Linux? Stable for editing?

Post by **HuntingtonGault** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 7:56 am

Hello, I was thinking of trying an alternative operating system for my pc. So far I've seen linux. Does anyone use, or have experience? I wondering if it's easy to install and worth while.

Thanks

Post by **kettuz** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:59 am

I use only linux for my editing projects and thus far I have been quite satisfied. However, there can be many problems. While there is only one low cost commercial editing software for linux (http://www.mainconcept.com/mainactor_v5_linux.shtml) getting a working editing computer up and going can be a bit hard.

I myself use Cinelerra (Main page:http://www.heroinewarrior.com/cinelerra.php3 and cvs-version page [more advanced version] http://cvs.cinelerra.org/) and it works quite well, but being a project made by nonpaid coders, it can be sometimes a bit unstable. But it's being continuously developed.

Of course, one should also remember that there is Cinepaint (http://cinepaint.sourceforge.net/), a good program for frame by frame postproduction. Used also by big movie companies...

Hopefully this helps!

Post by **Lunar07** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 1:51 pm

HuntingtonGault wrote:Hello, I was thinking of trying an alternative operating system for my pc. So far I've seen linux. Does anyone use, or have experience? I wondering if it's easy to install and worth while.

Thanks

While can be hard to setup because you need to know the 'under the hood' things and things like that, but once you get used to it and how the Unix-like environment operates, you'll be using an OS that puts Windows and Mac out on the closest trash heap. No question about it. This is the 'star trek' sort of OS.

Post by **mattias** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:01 pm

while i'd certainly use linux rather than windows i don't see in what way it's better than mac os. it has a very similar kernel and the same unix subsystem but mac os has a way better user interface. and you can run pretty much all linux software on a mac too. linux runs on cheaper hardware, which is a major plus but i don't think that alone puts mac on the "trash heap"...

/matt

Post by **Lunar07** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:22 pm

mattias wrote:while i'd certainly use linux rather than windows i don't see in what way it's better than mac os. it has a very similar kernel and the same unix subsystem but mac os has a way better user interface. and you can run pretty much all linux software on a mac too. linux runs on cheaper hardware, which is a major plus but i don't think that alone puts mac on the "trash heap"...

/matt

I have not used Mac recently. But when it comes to memory management, Mac only follows. Try to crash Linux for example. It just won't. Mac does.

Post by **soundboy** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:31 pm

Lunar07 wrote: Try to crash Linux for example. It just won't. Mac does.

They sure do.. I have to reboot my mac twice a day... and they say PC's are shit ???

I run ProTools TDM on a G4 but it's only OS9..... maybe OSX is better???

Post by **mattias** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:45 pm

mac os x crashes less often than linux, i.e. absolutely never at all. the memory management is in my opinion even better than in linux due to different kernel/userspace handling, but they have the same basic architecture exposed to applications, both being unices.

os9? well if you want to compare it to an ancient version of linux that could be interesting i guess, but relevant today? not really.

/matt

Post by **kettuz** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 3:21 pm

I have to agree, if I had the money I'd go the Apple way. That just is 'the professional' way. But even though my graphical interface often crashes while running opengl software, I have never had my computer crash while doing video editing. So linux can be quite stable too, if run on good hardware. And I guess that's the magic in macs too-- restricted hardware and very good support for it.

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 3:27 pm

"while i'd certainly use linux rather than windows i don't see in what way it's better than mac os. it has a very similar kernel and the same unix subsystem but mac os has a way better user interface."

Agreed... I guess Lunar07 has only used older versions of the Mac OS. OS X is a completely different animal. I haven't had a kernel panic or crash in at least 6-7 months.

Post by **lunni** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:16 pm

mattias wrote:it has a very similar kernel

Altough I get your point, I just have to point out that actually these two kernels are fundamentally different. Linux being monolithic and MACH being a microkernel. Anyways this is not the right place to discuss kernels... sorry :)

/henri

Post by **drsanchez** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 6:41 pm

To me isn't just wasn't worth it. I use Linux 9 hrs/day at work and puttering around at home (and my uptime is measured in months), but I saved probably 100 hours by just buying an older copy of Premiere (6.5, works fine).

But I would love nothing more than for someone to port their app to Linux. The beauty of Unix and clones is the command line. I'm so much faster using the keyboard than the mouse. Don't Avid editors use almost nothing but hotkeys? I know you can use the command line in Windows, but DOS isn't quite as powerful.

I think Mac used a modified FreeBSD kernel.

Post by **christoph** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 7:14 pm

the problem is less the stability but the drivers for the videocard/firewire ports and the editing software (or lack thereof).

try to find anything remotely with the power of FCP (or FCE if you are on a budget) or the hardware support or the file exchange possibilities ...
not gonna happen on linux.

++ christoph ++

Post by **mattias** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 7:15 pm

lunni wrote:
mattias wrote:it has a very similar kernel
Altough I get your point, I just have to point out that actually these two kernels are fundamentally different.

yeah i know, i've developed for both as well as various bsd's. just trying to simplify things for those who haven't. :-)

/matt

Post by **scott** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:07 pm

I set out some time ago to do editing on the cheap, which lead me to Linux. I was given a several year old IBM with a somewhat slow processor but lots of RAM to start with. I settled on Mandrake Linux, which has a reputation for ease of installation/use, and got to it.

The things that gave me the most trouble were configuring linux to work with sound cards, modems, etc. Drivers take a while to track down, and installing things has a steep learning curve. You'll find yourself learning lots of new terms like RPM's (not like a car) and kernel (not popcorn). I advise you to get the program that automatically finds the right RPM for your system and installs it for you. I can't remember what it's called at the moment.

I now have a working Linux system up and running, but ended up building a Windows machine from the ground up, and using that for editing instead. There are just many more options for editing packages in Windows or Mac (If I had the extra cash, I'd go Mac). The Linux machine is now used for running The Gimp, and for continuing my Lnux education.

Good luck!

Scott

Post by **jean** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:22 am

I did my best to use linux, but unfortunately the system is not ready yet to be used for - how do I put this - non-IT related work.

If I had to set up an IMAP server, I'd get linux without thinking twice.
But if I want to pop in a DVD, heck.. I want to watch the DVD, and am simply not willing to spend hours to find out how I can do this.

Same for editing. It is possible, like anything else. But when I edit, I want to edit and not learn anything about the guts of a linux system.

So then, you guessed it, after some 6 years on PC, I've gone back to the Mac, and assure that it is as stable as any unix, and as nice to use as the Mac has always been.

A macmini will do, BTW. Pop in the 1GB RAM, however.

Filmshooting

Linux? Stable for editing?

Linux? Stable for editing?

Re: Linux? Stable for editing?