Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 1st Sep 2012 21:15 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 533677
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.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-08-13
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Hollywood-Loves-Linux-45571.shtml
That is just one article from Google. There are tons more like it. Most production houses are using Linux.
No, I'm not wrong. You're mistaking cgi rendering with film & audio editing. "
Read this article from 2001:
http://www.cgw.com/Publications/CGW/2001/Volume-24-Issue-9-Septembe...
Linux was the best choice for Hollywood to replace all it's SGI/Irix machines, and to this day it's still their choice not only for rendering but also for workstations.
However, that doesn't means everything is Linux compatible. Smaller studios might find it better to just pay for standard windows/osx tools instead of highly specialized Linux one. Game developers generally use windows tools and Audio artists prefer macs.
Most people in this thread say that Linux is unsuccessful, but for the wrong reasons. It's more a matter of not running your software of preference instead of not having X API and not having OEM backing instead of not working with your hardware X.