Ubuntu Studio Announced

lukeknipe writes "Ubuntu has set up a page for the April release of the Ubuntu Studio. An ambitious project, it is described by Ubuntu as a 'multimedia editing flavor of Ubuntu for the Linux audio, video, and graphic enthusiast or professional who is already familiar with the Ubuntu-Gnome environment.' They've set up an Ubuntu Studios Wiki for the project, and their stated goal is to have a the package ready for use in time for 'Feisty Fawn'."

Comments

Go back to sleep

[Steeltoe]

Just get back to sleep. This release is for those who are awake and want to contribute I guess.

Re:Wake me up...

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Anyone can plan to do something, but how many of those projects are finished?

Anyone can plan a well-polished gnome based distro, but Ubuntu are one of few who've delivered.

I'd give alot more credence to a well funded organisation with a proven track record than the announcement of YALM project.

If they're announcing, they're probably confident about delivering.

Great Idea

[evilviper]

This really is a great idea for a distro. In my own experience, I've found that keeping workstation task (web, e-mail, programming, etc) and multimedia tasks (DVR, editing, etc. as well as games...) on seperate systems works out for the best of both tasks. The two have a terrible tendancy to conflict with each other...

One may be working on a job that will take hours, while the other may need a quick reboot ASAP. One may need 99% uptime, while the other serves it's purpose just as well at 95% downtime. One needs quite high-end hardware, latest drivers, and frequent updating of software, while the other is better handled by older, lower-power, more reliable hardware and old, known-good software. One can be tucked away in a corner, while the other often needs to be nearby. etc.

Plus, it's no secret that many multimedia tools are a serious hassle to get up and working in the first place. Different toolkits and widely varying interfaces abound in this space. Good luck trying to INTEGRATE them with each other, on your own. My multimedia system is filled with shell scripts, which do the job pretty well, but aren't very elegant solutions. Doing something in a convoluted way is sometimes quicker and easier than trying to adapt the scripts that, for example, convert between formats for different editing tools.

Re:Great Idea

[Anonymous Coward]

My multimedia system is filled with shell scripts, which do the job pretty well, but aren't very elegant solutions.

You make this sound like a problem with multimedia, anybody computer literate automates tasks via scripting. Shell script lets you solve the problem now. If you want elegance you write that program after you already identified and solved all the problems ;-)

This distro looks like cool, except for using Gnome :-/

The wrong direction

[JPriest]

I fail to see the point of forking an entire Operating System for the sake of haveing 4 or 5 applications installed on it.

Why not just build packages than can be installed to the main Ubuntu distro(s) already out there?

Re:The wrong direction

[ubernostrum]

Why not just build packages than can be installed to the main Ubuntu distro(s) already out there?

It's easier for the end user to have something that gives them most or all of what they need out of the box, rather than forcing them to scour around for the packages they need to get their job done. And once you have a solid reusable core OS like Ubuntu, building specialized distros tailored to specific types of users isn't all that hard.

Re:The wrong direction

[gEvil (beta)]

What he's saying is that the needs of people doing pro audio on Linux are considerably different from the needs of someone using Linux as a server or general purpose desktop OS. Serious pro audio users NEED the realtime patches to the kernel--trying to track something and hearing what you've played in your headphones a quarter of a second after you've played it is simply not acceptable for something that needs to be perfect down to the millisecond. So in this case, yes a fork is necessary. It's this attitude of "You don't really need that, do you?" that hurts Linux in the eyes of many people who know what they're talking about. The same can be said for the repeated claims of "You don't really need CMYK support" for the GIMP. Because in order for Linux to be taken seriously in certain fields, these issues need to be addressed. And when I say "seriously", I mean widespread professional adoption, not just hobbyists or people willing to pull their hair out to get something working right.

Re:Yep, bloatware, and a mediocre one

[lixee]

Your sig betrays you!

Try opening a 56 GB image with GIMP and watch it paifully die.

Last time I checked, XP couldn't allocate more than 2 GB to a process.

Re:Yep, bloatware, and a mediocre one

[evilviper]

I mean, graphic pro-men use Photoshop, that is the only graphi program that can work with really big images (and it does it well). Try opening a 56 GB image with GIMP and watch it paifully die.

Your advertisement for Photoshop belongs elsewhere.

If this is your only specific complaint, I can quite easily dismiss you by saying that a great many paid professionals don't want or need to handle "56 GB" images.

Animation guys use Maya, WheelBuck or something similar,

What theoretical "guys" use is irrelevent.

but there is NOTHING of similar quality here (or freeware or OS for that matter).

Everything is still in development, so that list will change. Besides, you aren't even constructively criticising, you're just bitching and whining that proprietary apps are (magically?) better.

Ok call me a troll if you want, but DON*T TELL ME for fuck sakes that this is for the pro.

You are, and it still is.

Re:Yep, bloatware, and a mediocre one

[evilviper]

Let's see I'm a pro and I use:

3D Studio Max, XSI, Maya, Zbrush, Avid, Fusion, Nuke, Combustion and Photoshop.

I see. Therefore: Anyone else who is a pro MUST be using all the same programs you do. And because you aren't already using free programs, they must not possibly be able to do the same job.

Either you're a complete fool, or just trolling.

If you use Photoshop day in and day out you would know that Gimp isn't acceptable.

Nicely done. No reasoning. No justification. Just the word of God. No matter what, anything named "Gimp" can't do the things programs named "Photoshop" can.

Re:Yep, bloatware, and a mediocre one

[atrus]

If you use Photoshop day in and day out you would know that Gimp isn't acceptable.

Nicely done. No reasoning. No justification. Just the word of God. No matter what, anything named "Gimp" can't do the things programs named "Photoshop" can.

Here is one: Color management. Its a HUGE missing feature from GIMP (and Linux display systems). I'm not saying Windows color management is good (like in multi monitor support on one graphics card....), but it at least works. So no, for many professional users, GIMP cannot replace Photoshop as GIMP has no notion of color spaces, soft proofing, etc.

Re:Dumb question

[polyp2000]

Im not sure there is - But one of the things the Ubuntu team is doing is making it plain and simple for potential users to know which distro is for them! Its also nice that you know all the apps are going to be relevant instead of having a multitude of applications that will never get used and overwhelm the user. This is about keeping things simple and I applaud what they are trying to do!

Re:Linux audio software

[Stormx2]

I have to say the audio department is already pretty good. But video? Video editing packages for ubuntu are very limited at best. I've tried editing video on more than one occasion and drawn a complete blank after 4 or 5 apps. Same goes for graphics, I absolutely cannot stand The GIMP. I try to emulate paint shop pro 7, but its pretty shakey...

Re:Yep, bloatware, and a mediocre one

[im_thatoneguy]

Depends on what you define as whining.

The problem I've had with just about every single large Open Source project is it requires me to contribute. I don't want to contribute to it, I want to use it. If I had time to contribute I would be a software developer not an artist. This is why projects like Apache do very well in an Open Source environment. People who use it, contribute to it and make it better, because using it is improving it.

Re:Good news

[Aladrin]

Did you read their page at all? Their wiki says their plan includes "Use only packages in official Ubuntu repositories" ... That'd make it just plain Ubuntu, but with certain packages preloaded, rather than the current defaults. Just like Kubuntu and Xubuntu do.

Maybe a neat idea, but I wouldn't put much effort into it if it was my baby, and I certainly don't approve of the slashvertising of it before it's really even started. Vaporware is a BAD thing for Linux.

Re:Yep, bloatware, and a mediocre one

[xtracto]

You hit the nail with that one. I *am* a programmer. I like open source software and I appreciate the OS community/karma. However some (most of the OSS ?) programmers have this weird notion that you can not say their program is ugly or bad or does not work for X or Y or Z. Any kind of criticism (good or bad) will be answered with "why dont you make your own software" or "so what it is free" or even... "fuck off".

That state of the issues is very sad. You might think it is a problem of the open source community but, just one or two days ago there was a story running on slashdot asking "why are IT people always jerks"?.

Of course not all of them are like that... but there is a high concentration of jerks doing Open Source.

I could understand why *you* would not like to contribute with those kind of projects which to be sincere *really* need some help of UI designers and alike. Same thing with games... no graphic designer wants to "contribute" to the open source community (or it is very hard) but I am afraid it is because of the arrogance of developers.

Re:Yep, bloatware, and a mediocre one

[vga_init]

this isn't a professional package at all.

If you're saying that because professionals don't use it, I'm wondering what kind of logic you are using because it doesn't exist yet.

Secondly, if you are reasoning "I'm a professional, and I don't use this software, therefore if someone uses this software, they aren't a professional," then I would also be rather skeptical of that line of thinking. Being a professional usually has to do with whether or not you are generating income, and I doubt that no one has ever profited from the use of the software that is going to be included.

Re:Would be great...

[FromellaSlob]

For those unfamiliar with the history of Cinelerra, the developer(s) are anonymous so as not to jeopardize their current employment status; apparently the author(s) believe there might be a conflict of interest with regard to their day job(s).

That sounds like a litigation timebomb.

Re:Has potential

[flewp]

Can you tell me where I said Ardour, Jack, and Sweep are not profession-level software? If you read my post, I never made any such statements. I know a few people who are in the field of sound/music production, and very few of their core tools are freeware apps. Sure, some of the utilities they use are, but again, they're not the core apps that they do the majority of their work in. Chances are, they already have their OSX/Windows systems set up, configured, and all their software already installed, so I don't see this causing a lot of people to switch. If anything, I think it'll just make it easier for hobbyists, who are already familiar with Linux, to get more into sound/video/graphics with Linux. The general person, who might be interested in sound/video/graphics, but who isn't familiar with Linux is probably not even going to consider this when there's iMovie, etc out there on systems they're most likely more familiar with. The professionals who already use and know Linux probably have everything set up already - though it might make it easier for people new to the "scene".

I'm not really knocking the idea, just saying it's not going to cause a large number of people to switch over. It's just more of the same old "Linux is going to take over !!" hype. Don't get me wrong, I'd love for Linux to be more well recieved in every aspect of computers, but it's just not going to happen for Joe Sixpack for awhile. It seems to be making more inroads in the professional communities, especially in areas like 3D where Linux seems much better suited for massive render farms and the like.

Re:Ubuntu Developer

[BadMrMojo]

Currently, I make these modifications myself after a fresh install at every new release. I'm really just asking Canonical to make my life even easier. ;-)

I think you have answered your own question. As a rule of thumb, a developer is less likely to need a head start in configuring their system than a media- or education-specific audience.