Red Hat Is Hiring So Linux Can Finally Have Good HDR Display Support

[Sonadow]

I don't know what's sadder, that you can't be bothered to even go to Autodesk's website to see that you are wrong or that the two people that upvoted you also couldn't be bothered to check their site:

https://www.autodesk.com/products

Please notice the filter list on the left, under OS type, they only list Windows and Mac, no Linux.

That's a swing and a miss for you.

I have already that fellow the favour of listing every single Autodesk product and their target platforms.

[sophisticles]

I appreciate you trying to disprove my own real-life work experience as a film industry Linux sysadmin with delusion. I was literally explaining to you how the industry extends far beyond NLE editors which you seemed to be basing your entire initial rebuttal on.

Examples for you to ponder (as these are studios I had direct relations with):
*Pixar:
- Render farm nodes run RHEL
- Workstations are vSphere VDI over Teradici PCoIP running RHEL (using MATE, some of us in systems used GNOME).
* WDAS (same as above, not sure if using vSphere or something else and which DE they settled on).
* Blue Sky
- Render farm on CentOS
- Desk-side workstations running CentOS (using Cinnamon, formerly XFCE).

There's something that's been bothering me about this response and I initially missed it.

You claim that you work as a Linux sysadmin for Pixar; Pixar claims that all it's rendering is done on one of the 25 fastest supercomputers in existence, ergo, you are claiming that you are an admin of one of the 25 fastest supercomputers in the world.

You also claim that the workstations used are running RHEL with Mate (with some running Gnome)l here's the thing, RHEL comes with 2 desktops, Gnome and KDE:

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/4/html/reference_guide/s1-x-clients

So you're claiming that Pixar, spends $179 per pc RHEL license, then yanks out the default desktops and installs Mate, I don't know about anyone else, but I find it hard to believe. If you're going to do that why not start with Ubuntu Mate or Mint and save the $179 per pc?

You also claim that there are other workstations that run CentOS + Cinnamon and they used to be CentOS + XFCE; CentOS 8 defaulted to Gnome 3.28 and previous versions did not include a GUI with the default install, if you're going to use Cinnamon, why not use the distro where Cinnamon was first introduced, Mint?

[Sonadow]

There's something that's been bothering me about this response and I initially missed it.

You claim that you work as a Linux sysadmin for Pixar; Pixar claims that all it's rendering is done on one of the 25 fastest supercomputers in existence, ergo, you are claiming that you are an admin of one of the 25 fastest supercomputers in the world.

You also claim that the workstations used are running RHEL with Mate (with some running Gnome)l here's the thing, RHEL comes with 2 desktops, Gnome and KDE:

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/4/html/reference_guide/s1-x-clients

So you're claiming that Pixar, spends $179 per pc RHEL license, then yanks out the default desktops and installs Mate, I don't know about anyone else, but I find it hard to believe. If you're going to do that why not start with Ubuntu Mate or Mint and save the $179 per pc?

You also claim that there are other workstations that run CentOS + Cinnamon and they used to be CentOS + XFCE; CentOS 8 defaulted to Gnome 3.28 and previous versions did not include a GUI with the default install, if you're going to use Cinnamon, why not use the distro where Cinnamon was first introduced, Mint?

Actually, RHEL and CentOS have only Gnome 3 as the sole supported desktop environment since v8. MATE was never a supported desktop, not even during RHEL6 and 7's life cycle.

Secondly, the only place to get alternative GUIs is through EPEL, and RHEL does not provide any support for packages installed through EPEL, and for any breakages caused by installing EPEL packages.

Which makes that fellow's claims even more suspect.

[MadeUpName]

Fusion: Windows and macOS only

About Blackmagic Fusion Studio 17.3

What's new in Blackmagic Fusion Studio 17.3

• Support for viewing the node type by holding Ctrl/Cmd-Shift-E.
• General performance and stability improvements.

Minimum system requirements

• Mac 10.14.6 Mojave
• Windows 10
• Linux CentOS 7.3

[Sonadow]

About Blackmagic Fusion Studio 17.3

What's new in Blackmagic Fusion Studio 17.3

• Support for viewing the node type by holding Ctrl/Cmd-Shift-E.
• General performance and stability improvements.

Minimum system requirements

• Mac 10.14.6 Mojave
• Windows 10
• Linux CentOS 7.3

Blackmagic is not an Autodesk product.

Keep trying.

[tomas]

Actually, RHEL and CentOS have only Gnome 3 as the sole supported desktop environment since v8. MATE was never a supported desktop, not even during RHEL6 and 7's life cycle.

Which makes that fellow's claims even more suspect.

Your suspicion is frankly a bit silly.
At my work at a major Telco company they (someone at IT) also decided to install Mate on our RHEL7 desktops instead of going with the default (gnome 3 I guess?), probably because it was more similar to the setup in RHEL6 that came with GNOME 2 by default. The reason for not going with Linux Mint in this case is of course that the expensive proprietary software that we run is only supported on RHEL7 and nothing else. And no, the support for the software does not care about running Mate or not since it does not rely on which desktop environment that is used.

[Awesomeness]

cannot comprehend finer details.

You claimed studios use Linux pretty much only for servers and people with actual knowledge disproved you.

Oh man your hilarious 🍿

*you're

[mdedetrich]

You claimed studios use Linux pretty much only for servers and people with actual knowledge disproved you.

You do realize that you are quoting me out of context, right?

[numasan]

You have no idea what you are talking about and it is obvious that you have never actually attempted to use Resolve on Linux or compared it to the experience of running it on a Mac or Windows.

I've worked 10 years in VFX, with experience in 3D and compositing and also IT, all primarily in Linux. While I haven't used Resolve for production, I worked with a few colorist who did, and some using it on Linux (typically higher budget productions). The fact that you refer to Resolve as an editor, when its primary use is for color grading, just exposes how little you know of this field, just as the rest of your "arguments" are a joke. It really is embarrassing how you ignore the facts people like mroche are bringing, and still think you know one bit about this topic and post here. On top of that there is this gem

Honestly, the more I read about the custom software that Pixar and Dreamworks use, the more I think that they may not even run on an OS per se, they may be using custom setups where the rendering software runs on bare metal, maybe even coded with extensive assembler, based on the claims of speed.

I mean, wow. Do you have any clue?

Are you talking about the recent versions of Davinci which can run on any Linux or the server version which historically came with their custom Linux or servers? Because historically Davinci resolve ran on a custom Linux that they provided (based on Cent/Redhat) in order for software to work correctly. They even advised you to not even connect to the internet as to not update Linux machines, and they were doing things like pinning NVidia drivers.

I'm talking about it being used on Linux workstations. It's not "custom" or "generic", it's just Linux even with a capture card, so your point is still false. The reason I brought this software up was your comment:

Studios don't use Linux when they need to do color because Linux is absolutely terrible in this.

For you who still don't believe that Linux is used for highend digital content production, and would rather spout nonsense and look silly, maybe seeing is believing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9ikzGQW0ys&ab_channel=PixarStudioTools

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTP7ccZ4ubw&ab_channel=CGRecord

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZsEwUuBjio&ab_channel=ILMVFX

If you'd bother to read, here's an old article but still relevant:

https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9653

Even with wasting time to post this, I still don't think you will be convinced, out of stubbornness or some weird constructed world view, but at least it out there for those interested.

[arQon]

Actually almost all studios use Linux for the desktop.

If so, we can look forward to at least another decade of X, sigh. Because until the Wayland team - half of which is RH employees in the first place, I expect - stop sulking about ICC support etc, X is NEVER going away for any content creation tasks.

Frankly, at this point Wayland looks more like an attempt to sabotage desktop Linux than a genuine attempt to improve things. But 100% of the problem is more with the attitude of the developers than the technology, so a case like this, where a large or high-profile RH client might want Wayland to Actually F**king Work Properly, is the one thing that might cause some of those missing pieces to finally start making some progress.