Photoshop for Linux
UrbanVoyeur
DreamWorks SKG animation group that is not on Linux.
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6103&mode=thread&order=0
With a major animation & effects studio like this switching over to Linux
for cost and performance, it won't be long before others do.
With a native OSX version already working, I can't imagine it would be too
hard to port Photoshop to Linux.
Chris Cox (or anybody else) - any idea when we will see a Linux version of
Photoshop?
Glenn Pechacek
news:MYrJ8.6094$9V....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
IMHO, When there is enough demand in the market a Linux version will be
released. People should worry more about the application than the OS. Is
DreamWorks going to drop PhotoShop in favor of Gimp because PhotoShop does
not operate under Linux ?
Glenn
John Stafford
"Glenn Pechacek" <ps6l...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:WTsJ8.226$on6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> IMHO, When there is enough demand in the market a Linux version will be
> released. People should worry more about the application than the OS.
Bravo, and I second that! Photoshop is to me the Killer App that made the
OS secondary for the first time since VisiCalc!
Tacit
>too hard to port Photoshop to Linux.
Incorrect.
OS X is Unix at its core, and so is Linux. But the application frameworks and
the GUI APIs are totally, completely different.
Porting an OS X app to Linux involves a 100% top-to-bottom rewrite, from
scratch, of every single user interface element, as well as of the application
framework itself. Just because both systems have a Unix core does not mean that
it's trivial to port from one to the other. It would be easy if there was no
graphical user interface, but as it stands now, it would be about the same
magnitude a project as porting it to, say, AmigaDOS.
--
"Quand la morale triomphe, il se passe des choses tres vilaines."
Literature. Art. Photography. Forums. Shareware. Kink. Sex.
All at: http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
UrbanVoyeur
graphics tablets, requiring dismounts & reboots.
"Glenn Pechacek" <ps6l...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:WTsJ8.226$on6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Derek Fountain
> released. People should worry more about the application than the OS. Is
> DreamWorks going to drop PhotoShop in favor of Gimp because PhotoShop does
> not operate under Linux ?
If all you want is PS, your argument holds water. If you're planning on
using other applications, it doesn't. Propietary solutions can be very
expensive; most studios are switching to Linux because it's free and runs
on commodity hardware. There's no licensing problems, no viruses, and a
wealth of free software. The OS might be irrelevant, but you have to look
at the entire picture - everything you want to do and how much it all costs.
Will DreamWorks drop PS for Gimp as things stand? Probably not. Will it
take the Gimp code and spend a couple of hundred thousand dollars on
software engineers bringing it up to speed so it does what they need? Quite
possibly, if they decide that will save them twice that figure in licensing
fees.
Companies like IBM have already adapted and improved free software up to
enterprise level on the server side. It's only a matter of time before it
happens on the desktop. Sun have already done if with their office suite.
Other expensive vertical applications, like image processing, will happen
soon.
--
---
Derek
John Stafford
"Derek Fountain" <nom...@hursley.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:ad7fcj$117i$1...@sp15at20.hursley.ibm.com...
> If all you want is PS, your argument holds water. If you're planning on
> using other applications, it doesn't. Propietary solutions can be very
> expensive; most studios are switching to Linux because it's free and runs
> on commodity hardware.
A rather poor move, I think.
> There's no licensing problems,
No support.
> no viruses,
Bullshit.
> and a wealth of free software.
Very little of which is significantly valuable to a production graphics
shop.
MK70
Since, Adobe already have the Photoshop Windows version,
they can easily make Photoshop run with WINE set of library by using very
little rewirte.
In addition, there was SGI IRIX version of Photoshop many years ago.
If you look at GIMP, you will notice that it runs with Linux, Windows, OSX
with X11, Solaris, IRIX etc...
I think the problem is financial rather than technical.
Corel did ported CorelDraw and PhotoPaint to Linux two years ago,
however, it was consider as a financial failure.
"Tacit" <tac...@aol.com> 撰寫於郵件新聞
:20020530155328...@mb-ch.aol.com...
UrbanVoyeur
relatively inexpensive to deploy and maintain, and gives them better
performance per hardware dollar - which is important when rendering. It has
also proven very stable for them.
I think it would be interesting to see the effect Photoshop and premiere
would have if they ran on Linux natively.
"John Stafford" <jo...@stafford.net> wrote in message
news:uff7j5e...@news.supernews.com...
Tacit
>Since, Adobe already have the Photoshop Windows version,
>they can easily make Photoshop run with WINE set of library by using very
>little rewirte.
Running Photoshop in WINE is likely, I fear, to result in suboptimal
performance... Anyone care to benchmark Photoshop in Windows and Photoshop
under WINE?
Ilya Razmanov
"Tacit" <tac...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020531124134...@mb-cg.aol.com...
> >Porting Photoshop to Linux is not necessary a 100% rewrite.
> >Since, Adobe already have the Photoshop Windows version,
> >they can easily make Photoshop run with WINE set of library by using very
> >little rewirte.
>
> Running Photoshop in WINE is likely, I fear, to result in suboptimal
> performance... Anyone care to benchmark Photoshop in Windows and Photoshop
> under WINE?
Huh... anyone care to make Photoshop run under WINE? I've seen several Linux
fanatics trying to, with no success. If anyone manage to do it, please tell
me how ;-)
Ilyich.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ilya Razmanov (a.k.a. Ilyich the Toad)
http://photoshop.msk.ru/ - Photoshop plug-in filters
"I'm trying to do my art in here, buddy!" - Todd, Full Throttle
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Helmut P. Einfalt
>performance... Anyone care to benchmark Photoshop in Windows and Photoshop
>under WINE?
Shouldn't that be called WHINE with Photoshop?
Helmut
--
Brought to you by IBM PS/2 power
Eric Gill
news:suNJ8.2070$b73...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net:
> From what I've read Dreamworks uses Linux because, for their purposes,
> it relatively inexpensive to deploy and maintain, and gives them
> better performance per hardware dollar - which is important when
> rendering. It has also proven very stable for them.
Dreamworks and similar studios use Linux/UNIX mainly because the teams
usually develop their own software for each movie, raising the bar nearly
every time one is released.
> I think it would be interesting to see the effect Photoshop and
> premiere would have if they ran on Linux natively.
Lose Adobe a lot of money, I would expect.
UrbanVoyeur
high end commercial packages.
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6103&mode=thread&order=0
"Eric Gill" <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns921FB28836E47...@24.28.95.190...
Chris Cox
<nos...@nospam.urbanvoyeur.com> wrote:
> No. They use it under an emulator, but it is slower and is finicky with
> graphics tablets, requiring dismounts & reboots.
Funny - most of the artists have Macintoshes or PCs on their desk to
run all the applications they CAN'T run under Linux.....
Chris
Chris Cox
<nos...@nospam.urbanvoyeur.com> wrote:
> According to Linux Journal, Photoshop is the only major application at
> DreamWorks SKG animation group that is not on Linux.
>
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6103&mode=thread&order=0
>
>
> With a major animation & effects studio like this switching over to Linux
> for cost and performance, it won't be long before others do.
Funny, lots of folks are switching to OS X for similar reasons....
And they get real desktop applications, usable frameworks, printing,
good networking, good drivers, etc. ...in addition to a command line
and a Unix kernel.
> With a native OSX version already working, I can't imagine it would be too
> hard to port Photoshop to Linux.
Other than sharing a Unix underpinning - there is nothing similar
between OS X and Linux.
Doing a port for Linux would be a FULL port of the application -- much
harder than OS X was.
> Chris Cox (or anybody else) - any idea when we will see a Linux version of
> Photoshop?
Probably when Linux has a market willing to pay for applications.
And has a viable windowing system (X is NOT viable, been there - ain't
goin back).
And has a standard printing solution.
And has a standard font management solution.
And has a standard color management solution.
And has standards for drivers.
Linux is a kernel, not an OS.
The OS pieces that verious companies provide with Linux are more of a
moving target than a platform.
Chris
UrbanVoyeur
Linux has quite a way to go before it ready to receive some apps. Oh well.
Back to my life as a microserf.
"Chris Cox" <cc...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:010620021858307188%cc...@mindspring.com...
Jason
...
>
> Probably when Linux has a market willing to pay for applications.
> And has a viable windowing system (X is NOT viable, been there - ain't
> goin back).
> And has a standard printing solution.
> And has a standard font management solution.
> And has a standard color management solution.
> And has standards for drivers.
>
>
> Linux is a kernel, not an OS.
> The OS pieces that verious companies provide with Linux are more of a
> moving target than a platform.
>
> Chris
Well put.
In a recent PC Magazine rant, John Dvorak proposed that Adobe's releasing a
Linux version of PS would legitimize it for an important segment of
professional users and thence threaten Necrosoft's dominance. A month or two
later, he recanted. He opined that Adobe was PO'd by the release of
Ghostscript open-source freeware. He mentioned also that he'd learned that
Adobe had, in fact, released PS versions for some proprietary Unix systems
and hadn't made any money. He didn't mention which systems, but I'd have to
guess SGI's was one of them, back when SGI was atop the graphics world.
Bottom Line: it's the Bottom Line.
Jason