Linked by David Adams on Thu 29th Sep 2011 23:47 UTC, submitted by lucas_maximus
Thread beginning with comment 491573
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-11-12
Nevertheless, it far out-classes any OSX/Windows NLE, and it only runs on Linux.
By the way, Piranha runs on RedHat, but I've heard of Ubuntu Piranha installations.
Ant can run on RedHat and Ubuntu, too. From the Ant page: "The Ant is a Linux Solution supporting most versions of RedHat and Fedora as well as Ubuntu, Debian and others."
Nevertheless...
It helps in showing that fanboys make a lot of baseless claims about the superiority of their proprietary OS (OS means "Operating System" -- not "application").
As I recall, Piranha in 2005 was capable of 100 simultaneous HD feeds on Linux. Call me when OSX has an NLE with that capability.
The cost is irrelevant -- the important thing is that Linux has already demonstrated superior capability in all aspects of production software. If a developer wanted to create an open source version of Piranha, there is nothing in Linux that is limiting him/her.