Linux in hollywood...but really? - Linux

This is a discussion on Linux in hollywood...but really? - Linux ; Hello, I was checking linuxmovies.org, as well as doing my own research for an article, and would like peoples opinions. I would like to know how the conclusions that Linux has 95%, or even the majority of the market share ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Linux in hollywood...but really?

  1. Linux in hollywood...but really?

    Hello,

    I was checking linuxmovies.org, as well as doing my own research for
    an article, and would like peoples opinions.

    I would like to know how the conclusions that Linux has
    95%, or even the majority of the market share in Hollywood were
    reached. What
    sources were used, and what was considered in making up the market
    share?

    How could Linux make up the majority market share, when there are no
    stable, fully featured editing programs available for Linux? The most
    promising is kdenlive, which is still in alpha stage.

    Most of the information I have found, supports the fact that Linux is
    used in visual effects editing and studios, such as dreamworks or
    pixar, but not extensively outside of this.

    From what I have researched, Universal uses Avid for their post
    production work, as do paramount and the other studios, or a similar
    platform. Are there any quotes from any of these studios, ie the big 5
    or so that make up Hollywood, supporting that they have moved to or
    use Linux? I am referring to studios such as Universal, Paramount,
    Sony, Warner Brothers and Fox. I am not asking for evidence that they
    have used Linux, but rather that they regularly rely on Linux and it
    makes up a majority of their computers.

    What about the Pirahna system, which is Linux based and
    similar to Avid, but does not seem to be used by any of the big movie
    studios. Do you know what this system might be missing when compared
    to the industry standard editors?

    I am aware that programs such as cinepaint are available, but these
    are not filmeditors as such, and could not warrant a studio moving to
    linux for this one program.

    At the moment it seems very unlikely that linux has 95%, or even 50%
    of hollywood as posted on linuxmovies.org

  2. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    zaebos@gmail.com wrote:

    > Hello,
    >
    > I was checking linuxmovies.org, as well as doing my own research for
    > an article, and would like peoples opinions.
    >
    > I would like to know how the conclusions that Linux has
    > 95%, or even the majority of the market share in Hollywood were
    > reached. What
    > sources were used, and what was considered in making up the market
    > share?
    >


    < snip >

    ILM uses linux (the last Star Wars movies were made with it)
    Weta uses linux, nearly exclusivly. The LoTR trilogy was done with linux,
    the visual effects were done on linux machines running KDE, the massive
    amount of warriors in the battle scenes was controlled by "Massive" running
    on linux clusters
    CinePaint is an offspring of The Gimp, done for professional work on
    pictures and movies

    How you can come to the conclusion that linux is not equipped to do that
    work is rather strange. And your failure to locate any references tells one
    story only: You are incompetent
    --
    Your depth of comprehension may tend to make you lax in worldly ways.


  3. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    On Nov 10, 2:47*pm, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    > zae...@gmail.com wrote:
    > > Hello,

    >
    > > I was checking linuxmovies.org, as well as doing my own research for
    > > an article, and would like peoples opinions.

    >
    > > I would like to know how the conclusions that Linux has
    > > 95%, or even the majority of the market share in Hollywood were
    > > reached. What
    > > sources were used, and what was considered in making up the market
    > > share?

    >
    > < snip >
    >
    > ILM uses linux (the last Star Wars movies were made with it)
    > Weta uses linux, nearly exclusivly. The LoTR trilogy was done with linux,
    > the visual effects were done on linux machines running KDE, the massive
    > amount of warriors in the battle scenes was controlled by "Massive" running
    > on linux clusters
    > CinePaint is an offspring of The Gimp, done for professional work on
    > pictures and movies
    >
    > How you can come to the conclusion that linux is not equipped to do that
    > work is rather strange. And your failure to locate any references tells one
    > story only: You are incompetent
    > --
    > Your depth of comprehension may tend to make you lax in worldly ways.


    That seems rather unfair. I specifically said that I was looking for
    proof for the big studios, ie not visual effects studios.

    I am aware of the programs you listed, but they are not equivalents to
    things such as avid or final cut pro.

  4. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    zaebos@gmail.com wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > I was checking linuxmovies.org, as well as doing my own research for
    > an article, and would like peoples opinions.
    >
    > I would like to know how the conclusions that Linux has
    > 95%, or even the majority of the market share in Hollywood were
    > reached.


    The conclusion was reached by a Linux idiot who stuck his thumb in his ass.
    He's presented zero proof and zero evidence for the claim of "95% of the
    servers and desktops at large animation and visual effects companies."

    It's bull****. Nobody can say with a straight face that Disney and ILM and
    Paramount run OpenOffice crapware in their offices.


    > What sources were used, and what was considered in making up the market
    > share?


    One source: a Linux bozo who made up a wild number and published it on a
    bogus web page.


    > How could Linux make up the majority market share, when there are no
    > stable, fully featured editing programs available for Linux?


    Every studio would have to write their own programs.


    > The most promising is kdenlive, which is still in alpha stage.


    The very definition of open source sludge.


    > Most of the information I have found, supports the fact that Linux is
    > used in visual effects editing and studios, such as dreamworks or
    > pixar, but not extensively outside of this.
    >
    > From what I have researched, Universal uses Avid for their post
    > production work, as do paramount and the other studios, or a similar
    > platform. Are there any quotes from any of these studios, ie the big 5
    > or so that make up Hollywood, supporting that they have moved to or
    > use Linux? I am referring to studios such as Universal, Paramount,
    > Sony, Warner Brothers and Fox. I am not asking for evidence that they
    > have used Linux, but rather that they regularly rely on Linux and it
    > makes up a majority of their computers.


    No, there is no such evidence, because it's not true.


    > What about the Pirahna system, which is Linux based and
    > similar to Avid, but does not seem to be used by any of the big movie
    > studios. Do you know what this system might be missing when compared
    > to the industry standard editors?
    >
    > I am aware that programs such as cinepaint are available, but these
    > are not filmeditors as such, and could not warrant a studio moving to
    > linux for this one program.
    >
    > At the moment it seems very unlikely that linux has 95%, or even 50%
    > of hollywood as posted on linuxmovies.org


    We'll never know, as movie studios won't publish a real inventory of their
    computers. You can take it for granted that virtually 100% of them use
    Windows on their desktops in the offices, and some percentage use Linux for
    systems involved in effects and editing.




  5. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > ILM uses linux (the last Star Wars movies were made with it)


    More extremely filthy lies from the stinking Kohlmann POS garbage vermin
    (ha! See how ridiculous you sound you moron)

    Star Wars III was produced with Windows XP and Server 2003.

    http://www.amd.com/us-en/Weblets/0,,...~89153,00.html




    > Weta uses linux, nearly exclusivly. The LoTR trilogy was done with
    > linux, the visual effects were done on linux machines running KDE,
    > the massive amount of warriors in the battle scenes was controlled by
    > "Massive" running on linux clusters


    Massive is expensive, closed-source, proprietary code. Why are you even
    talking about it? Oh, that's because you make a living with closed-source,
    proprietary code - just like most cola "advocates*".



    > CinePaint is an offspring of The Gimp, done for professional work on
    > pictures and movies
    >
    > How you can come to the conclusion that linux is not equipped to do
    > that work is rather strange.


    He never made that conclusion.



    > And your failure to locate any
    > references tells one story only: You are incompetent


    No he's not. He's questioning the lies by the Linux "community".




  6. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    On 2008-11-10, zaebos@gmail.com wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > I was checking linuxmovies.org, as well as doing my own research for
    > an article, and would like peoples opinions.
    >
    > I would like to know how the conclusions that Linux has
    > 95%, or even the majority of the market share in Hollywood were
    > reached. What
    > sources were used, and what was considered in making up the market
    > share?


    You are an amateur.

    [deletia]

    You are trying to understand the situation as an amatuer. Whether
    or not you feel comfortable making YouTube mix videos has no bearing on
    the market segment you're trying to understand.

    --
    "Microsoft looks at new ideas, they don't evaluate whether
    the idea will move the industry forward, they ask, |||
    'how will it help us sell more copies of Windows?'" / | \

    -- Bill Gates

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  7. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    On 2008-11-10, DFS was urged to write the following:

    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >> And your failure to locate any
    >> references tells one story only: You are incompetent

    >
    > No he's not. He's questioning the lies by the Linux "community".


    http://digitalcontentproducer.com/dc...nux_hollywood/
    http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-945310.html
    http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6011
    http://tweakers.mobi/nieuws/22630

    etc...

    ~ Tommy
    --
    Mijnen deem, mijnen deem
    Stoeng heelmaal vol exeem
    ~ Katastroof

  8. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    ____/ zaebos@gmail.com on Monday 10 November 2008 13:28 : \____

    >
    >
    > Hello,
    >
    > I was checking linuxmovies.org, as well as doing my own research for
    > an article, and would like peoples opinions.
    >
    > I would like to know how the conclusions that Linux has
    > 95%, or even the majority of the market share in Hollywood were
    > reached. What
    > sources were used, and what was considered in making up the market
    > share?
    >
    > How could Linux make up the majority market share, when there are no
    > stable, fully featured editing programs available for Linux? The most
    > promising is kdenlive, which is still in alpha stage.
    >
    > Most of the information I have found, supports the fact that Linux is
    > used in visual effects editing and studios, such as dreamworks or
    > pixar, but not extensively outside of this.
    >
    > From what I have researched, Universal uses Avid for their post
    > production work, as do paramount and the other studios, or a similar
    > platform. Are there any quotes from any of these studios, ie the big 5
    > or so that make up Hollywood, supporting that they have moved to or
    > use Linux? I am referring to studios such as Universal, Paramount,
    > Sony, Warner Brothers and Fox. I am not asking for evidence that they
    > have used Linux, but rather that they regularly rely on Linux and it
    > makes up a majority of their computers.
    >
    > What about the Pirahna system, which is Linux based and
    > similar to Avid, but does not seem to be used by any of the big movie
    > studios. Do you know what this system might be missing when compared
    > to the industry standard editors?
    >
    > I am aware that programs such as cinepaint are available, but these
    > are not filmeditors as such, and could not warrant a studio moving to
    > linux for this one program.
    >
    > At the moment it seems very unlikely that linux has 95%, or even 50%
    > of hollywood as posted on linuxmovies.org


    Contact CinePaint's Project Manager, Robin Rowe. He said that "Linux is the
    default operating [system] on desktops and servers at major animation and
    visual effects studios, with maybe 98 percent [or more] penetration."

    robin.rowe at cinepaint.org

    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Partition if an operating $ysteM must be set aside
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkkYcgQACgkQU4xAY3RXLo47CQCfdWPv+GYZzM R0UDhONb4UwSBu
    absAnjd5yDCXAawi67JxRCWXgJy3Q2uU
    =znuc
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  9. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    zaebos@gmail.com wrote:

    > On Nov 10, 2:47*pm, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >> zae...@gmail.com wrote:
    >> > Hello,

    >>
    >> > I was checking linuxmovies.org, as well as doing my own research for
    >> > an article, and would like peoples opinions.

    >>
    >> > I would like to know how the conclusions that Linux has
    >> > 95%, or even the majority of the market share in Hollywood were
    >> > reached. What
    >> > sources were used, and what was considered in making up the market
    >> > share?

    >>
    >> < snip >
    >>
    >> ILM uses linux (the last Star Wars movies were made with it)
    >> Weta uses linux, nearly exclusivly. The LoTR trilogy was done with linux,
    >> the visual effects were done on linux machines running KDE, the massive
    >> amount of warriors in the battle scenes was controlled by "Massive"
    >> running on linux clusters
    >> CinePaint is an offspring of The Gimp, done for professional work on
    >> pictures and movies
    >>
    >> How you can come to the conclusion that linux is not equipped to do that
    >> work is rather strange. And your failure to locate any references tells
    >> one story only: You are incompetent
    >> --
    >> Your depth of comprehension may tend to make you lax in worldly ways.

    >
    > That seems rather unfair. I specifically said that I was looking for
    > proof for the big studios, ie not visual effects studios.
    >
    > I am aware of the programs you listed, but they are not equivalents to
    > things such as avid or final cut pro.



    Which proves you know nothing about what big studios use as default
    standard.

    Hint: They expect you to know Linux solutions as that is
    what brings in their bread.

    If you haven't the foggiest, then you should have googled
    before sprouting lame content spam trolls.


  10. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    TomB wrote:
    > On 2008-11-10, DFS was urged to write the following:
    >
    >> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>> And your failure to locate any
    >>> references tells one story only: You are incompetent

    >>
    >> No he's not. He's questioning the lies by the Linux "community".

    >
    > http://digitalcontentproducer.com/dc...nux_hollywood/
    > http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-945310.html
    > http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6011
    > http://tweakers.mobi/nieuws/22630



    I never doubted Linux is used by some movie studios - maybe 95% of them use
    Linux. But where in those links is a shred of proof or evidence that Linux
    is on "95% of the servers and desktops at large animation and visual effects
    companies."?

    Where's the evidence to support that wild-ass claim? There is no proof or
    reasonable evidence, because it's another fabrication by a Linux nutjob
    zealot.




  11. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    On 2008-11-11, DFS was urged to write the following:
    > TomB wrote:
    >> On 2008-11-10, DFS was urged to write the following:
    >>
    >>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>> And your failure to locate any
    >>>> references tells one story only: You are incompetent
    >>>
    >>> No he's not. He's questioning the lies by the Linux "community".

    >>
    >> http://digitalcontentproducer.com/dc...nux_hollywood/
    >> http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-945310.html
    >> http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6011
    >> http://tweakers.mobi/nieuws/22630

    >
    >
    > I never doubted Linux is used by some movie studios - maybe 95% of them use
    > Linux. But where in those links is a shred of proof or evidence that Linux
    > is on "95% of the servers and desktops at large animation and visual effects
    > companies."?
    >
    > Where's the evidence to support that wild-ass claim? There is no proof or
    > reasonable evidence, because it's another fabrication by a Linux nutjob
    > zealot.


    I thought you we're calling the mere statement that a lot of studios
    are using GNU/Linux, a "lie". My bad.

    I don't know about the 95%. I know GNU/Linux is used an awful lot for
    animation and CGI, that's all.

    ~ Tommy
    --
    Human beings are the only creatures that allow their
    children to come back home.
    ~ Bill Cosby

  12. Re: Linux in hollywood...but really?

    TomB writes:

    > On 2008-11-11, DFS was urged to write the following:
    >> TomB wrote:
    >>> On 2008-11-10, DFS was urged to write the following:
    >>>
    >>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>>> And your failure to locate any
    >>>>> references tells one story only: You are incompetent
    >>>>
    >>>> No he's not. He's questioning the lies by the Linux "community".
    >>>
    >>> http://digitalcontentproducer.com/dc...nux_hollywood/
    >>> http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-945310.html
    >>> http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6011
    >>> http://tweakers.mobi/nieuws/22630

    >>
    >>
    >> I never doubted Linux is used by some movie studios - maybe 95% of them use
    >> Linux. But where in those links is a shred of proof or evidence that Linux
    >> is on "95% of the servers and desktops at large animation and visual effects
    >> companies."?
    >>
    >> Where's the evidence to support that wild-ass claim? There is no proof or
    >> reasonable evidence, because it's another fabrication by a Linux nutjob
    >> zealot.

    >
    > I thought you we're calling the mere statement that a lot of studios
    > are using GNU/Linux, a "lie". My bad.
    >
    > I don't know about the 95%. I know GNU/Linux is used an awful lot for
    > animation and CGI, that's all.
    >
    > ~ Tommy


    This is the COLA problem. An "awful lot" does not translate to 95%. It
    does not even translate to the "majority". It's this kind of nonsense
    which makes COLA such a laughing stock.,

    See the other thread about laptops. We have Rexx Ballard actually
    stating that only 25% of Laptops out side the company firewall run
    Windows. Which is total an utter nonsense. Fortunately Ian was a little
    more responsible and acknowledged that while he (as do I) use Linux on
    his laptop the only other visible competition to Windows out there is
    generally the Mac. Linux is almost nowhere to be seen. And hardly
    surprising considering the trouble one had installing Linux on laptops
    up until recently. COLA can bleat and whine all they like - but it
    doesn't change the adoption facts. See the thread where Liarnut is
    claiming that web stats from corporate sites, commercial sites and
    "anything else sites" are not representative of Linux adoption. Say
    what? Linux users (desktops/laptops) dont surf the web or what? I can
    quiote believe that a huge amount dont buy anything on line since in
    COLA they continually harp on about getting things for free.....


+ Reply to Thread