[Sussex] Distros

[Geoffrey J. Teale]

"Chris Jones" <cmsj at tenshu.net> writes:
> Yes, if you want to do any kind of home or SME accounting or payroll type
> stuff you can maybe struggle with GnuCash-the-overcomplex or buy Crossover
> and run Quicken, or buy Windows and run Sage.

There is:

http://www.turbocashuk.com/

> Small, yet ridiculously important, like the glaring lack of top-to-bottom
> CMYK support.

Which you can get as a plug in and I have used to get professional
quality print work done for Emma Tindley couture in East Grinstead.

> Inertia is definitely a factor, but there are still huge gaps of software.

I don't think there really are any more, but keep trying to convince
me :-)

> No there aren't, they all suck. Put any of them next to even the crappy
> editing software you get with a DVD burner, or iMovie or Adobe Premiere.
> Please contradict me with real examples because I would love to find
> something that works better than avidemux and isn't insane like cinelerra.
>> this, but major Holywood movies have been edited with free software.
>
> A bunch of movies have been touched up and processed with Film-GIMP, but
> that is not editing. Any movie editing that has been going on with Linux
> will have been with distinctly non-free software. Again, I would love to
> have URLs here proving me wrong :)

Well I'm no expert, but I read an article in MIT Technology review
that said that off line editing firms  had used GPL'd software to edit
their films on proprietary hardware.  Certainly Roland and a few other
companies make special devices that run GPL'd code specific to them.

As for links:

http://www.arboretum.com/
http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2005/02/22/open_source_realtime_video_editing.htm
http://www.roland.com/support/gpl/

.. probably not all there is, but simple google search for GPL and
video editing return them all.

> That's the serious rub though, a significant number of users (I would say
> most) each have at least one specialist application they like/need and
> Free/Open source software, for all the amazing progress it has made, is
> not yet covering these.

Hmm, well yes, but in order to get it we have to make free software a
viable platform.  Accounts is a good example because it is a general
requirement of businesses, but specialist applications - like clinical
trial data management software, and example I understand well - are
not the definitive switching point that most companies need.

> I agree there, the core platform is indeed very well served.

Which is the key to getting the more esoteric things done.
>
> It's not really, but it is an area we would be wise to foray into, at
> least from the POV of game engines/platforms. I think RMS has spoken about
> this before, saying he thought the way forward would be open games
> platforms and proprietary game content that you buy and play.

Hmm, I've not heard this.  Certainly free software is what we want.
>
> Indeed and it's only going to get worse, people are estimating top-budget
> titles for the next generation of games consoles coming in at around 10
> million bucks!

Yes, but development cost doesn't necessarily exclude free software,
it just makes it harder to convince the accountants :-)


> Sure they *could* have, but politically they clearly wouldn't. I bet you
> they release a Hurd based distro when it's ready though ;)

I bet you they don't, that is absolutely not the policy or role of the
FSF.  The GNU project already considers GNU/Linux to be a complete
implementation.  Why do you think there's anything political about the
FSF's views on Linux?  Sure there is a sense of embarrassment for some
people that the HURD is pretty much a failure, but that doesn't mean
they hate Linux or having any bad feeling toward it.  The FSF is
generally very happy that so many people are using a GPL'd piece of
software.  All that the FSF wishes is that people pay attention to
what that freedom is!

-- 
Geoff Teale
CMed Technology            -   gteale at cmedresearch.com
Free Software Foundation   -   tealeg at member.fsf.org

/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/^\v/