> On Sun, 2003-09-21 at 10:13, Rick Taylor wrote:
> > Mark Knecht <markknecht@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Pro Tools
> > >
> > > (sorry it was a non-Linux answer!)
> >
> > It surprises me that they've not ported to linux yet.
>
> To a small extent, me too. They have an OS X version. They could release
> a straight Linux version if they wanted to, I'm sure.
And there's the Avid/Softimage/SGI/IRIX connection... I'm sure it wouldn't
be any big deal.
{I just ran across an ad for Discreet's Smoke 6 for linux, by the way.}
> > You can't really run their software without their hardware,
> > they have something of a UNIX heritage, if they were to open
> > source the software it would do them wonders as pr/advertisement,
> > it would give them the benefits of linux developers and get them
> > as firmly entrenched in the linux world as they are everywhere else.
>
> Linux, as a business architecture, is so totally screwed up that I don't
> understand how it's supposed to work anymore. When you make hardware you
> have to compile drivers. In the Linux world (today anyway) this means
> releasing source. DigiDesign doesn't release source, so there's no real
But they could.
> way to support all the different distributions and hardware
> configurations that exist. There's probably also a risk that if they
> were able to release only a small part that would be compiled on a
> target system that someone would hijack it and figure out how to make
> Pro Tools work with other hardware, thus undercutting DigiDesign's real
> business model which is selling hardware with software to support it.
Probably, but... they could do that anyway. And... The free '98 version
doesn't seem to have hurt them. They could always release a "common" and
an "elite" version. Linux people are pretty good about copyrights. They'd
get their bugs fixed... linux would get a real boost.
> I think the Linux architecture (or what little of it I understand) makes
> this difficult and unlikely to ever happen.
> >
> > {Same for Creamware.}
>
> Actually, I think most people look at DigiDesign incorrectly from a
> business perspective. They are really a hardware company. They make
> their money selling hardware, not software. If they depended on making
> money selling software, they'd be no different from Steinberg, etc., so
> they relay on their own hardware to differentiate themselves from the
> rest of the pack.
Probably the way things are headed anyway.
> > {{Linux strikes me as being vastly more suited to industrial scale
> > applications than anything else. Lower latency, more stability, it's
> > open source and it's free.}}
> >
> > Seeing as movie folk and major 3d apps are already running on linux
> > it really seems that there's a need there.
>
> Oh, I agree. Pro Tools on Linux would be a great app on a great
> platform. DigiDesign would benefit greatly, if they could manage the
> security of their source, and if their plug-in manufacturer's would play
> ball. Unfortunately, the 001/002/RTAS plugin support has been bad,
> except for Waves. The advantage for Pro Tools in Linux would come if
> they would embrace LADSPA.
VST's pretty similar... It is the users and small developers that have
built the bulk of the win/mac software. Once VST support gets a bit more
complete, I have a feeling linux music will flourish {The platform is
perfectly suited}. With a few good hosts {a good, commercial keykit
would be great.} linux folk will have access to all sorts {even more}
of synths, etc. :} What linux audio needs is more users.
LADSPA, etc {most linux software} does seem a bit more "hardcore" to me.
Something that professionals might take a bit more seriously than your
run of the mill VST reverb. Linux has always struck me that way though
...practical, no-nonsense software that does its job properly.
