Disney, DreamWorks, Pixar Go Linux

robinsrowe writes "Most of the major studios use Linux -- such as DreamWorks with more than 1,500 Linux desktops and 3,500 Linux servers. The MovieEditor Conference is an all-day event on computer-based filmmaking in downtown Los Angeles on August 3rd. Studio technology chiefs and other experts discuss ongoing work using Linux in feature animation and visual effects. Presented in collaboration with LinuxMovies.org."

Rolling Credits

[WindBourne]

It would be be nice to see credit given to even some of the OSS that is used in the movies; CineaPaint, Linux (how about a tux), etc. After all, the movie companies want credit when they help on OSS (look at CineaPaint).

Created with Linux... but do not watch with Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be nice if the movie industry embrassed Linux enough that I could legally play back my DVD's with it. I don't plan on buying HD-DVD or BluRay disks anytime soon because I don't want to buy anything that prohibits me from playing back on my computer.

Irony

[EvilMonkeySlayer]

Does anyone else find great irony in this?

I mean, in order for most Linux users to watch these films they have to break some draconian laws when playing DVD's.

Yet, the very thing they use to create these films on is Linux.

Well, if not irony.. some kind of word ending with ony.

Re:So what are the reasons? Cost? Customization?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not just that, but you can really fix it when it breaks.

Currently, if a movie house is using a closed-source toolset, and there is a feature missing or a non-trivial bug causing issues with their workflow, they have to spend a *ton* of money to get the Vendor to 'fix' it for them. With an open-source solution, they can hire someone and fix it/extend it themselves for a whole lot less money.

Production is *everything* to these kinds of businesses. *Anything* that minimizes disruptions to the production is going to be seriously considered...

The funniest part

[bonch]

The funniest part is that all these movie companies using Linux to make movies wouldn't be able to legally play those DVD movies on their Linux machines.

Re:So what are the reasons? Cost? Customization?

[flooey]

From what I've heard, Linux and other open-source software is also preferred because of its ability to respond to deadlines. If you're two months from release and an obscure bug in your OS interferes with your rendering, you can't rely on the OS provider to get you a fix in a timely manner, especially if it's a bug nobody else encounters. If it's an open-source system, though, you can fix it yourself.

Re:And this is news?

[Erik Hensema]

I'm quite sure the rendering time doesn't differ more than a low single digit number. It's CPU bound, the OS doesn't do much.

It's just licensing cost. When you've got a render farm of 100 machines, Linux is way cheeper than Windows.

Re:So what are the reasons? Cost? Customization?

[DF5JT]

"The choice wasn't Windows vs Linux, it was Linux vs IRIX. This is why SGI's stock is in the toilet."

Incorrect.

The choice was between IRIX--> Linux and IRIX --> Windows with hundreds of MS key account managers in LA throwing lavish parties and handing out gifts for those in the decision making process.

Considering that, the choice made should not be underestimated in its impact, since it was a *technical* decision, not a "business" decision. Of course, a sound technical decision process will always lead to a sound business development.

Re:So what are the reasons? Cost? Customization?

[Orgazmus]

And now you are touching the key feature of open source software in a big buisness enviroment.
To a small company the windows licenses are cheaper than implementing and testing custom features, but to a company like Pixar og Dreamworks, the cost of a couple of hundred manhours are nothing compared to the cost of waiting for Microsoft to use that money.

Is it just irrational hatred of Microsoft

[suitepotato]

that drives this neverending fascination with fluff non-news about where Linux is being used or is it to cover up and draw attention away from poor Windows skills, or both?

I think both.

I may use Linux but that doesn't mean I care to hear about every single place, thing, entity, etc. that uses some iteration of Linux. Nor do I need to hear endless fawning over Steve Jobs and Apple and OSX as if it was going to bring spiritual salvation.

Fer crissakes people, it's just an operating system. It's not giving you longer life, making you smarter, conferring beauty and handsomeness on you, or sleeping with you (although I'm sure there's some geeks looking to cyberneticize a real doll with Linux and report on it here). I really think we need to get a grip here at Slashdot when it comes to Linux.

I bet if my mother started using Linux at work and my company stopped using BSD it would get rave reviews and seven hundred replies in a day and a half. Meanwhile, there's actual apps being written that do amazing things running ON various OSes and we're too busy short-stroking to see the forest for the trees.