studio Paint - Not custom


Custom Apps: 4
Not Custom: 3

Apps mentioned are 57% custom, 43% not.

And your reading skills aren't up to par - Scan Level, for example, IS custom. It is an IRIX based tool that is being ported for Dreamworks.
And studio paint is being replaced: "But, they are switching to wpaint, a proprietary Linux application developed at PDI/DreamWorks."

That means that ALL of their software apart from Maya is custom software, and MAYA is using plugins well beyond the realm of what the common man can get their hands on.

I guess these guys haven't heard of Blender

[waldojim]

JustinReide1qx, on 04 May 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

I guess these guys haven't heard of Blender

Blender isn't even in the same league as the suite of software used by Dreamworks. It is great for the home user to tinker with, but not for professional production.

[linuxrants7xpg]

waldojim, on 04 May 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

JustinReide1qx, on 04 May 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

I guess these guys haven't heard of Blender

Blender isn't even in the same league as the suite of software used by Dreamworks. It is great for the home user to tinker with, but not for professional production.

Based on what information?

[SantingKho]

LOL. she gets published for writing this? Ahhhh. she asked "Why Linux is a Desktop Flop?". which she didn't realize she answered a few paragraphs down, emphasis mine: "First, Windows itself isn't that expensive when you get it BUNDLED in with new desktops and laptops. The cost savings to run Linux on the same hardware is minor."
This article and writer are a total waste of time.

[waldojim]

linuxrants7xpg, on 04 May 2012 - 04:23 PM, said:

waldojim, on 04 May 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

JustinReide1qx, on 04 May 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

I guess these guys haven't heard of Blender

Blender isn't even in the same league as the suite of software used by Dreamworks. It is great for the home user to tinker with, but not for professional production.

Based on what information?

I am getting tired of doing your homework for you. Go out and find proof of it being used by a major publisher, when you can't, consider WHY.

[nonseq]

waldojim, on 04 May 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

JustinReide1qx, on 04 May 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

I guess these guys haven't heard of Blender

Blender isn't even in the same league as the suite of software used by Dreamworks. It is great for the home user to tinker with, but not for professional production.

I tried blender. It's no as good as Avid version 1.0 or Premiere 1.0. Hell it's not as good as premiere 1.0 pre-release. I've used them all to make a living and blender is not in the same league. This seems to be a pattern of the Lunx faithful. Those who claim equivalency or superiority have never used the products at length or for pro grade projects. They are willing to make unsupported claims without testing those claims.

[linuxrants7xpg]

waldojim, on 05 May 2012 - 08:21 AM, said:

linuxrants7xpg, on 04 May 2012 - 04:23 PM, said:

waldojim, on 04 May 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

JustinReide1qx, on 04 May 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

I guess these guys haven't heard of Blender

Blender isn't even in the same league as the suite of software used by Dreamworks. It is great for the home user to tinker with, but not for professional production.

Based on what information?

I am getting tired of doing your homework for you. Go out and find proof of it being used by a major publisher, when you can't, consider WHY.

You made a claim Jim ("Blender isn't even in the same league as the suite of software used by Dreamworks."). It's not my homework to prove or disprove your claims. Further, even if Blender isn't used by a single publisher, that doesn't prove that the software isn't "in the same leauge as the suite of software used by Dreamworks." Prove your claims.

[waldojim]

linuxrants7xpg, on 05 May 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

You made a claim Jim ("Blender isn't even in the same league as the suite of software used by Dreamworks."). It's not my homework to prove or disprove your claims. Further, even if Blender isn't used by a single publisher, that doesn't prove that the software isn't "in the same leauge as the suite of software used by Dreamworks." Prove your claims.

You are the one countering. That is on you. I have proven every claim I have made thus far, based on you being a smart ass. I am tired of doing your homework for you, and proving you wrong time after time. Have at, or don't. Your choice.

[Evildave]

Oh, FFS. Can't anyone use google?

http://www.blender.o.../professionals/

If you don't personally want to use something, because you feel you should always avoid anything that can be had for free, in deference to 'products' that you can flush thousands of dollars a seat into, be my guest, and that can go out of business and disappear overnight.

It sure would be nice to have investors who are blind AND stupid.

For instance, if you DO make games (and I do, in fact, make games, several every year), it might be important for Unity to import Blender models. And gosh, it does.

It's nice to be able to pay cheap people to make cheap stuff, and not require them to invest thousands of dollars to pitch in their help.

People pay me to make games, which makes me a (gasp!) 'professional'.

http://unity3d.com/s...ectBlender.html

But I suspect these standard nay-sayers will never be in the kind of position to make that that decision for real, any more than a panhandler would be trusted for investment advice.