Kdenlive 0.8 Adds Advanced Features for NLV Editing

dmbkiwi writes "For a long time I've been a big fan of Kdenlive. I've written two articles about it. One is a general overview of video editing on Linux and the other is more specific to Kdenlive. For a number of years, video editing on Linux – at least at a consumer level — has been patchy at best. This is somewhat ironic given the heavy use of Linux in major Hollywood blockbuster film production. However, with the advent of Kdenlive, things are looking pretty good and with the release of version 0.8, there have been some great features added for the more advanced users, while still retaining a simple and easy to use UI."

Comments

Official Website

[candreacchio]

Official list of changes, not some blogpost -- http://www.kdenlive.org/discover/0.8

Not quite there, but looking good

[Anonymous Coward]

I just used a the new version of kdenlive on a project yesterday. I've been using kdenlive on and off since somewhere around 0.4-something, I think, and like what I see. However, it still has a long way to go (in stability as well as features).

Re:Not quite there, but looking good

[Fri13]

I am waiting a very easy way to do pixel accurate cropping and zooming. Simply just dragging with mouse a area to video and zoom in to see pixels (150% zoom?). Now I have not found any other way than play around the numbers and see a overlay on video to move by them.

What I think Kdenlive needs is something like Crop and rectangle selection tool in GIMP (Or photoshop if you really hate GIMP name!).

What is already easy on Kdenlive is use of the timeline and applying most effects. But to get even more users, video editing should be very easy for desktop recorders who does blog posts and other fancy things. And there you need zoom/crop feature to be a very easy.

Re:Not quite there, but looking good

[hedwards]

Slightly off topic, but does anything actually support MKV? I've looked around and while the codec is probably fine, in practice that's pointless as nobody is bothering to produce software to use it. I've seen a half dozen open source and free products included it, none of which are currently being worked on and none of which are actually useful without a ton of knowledge about the program.

There's a fair number of packages which can read the files, but unlike the MKAs which are pretty easy to do, the video component has been a serious pain.

Re:Not quite there, but looking good

[mfraz74]

MKV isn't a codec, it is a container format so can contain pretty much any codec you want.

Re:Not quite there, but looking good

[hedwards]

Right, but what I'm saying is that aren't any decent authoring programs, the ones referenced on their site are mostly out of date and no longer being worked on. Sure you can play them, but good luck actually making them as the tutorials and software to do so aren't particularly user friendly. I ended up giving up on that for backing up my DVDs and just store them as ISOs, at least with VLC and a few others I can just read those directly rather than have to screw around with a container format that I can't figure out.

Which is a shame, because I've really grown fond of MKA instead of the alternatives for storing albums.

Re:Not quite there, but looking good

[mehemiah]

if you really dont like the name of the program, just call it the GNU Image Manipulator

Ediiting

[psergiu]

What's this "Ediiting" (with double-i) mentioned in the title ?

Re:Ediiting

[Samantha Wright]

I'd be happier if they stopped calling it "NLV Editing", as if Kdenlive allowed you to edit non-linear video. Excellent research there, senor editor. You've created a submission title that is completely incomprehensible to everyone except its target market, which has to work almost as hard to figure out what it means.

(To be fair, there's an NLE package called "Pyxis NLV", but that's pretty much the only intentional usage on the entire internet.)

Re:Ediiting

[Anonymous Coward]

Why mention at all that it's nonlinear? How many linear video editing programs are there on Linux or any other OS? I thought linear video editing died with celluloid and video tape.

Re:Ediiting

[Samantha Wright]

Linear editing (and Betacam, the broadcast-grade sibling of Betamax) is still used for short-time-scale projects, e.g. local news programs. That's where their characteristically bad editing "style" comes from; there's no time to peck around in an NLE and get it perfect, so they just march through it in real time, perhaps repeating once or twice to improve quality. Also, since most linear editing tools are just live editing tools + output to storage, the same equipment sees a lot of use in live video switching at smaller-budget establishments. An Amiga 4000T with a Video Toaster Flyer can still run a good $800 US on eBay.

mirror

[Anonymous Coward]

mirror here:

http://everydaylht.com.nyud.net/2011/04/30/kdenlive-0-8-released-best-non-linear-editor-for-linux/

Ediiting

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps the Ediitors should do some Ediiting.

Linux editing?

[SuricouRaven]

I use a folder full of tens of thousands of BMPs and some perl scripts that move them around as I command.

Re:Linux editing?

[webmistressrachel]

I have mod points, but I can't do this post justice with just one. OMG I'm still laughing!

Reminds me of saving programs to tape, and then copying them for friends on an old hifi double tape deck...

Re:Linux editing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Imposter! A real Linux user would use PNMs, and also would know it's called a directory, not a folder.

Re:Linux editing?

[Rich0]

Nah, a real linux user would create a FUSE filesystem that mounts an avi as a directory tree full of still images.

They'd pipe those stills through aalib so that the actual edits could be performed using sed.

Re:Linux editing?

[GNious]

I am scared and intrigued at the same time...

Re:Linux editing?

[lsolano]

:D :D :D :D :D

I've got no mod points...

Open source names

[605dave]

Why is it that open source people spend so much time on their programs, and then name them things that seemed designed to confuse people? How is Kdenlive pronounced? How could I possibly know that it was a video app from the name? Or if not descriptive, how about something catchy? GIMP, GNU, kEverything. Weird names don't help persuade people to try open alternatives, they drive the average user away

Here's my theory. Linux developers like to feel superior in some way to the average user, so name their apps with inside nerd jokes or references that most won't get. It started with the man himself, Richard Stallman and GNU. GNU's not Unix! Get it? See its funny how it doesn't make sense! I have never understood this part of the open source community. They seem to want acceptance, but then throw up roadblocks to that acceptance. I guess its cooler to be the smart kid using different software than the ordinary people.

Re:Open source names

[AHuxley]

Yes something like avidemux2 sounds useful, it does something to an avi file.

Re:Open source names

[Yetihehe]

Just like "PCB", a program to design printed circuit boards (PCBs). Now try to find some informations about it - yep, most of the results are about printed circuit boards, not about this program.

Hey - at least blender (rendering program) is among top pages, along with normal blenders.

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it demuxes it.

Re:Open source names

[Mark Hood]

I just did a search for 'PCB linux' and it's the top hit on Google... If I search for 'PCB program' I get a few others first, but it's still on the front page. Obviously if you just search for an acronym you'll get results relevant to that first...

If I look for 'video editing linux' however, the top hit is a list of 5 apps from 2009 (which does mention kdenlive 0.7 to be fair), and the second dates back to 2007, so I suspect neither is that useful if you're looking for advice on the best one today. (Searching for 'video linux' just gives you loads of hits for playing, as you might expect.

Re:Open source names

[Mark Hood]

I know you're being funny, but a 'home user' probably won't know why they need to do that (or even if they do need to do that), let alone go looking for it.

A name that has some connection to what it does is useful, but since you're never going to guess it from nowhere (I need a video editing application, let's google for 'videdit'? no...) it's not required.

That said, a dumb-sounding name won't help you - until you're already popular, then it doesn't matter any more. Think about Linux, it's just a weak pun on the creator's name, and happily a near-anagram of Unix... hardly a 'meaningful' name like FreeBSD (with all due respect to Linus of course) and yet the name is never even talked about these days, everyone just knows what it is. Same with GIMP, how you can name a free 'clone' of photoshop after what Wikipedia calls "a type of sexual submissive in BDSM who may wear a bondage suit" and expect to be taken seriously I don't know (although I used the early versions and it did feel like I was being treated like one). But it's big enough now that people don't care.

Re:Open source names

[FooBarWidget]

Why is it that people these days are so inclined to attribute names they don't like to arrogance? Haven't you considered that the global namespace is running out of good names so developers start using bad ones or non-English ones? Come on, VideoEdit can only be used once and it's probably trademarked too.

Re:Open source names

[suy]

I fail to see the link where you point to the research that proves that names in the open source world are worse than in the proprietary world.

Look, naming is hard, and of course some names suck and could be replaced by something better. But you are nuts if you think that the naming that (for example) Apple does makes any sense to a non-English speaker. Even with the huge popularity of iTunes I've heard this name said in a lot of different ways (how is read in Spanish, and how is read in English, but with very different levels of success).

And with other products it's the same. I had a really hard time spelling Google or Youtube when they were not widely known. Does the Windows name give you any hint that is an operating system? And iOS is easy to write or to pronounce or understand? Why Photoshop is not for buying things? How the hell QuickTime makes you thinkg about video? And so on.

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

Or my favorite Qtpfsgui which is a gui to the pfs command line program for making HDR images, programmed in Qt. Brilliant naming scheme to compete with something like Photomatix. Thankfully they took the hint and renamed it Luminance HDR.

Re:Open source names

[605dave]

yup, that one took the cake.

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah! Linux should use meaningful names for its apps, like "Acrobat", or "Excel". And it should reduce its footprint on the namespace by calling every other app by some minor variant of "Explorer".

Re:Open source names

[nyctopterus]

Same with GIMP, how you can name a free 'clone' of photoshop after what Wikipedia calls "a type of sexual submissive in BDSM who may wear a bondage suit" and expect to be taken seriously I don't know (although I used the early versions and it did feel like I was being treated like one). But it's big enough now that people don't care.

No, I think GIMP is still one of the stupidest of these naming blunders. Maybe you're used to it, but I don't think it's so ubiquitous no one notices.

Re:Open source names

[arisvega]

It demuxes it too

Re:Open source names

[salesgeek]

Your complaints are somewhat silly:

* Kdenlive is as good a name as Vegas when it comes to making sense for video editing. I suppose Apache (and Cherokee) was a horrible, politically incorrect name for a web server. Unfortunately trademark law prevents using names like "Non-Linear Video Editor", "Photograph Manipulation Editor", "Text Editor", or "Word Processor" because they are common descriptive names.

* Some names have roots in foreign languages and make perfect sense there but sound horrible here (Choquok - an amazing twitter client - is a perfect example)

* Unix itself is a play on Multics, which predates Stallman's great crusade.

* Things aren't designed to confuse people. They are usually designed by one person, who may not be as good as UI design as a six person UX team at a large development shop. In some cases, I've discovered that the graphical interface is wonky, but the keyboard interfaces is amazingly smooth. Unfortunately, doing UI redesigns is a huge to-do for end users who have in many cases become very adept at the original UI of a software package.

I guess its cooler to be the smart kid using different software than the ordinary people.
No, for me it costs a lot less, I can get things done, and if I want to customize, I can and do. In some cases the software is incredibly good at what it does. In other cases, the commercial alternatives are really a lot better, but I don't want to spend $, so you live with it. It's really not about being cool. It's about freedom as in having no encumbered rights and having the economic means to exercise them.

Re:Open source names

[Tom]

* Kdenlive is as good a name as Vegas when it comes to making sense for video editing.

No, it isn't. It's part of the stupidity to name everything for KDE with a "K" or KD or even KDE at the beginning. A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple, but for various reasons it doesn't work half as good. Copying good marketing badly does not give you good marketing, and the "K" thing is just dumb.

Names for products need to be pronouncable, easy to remember and difficult to confuse. "Kdenlive" falls on all three counts. For starters, it helps if they're actually, you know, names, not random gobbled-together parts of words.

* Things aren't designed to confuse people. They are usually designed by one person, who may not be as good as UI design as a six person UX team at a large development shop. In some cases, I've discovered that the graphical interface is wonky, but the keyboard interfaces is amazingly smooth. Unfortunately, doing UI redesigns is a huge to-do for end users who have in many cases become very adept at the original UI of a software package.

UI design is one of the most important parts of creating a good application, and the part most often ignored in the Free Software community. That's perfectly good if you are scratching your own itch, because in that case it must mostly be useful to and useable by you. And if you give it for free to the world, they can adapt to your style or die for all you care, because in the end you're writing the thing for your own need.

What too few people have realized is that Free Software (or open source, whatever term works for you) is a horrible development model for software you write exclusively for other people. People need motivation to work on stuff. Creating something for yourself has its own intrinsic motivation, creating something for others doesn't.

And designing something specifically different from how you like it best takes a lot of motivation, because you go against yourself, in a way. That's why good UIs are not designed by coders, but by UI experts - people who may not have a personal interest in this particular product, but who enjoy the general topic of UI design enough to have made it a job. That (plus the money) gives them the motivation required.

Look around yourself and you'll notice how most Free Software is seriously lacking in UI design. It is quite often comparable or superior to commercial programs when it comes to functionality and features, but the UI commonly rates somewhere between "horrible" and "acceptable" and very rarely above that.

And that's one of the main reasons that the "year of the Linux desktop" has never come. Mainstream people don't want to put up with that shit, they don't use their computer in order to gloat about technology, they use to get stuff done.

Re:Open source names

[TheSunborn]

Kdenlive is not as good a name as Vegas, because I have no clue about how to pronounce it which also make it very difficult to remember the name.

Re:Open source names

[infolation]

Ah. You mean like:

Avid
Smoke
Flame
DS Nitris
Lightworks
Premiere

Etc

Re:Open source names

[Gaygirlie]

No, it isn't. It's part of the stupidity to name everything for KDE with a "K" or KD or even KDE at the beginning. A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple

Apple fanboy, eh? KDE community has actually been using this naming convention for years and years and years, all the way from the beginnings of KDE. Way before Apple started using the 'i'-meme across the board of their products. So we could just as well claim Apple is the one copying the meme from KDE if we follow your logic.

Names for products need to be pronouncable, easy to remember and difficult to confuse. "Kdenlive" falls on all three counts. For starters, it helps if they're actually, you know, names, not random gobbled-together parts of words.

Random gobbled-together words or terms, eh? Like for example ColdFusion, RoboHelp, Alcohol 120% etc.? Those are all confusing names which really don't say much about the product itself and seem like completely random words. KDenlive ain't really different from those, it consists of two clear terms: KDE and enlive. I do agree that using 'KDE' or 'K' at the beginning of every damn application is silly, but...really, there's a lot of even worse names in the commercial space and yet many of those products are perfectly good and actually pretty successfull.

Re:Open source names

[Kjella]

* Kdenlive is as good a name as Vegas when it comes to making sense for video editing.

Sony Vegas is the version aimed at professionals though, the version aimed at customers is called "Sony Vegas Movie Studio". Apple calls theirs "Final Cut Express", Microsoft has "Windows Live Movie Maker".

Granted, Kdenlive might not be too bad in a menu if it says Kdenlive (Video Editor) but by itself it's quite non-descript. Even knowing what it is hard to work out the abbreviation as KDE Non-LInear Video Editor. It's not a particularly bad name, but no more than a passing grade.

My experience with it was that it'd open my HDV clips but crash within 30 seconds of navigating the file, so I'm taking this announcement with a big pinch of salt. It was very much so not ready last time I tried it.

Re:Open source names

[devent]

What is your problem dude? The program is for free and you can use it or not. Nobody is forcing you to use it.

If you really have a problem with the name or the UI than create a bug report (http://www.kdenlive.org/mantis/my_view_page.php) and let see if the developers like your change. If you still insist of a new name than by all means, just fork the project and release it under a new name. You can even sell it with a new name and if you redesign the UI you can sell it with a new UI.

"And that's one of the main reasons that the "year of the Linux desktop" has never come. Mainstream people don't want to put up with that shit, they don't use their computer in order to gloat about technology, they use to get stuff done."

Interesting, because that's the reason why I don't bother to use Windows anymore. Because I want my stuff just be done and I don't want to bother with technology. Linux enables me just to do that. You just grab a Linux CD like Fedora, install it on the computer and it will run for the years to come. Everything you will need can be installed by the package manager and I don't need to be bothered with drivers or anti-virus crap. Even if you get a new computer, just swap out the hard disk and you have your old system on the new computer.

Everything just runs smooth, no trouble at all. The "year of the Linux desktop" won't come because you have to install a distribution yourself and because all the games are for Windows only. If you could just go to Mediamarkt and get a Fedora 14 laptop or desktop (with all stuff installed like Mp3 and Dvd read), I guarantee you, you will have less trouble with it than the crap Windows 7 you get.

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple, but for various reasons it doesn't work half as good. Copying good marketing badly does not give you good marketing, and the "K" thing is just dumb.

KDE and its K-thing naming scheme predates Apple's use of iStuff names. At the risk of dating myself, I remember trying both KDE1 and a pre-release of GNOME before Apple's iStuff crusades began. Both were already using K* and G* naming schemes, presumably for shell completion, well before Apple popularised alphabet abuse.

Checking dates online confirms this: Konqueror has existed since 1996, and KDE1 beta screenshots show Kmail. It may be a stupid convention, but it wasn't chosen by copying Apple.

Re:Open source names

[knarf]

A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple,

Apple? What do they have to do with this? KDE's K-obsession and Gnome's similar G-naming predates the Apple hype by quite a bit. When KDE got started in 1996 Apple was still selling beige boxes with a crashy OS which lacked memory protection and only did 'cooperative multitasking'. It was not until 2001 that Apple finally launched its own Unix-based desktop operating system. Should I say that Apple copied KDE and Gnome...? and CDE... and Solaris... and Ultrix... and Apollo/Domain... and all the others. Come to think of it, this would not have been the first time that Apple based its offerings on something it gleaned from some other team - Xerox PARC is where the WIMP-interface got started after all.

In short, stop comparing everything computer-related to Apple as if they are the bellwether which all others slavishly follow.

Re:Open source names

[Tom]

Random gobbled-together words or terms, eh? Like for example ColdFusion, RoboHelp, Alcohol 120% etc.?

You may have noticed that all of these are easy to pronounce and remember, and there are no "near-misses" that make as much sense. That's what a good name needs to be like. Kdenlive does not link to any known terms, which makes it hard to remember without additional mnemonic aids. "ColdFusion", just to pick one of the examples, does not make sense as a product name (which has nothing to do either with temperature or nuclear power), but it's two well-known, easily recalled terms. It is unique enough to be remembered, it is pronouncable without effort.

Those are important things. That's how word-of-mouth works. "I found this great video editing tool. If only I could remember what it was called, Kenl-something or so." just doesn't cut it.

Yes, there are stupid names in the commercial space. I must have missed the memo about it being a good idea to copy the failures.
Yes, even if they are successful. You can be successful despite a stupid name. But why make it more difficult then it has to be?

And there are good examples. Broadcast and Cinerella were great examples for naming. Cinerella especially works so well that I still remembered it without looking it up 7 or 8 years after I've last checked on it. I doubt anyone who doesn't use Kdenlive will remember "that video editing software" name even three weeks from now.

Re:Open source names

[camperdave]

It's pronounced so the last syllable rhymes with "hive", rather than "give".

Re:Open source names

[Kjella]

And designing something specifically different from how you like it best takes a lot of motivation, because you go against yourself, in a way. That's why good UIs are not designed by coders, but by UI experts - people who may not have a personal interest in this particular product, but who enjoy the general topic of UI design enough to have made it a job. That (plus the money) gives them the motivation required.

No, the primary reason UI design shouldn't be done by the coder is that to the coder it's clear box testing, he knows the architecture, the design and exactly what strings he's pulling in the code so to him it makes perfect sense. To the user this is a big black box, he doesn't know anything about the inner workings of it and has to rely on only what the UI tells him. You can't shed that extra information and pretend to know no more than a user, no matter how hard you try.

Sure UI experts would be great, but I think most UI designs would be a lot better if they were designed by someone who didn't know the code, who deliberately didn't take too many lectures from the coders on the inner workings, who wouldn't know much written in mailing lists and forums except basic tutorials. Here's the application, here's the documentation, does the UI make sense on its own? Coders could be decent UI designers, just not on their own projects because you know too much. There should be an exchange program of some kind, you try making sense of my UI and I'll try making sense of yours. Then you'll see how much harder it gets without the invisible dotted lines you have in your head.

Re:Open source names

[cynyr]

hmm I think if was looking for a pfs gui, that the name "Qtpfsgui" would have immediately told me what it was, a gui for pfs in QT. granted that's not a good marking name, but oh well.

Re:Open source names

[Tom]

What is your problem dude? The program is for free and you can use it or not. Nobody is forcing you to use it.

My problem is that it pains me to see so much talent wasted because the Free Software stuff is so often excellent quality with a crappy exterior. There's these V10 engines that can go 100 km on 3 litres with making hardly any noise - and they put them into Yugos.

People rarely buy cars just for the engine. They want to sit comfortably in them and they want to drive them without a Ph.D.

just fork the project and release it under a new name. You can even sell it with a new name and if you redesign the UI you can sell it with a new UI.

I stopped contributing to Free Software development years ago when I realized that it's a net negative for me - I spent more time working on software than I spent actually using it. I did contribute quite a bit back then, but I also learnt that lots of Free Software people are too much in love with their projects to take a good advise - or patch. Which, again, is a perfectly ok attitude if you run the project to scratch your own itch. But then don't be surprised if the mainstream doesn't share your personal style.

That's my main point. Make up your mind and decide what you want to be - scratching your own itches or making a mainstream product. You can't do both. And no, you can't do both no matter how much you try to argue that you can.

Interesting, because that's the reason why I don't bother to use Windows anymore.

*nod* yes, once you've been outside of the windows mindset for a while, you start to wonder how anyone can get any work done on that abomination of user masochism. I just found that Linux is better but not by enough, and especially that it copies way too much from windos, probably in an attempt to "win over" windos users, so I moved on to OS X and I've not looked back.

I still love Linux to death - everywhere that doesn't have a GUI. All my servers run Debian, which means my company runs on Linux - but my development happens on OS X.

And I love Free Software, I couldn't do without it. Firefox beats Safari any day. It's UI is still crap. It's ok because there aren't any better alternatives right now, apparently nobody has yet figured out how to do a really great browser UI. But ever since I've done some actual research and work on HCI, ironically started by an overlap of Gnome and my other professional interest, computer security (which suffers massively from the same "the user is stupid" hybris), I've become very sensitive to failures in UI design, many of whom most users probably don't notice consciously.

But if you've ever used Keynote vs. Impress you know just how much of a difference some effort into UI design can make. And Keynote is far from perfect - but compared to Impress, you spend a considerable amount of time less on fighting with the interface. And don't even get me started on PowerPoint - if there's one piece of software that Dr. Who should throw into one of those gaps that eradicate it from all of history so nobody even remembers it, this is it. :-)

Re:Open source names

[Tom]

No, the primary reason UI design shouldn't be done by the coder is that to the coder it's clear box testing, he knows the architecture, the design and exactly what strings he's pulling in the code so to him it makes perfect sense. To the user this is a big black box, he doesn't know anything about the inner workings of it and has to rely on only what the UI tells him. You can't shed that extra information and pretend to know no more than a user, no matter how hard you try.

Yes, that's another reason, though you can do end user testing to reach that goal if you don't have access to someone unfamiliar with the code.

Sure UI experts would be great, but I think most UI designs would be a lot better if they were designed by someone who didn't know the code, who deliberately didn't take too many lectures from the coders on the inner workings, who wouldn't know much written in mailing lists and forums except basic tutorials. Here's the application, here's the documentation, does the UI make sense on its own?

Actually, I think the problem is the development direction. Free Software is usually designed from functionality to interface, because you want to get something done, and when it's working you slap on an interface.

Good software is designed from interface to code - the software needs to do something for the user, figure out how the process looks to the user first, then implement the technology.

For simple parts, the difference between those two approaches is purely theoretical, but when you think about complex activities, it makes a considerable difference. Writing a GUI for an existing command-line script is sometimes more cumbersome than re-writing the whole thing with a GUI from the start.
 

Re:Open source names

[marcello_dl]

There is a well named product for movies called kino.
Kdenlive in very short time dwarfed it in terms of features without being much more difficult to use for simple stuff.
Names might be important but features/price, documentation and stability count more, especially when softpedia and countless others will tag software product by function whatever their name is.

Re:Open source names

[Narishma]

It's Cinelerra, not Cinerella.

Re:Open source names

[605dave]

thanks tom, you are handling all the responses for me. we are pretty much in agreement...

Re:Open source names

[605dave]

Yes, I mean exactly like those. They are memorable, and workable, and marketable. That's my point.

Re:Open source names

[cynyr]

I'd love to just move over to linux, but all of my component suppliers only support windows(some not even vista/7 only XP). Also there isn't anything like autocad (btw like autocad in this case means 100% compatibility with autocad. All macros, blocks, everything needs to work), inventor, revit, on linux.

So while I would love to use linux for work, and have a useful scripting language, and programs that understand that the data that comes out may not be in the form I need it to be in... but I'm stuck with windows XP.

Re:Open source names

[jo_ham]

What's pfs, to a casual user?

You can see why it's not "year of Linux on the desktop".

"Yes maam, just load that kernel module dynamically using the following easy command, making sure you have root on your box...."

There's a reason Android has been so successful in the mobile space: abstraction. Sure, have the esoteric stuff down in the core that advanced users can mess with directly, but goodness me, if your GUI level stuff is just as impenetrable then newbies will have a learning curve similar to famous Eve Online one.

This is doubly true for applications - you might get a pass for system setup stuff, maybe, but there's no excuse for "Kdenlive" or "GIMP" or "Qtpfsgui".

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, these people aren't GUI experts. Designing a GUI takes a different skill-set than that of creating quality code.

Proprietary software can afford to hire a designer to polish their UIs. And even then it's hit or miss. (Nothing pisses me off more than CD burning software).

And they are scratching their own itch. I'm not gonna waste hours of development effort for a bunch of users I don't know. i'm just not. Am I gonna waste a bunch of hours on myself? Darn tootin'.

Some users seem to think that OS devs owe them something. Too much time between releases? Their pet bug not fixed or rejected? The features they want not implemented yesterday? Then a loud-mouth minority of users bitch and moan about it. It actually discourages devs who don't have a good enough BS filter.

The devs are not your bitches. Your not paying them. You don't have them under contract.

For fun, here's some crappy names from large companies:
Nero
Power Point
iAnything - which came after the KDE kAnything
Maya
Opera

And his name is The Doctor, not Dr. Who, which is the name of the show. Nerd fail.

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

Where the hell do they get the resources to do user testing?

Effective user testing is done with the testers can observe the users. Most OS development wouldn't exist without the internet.

Who's gonna volunteer to be a tester? It's the most boring job I can think of; I certainly wouldn't volunteer for it. You also can't base your evaluation of an interface on one user. You'd want many users, increasing the difficulty of the testing (can't get enough testers).

Designing a UI from the start, or after the fact, is still a difficult thing to do.

Re:Open source names

[clang_jangle]

They seem to want acceptance, but then throw up roadblocks to that acceptance. I guess its cooler to be the smart kid using different software than the ordinary people.

The zealots who want everyone to use Linux are rarely the people who contribute code. The people who code are usually not particularly concerned with whether or not 605dave likes the name. Besides, there are always some people who will complain about the name no matter what it is. Also, there is no "marketing dept" to sit around all day making up new buzzwords and running up the cost of services/goods.

Besides, if you think about things that have been super popular that have names like flickr, digg, slashdot, google, yahoo, lycos, etc one can easily see that the name has almost nothing to do with whether or not it becomes popular.

Re:Open source names

[jo_ham]

The point is that everyone bemoans the lack of penetration of Linux on the desktop, yet when you dare criticise it for some of the reason that this might be the case you get hit with the biggest barrier to adoption: the "butthurt Linux Defender" who tells you to shove your suggestions up your ass and if you don;t like it you can get lost because it's been given to you for free dammit!

No one is forcing me to use Linux, and with the attitude I have come across in some circles there really is no compelling reason for me to keep learning (I have Ubuntu on a Powerbook mainly used to see what this Linux thing is all about) - I can just go back to my OS of choice.

Now, I'd be unfair if I painted every Linux user that way - there's clearly a large number of them who are very helpful and are just as exasperated with the "we know it's impenetrable to do anything more than basic setup" who wrote guides and extensive forum posts - I'd never have got through some of the more basic tasks
that were giving me problems during setup (or after some updates that suddenly broke random things tht didn;t seem to be connected to the thing I updated).

Now, Ubuntu have tried to make it a painless as possible for a total newbie to get started, and what do they get? The accusation that they're "dumbing down Linux"

I really want to like Linux, if I can get it running smoothly on my Powerbook it will make an excellent little machine for when I'm not at my desk, but so far it has been hit and miss. It's just too... I won;t say "hard", but I will say "unintuitive" to do some things, and some stuff is just plain weird.

I tried a Kbuntu Live CD to give KDE a try compared to Gnome (was fed up looking at brown! j/k) and the Live CD worked great! The wireless worked just fine (like it did on Gnome), but then when I installed the CD so it would boot from the disc, the wireless stopped working and I have been unable to get it working again when nothing has changed! I was sure it had to do with the proprietary wireless driver for the Airport Express card, but even the cafeful forum instructions from helpful people could not get it going again. Drop back to Gnome: it works again! I'm not really sure why the window manager should have such an effect on something that I thought was handled by something unrelated to it, but there it is.

My experiences with it are that it would be quite easy to learn *if* you had an expert sitting next to you to answer the myriad questions that pop up, or solve that *one* little speedbump that appears in a long chain of stuff that you don't know how to deal with.

As it is, I have kept OS X 10.5 on the machine too, so I can dual boot if I need to take my laptop anywhere - I am just not comfortable with Ubuntu enough not to keep a crutch nearby that I know how to work with quickly and easily if something throws me off - like the wireless problem, or if I want a hardware-accelerated UI (still can't get that to work in KDE or Gnome, and I suspect it *can* work, I'm just missing something obvious).

Re:Open source names

[jedidiah]

> The point is that everyone bemoans the lack of penetration of Linux on the desktop,

Try saying something productive.

We aren't here to stroke your ego. If you say something stupid or offensive, we will tell you.

Of course whining about stupid minutia that aren't even restricted to Linux will get you slapped down.

Re:Open source names

[mcgrew]

Actually, I've started to think maybe Linux isn't ready for the normal user without having a nerd friend to help him. Hell, most people can't even run Windows without screwing it up.

The fact is, almost all Linux users ARE more computer literate and savvy than almost all Windows users. No need to try to look superior when you actually ARE superior.

The awful names aren't a Linux thing, they're a geek thing (Asperger's?). How is wifi in any way descriptive? Bluetooth? TWAIN? The difference between free and paid software is that paid software comes from companies with marketing departments. The only marketing you'll see for Linux is servers, etc, that corporations are producing.

You don't expect a ballerina to be a good wrestler, and you don't expect an anthroplogist to be good a physics. In the same way, you don't expect a programmer to be good at marketing (or a salesman to be good at programming).

Re:Open source names

[jo_ham]

So in what way is that stupid or offensive (also note that this is my second post in the thread), or looking for my ego to be stroked?

I am simply offering a point of view based on my experiences on slashdot over the years.

If you think that the issues concerning the ease of use of Linux, or using descriptive names that only really help power users is "stupid minutia", then congratulations, you are proving my point for me - the one I made initially. Now, I have a thick skin and things just roll off me, but consider how the attitude affects the perception of a new Linux user.

"I'm new to Linux and I am struggling to do [X], I've looked it up and still having issues"

"Piss off sonny, we're not here to stroke your ego, you must be at least *this* elitist to use Linux"

*user goes back to Windows or Mac*

Now, maybe *you* don't care about growing the user base, and in fact maybe you want to keep it small so you can be cool, elite and alternative, but I'm not sure that viewpoint is shared by all. S/N ratio is a little skewed though, in my experience.

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it isn't. It's part of the stupidity to name everything for KDE with a "K" or KD or even KDE at the beginning. A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple, but for various reasons it doesn't work half as good. Copying good marketing badly does not give you good marketing, and the "K" thing is just dumb.

Names for products need to be pronouncable, easy to remember and difficult to confuse. "Kdenlive" falls on all three counts. For starters, it helps if they're actually, you know, names, not random gobbled-together parts of words.

Wow, I would never have expected such an ignorant statement from this low a uid... I guess technology didn't exist before the mighty iMac, at least in the world that you live in.

Re:Open source names

[mcgrew]

...everyone just knows what [Linux] is

Actually, no. IT people and nerds in general know what it is, but go to your neighborhood bar and ask people if they've ever heard of Linux. People I talk to are amazed that there's a free and superior replacement for Windows that doesn't get viruses and costs nothing to use. Not only have they never heard of it, they don't believe it even exists until they bring me a "broken" computer that's been rendered useless by viruses or a corrupted registry, have no install CDs, and I put Linux on it for them.

Hell, one time I brought a netbook I'd installed kubuntu on to the bar, and people would ask "what version of Windows is that?"

Re:Open source names

[Jesus_666]

I wouldn't put a name with a Levenshtein difference of 1 to a Disney movie (and to the name of a fairy tale if you're in an English-speaking region) down as having no sensible near-misses.

(Of course the sibling pointed out that the name is actually different from what you remembered, which does put a different kind of damper on your argument regarding that name,)

Re:Open source names

[Tom]

Where the hell do they get the resources to do user testing?

Friends and family.

Sure, it won't reach the quality of a lab with testers selected to represent the target audience and paid to have patience and go through it all again and again - but it's a lot better than nothing, and still much better than testing only on yourself.

Re:Open source names

[Tom]

Both true.

And still - the similarity to a well-known name (movie or fairy tale, doesn't matter) is what makes it so easy to recall.
And that I was wrong about the exact name - yes I was and still the #1 Google hit on my wrong term is the correct website.

Does that tell you something about this name working?

Re:Open source names

[Tom]

Dude, these people aren't GUI experts. Designing a GUI takes a different skill-set than that of creating quality code.

Skill sets can be acquired. If you have the motivation and desire. Which is why I'm saying make up your mind. If you want to scratch your own itches, fine with me, just stop whining about Linux not making it into the mainstream. If you want to hit the mainstream, get the skills necessary for making that happen.

The devs are not your bitches. Your not paying them. You don't have them under contract.

You are not saying anything that's news in this thread. Again, I'm not saying "make stuff for me". I'm saying that if you want to go mainstream, then by definition you are making stuff for other people. So be clear about that and accept it - or don't do it and stop whining.

You make stuff either for yourself or for others - never both. Sure, sometimes people find the stuff you make for yourself useful and use it, too. And sometimes you find your own product is something you like using yourself. But don't kid yourself thinking you can merge these two things. The only way to combine them is to make stuff that neither you nor anyone else really wants.

So make up your mind, and stick with it. Scratch your own itch and tell the users that they're welcome to use the thing, and if they want to suggest improvements you're listen or not depending on your mood and they may be accepted or not depending on whether you think they're useful to you.

And stop the damn whining that Linux isn't mainstream. Everything mainstream is because it is made for the mainstream.

And his name is The Doctor, not Dr. Who, which is the name of the show. Nerd fail.

True. It's sunday and I had an excellent saturday night, so I'm tired. Oh wait, is that another nerd fail? Damn, deeper down the gutter. Next I know I'll have to exchange my /. ID for something with more digits. :-)

Re:Open source names

[mcgrew]

OOPS, hit submit too soon.

A gimp is someone with a bad, or "gimpy", leg. The word and that definition is way older than I am; I've heard it all of my 59 years. Look up GIMP you find the Gnu Image Manipulation Program with a link to "disambuigation" that lists your BSOM; and I'd bet money that the sex term is newer than the Gnu IMP. Also, I notice that wikipedia doesn't mention the now-politically incorrect original meaning of "gimp".

Gimp

You don't watch Monty Python? They used the slang dictionary useage in the skit that starts out with men in a rowboat and one asks "How long is it?" one of the sailors is to be eaten and the response is "ugh, with a gimpy leg?"

Also, there are some fairly gimpy mathematics."

Re:Open source names

[mcgrew]

You can see why it's not "year of Linux on the desktop".

"Yes maam, just load that kernel module dynamically using the following easy command, making sure you have root on your box...."

Are you trolling, ignorant little Windows user? Installing Linux is far easier than installing Windows, and not once does one have to go to a shell prompt. The whole process is inside a GUI, and unlike Windows there's only a single reboot.

I've been using Linux for almost ten years and I almost never see a shell prompt. Actually, I find myself at a DOS prompt at work using Windows far more than I need a shell prompt at home using Linux.

There needs to be a moderation of "ignorant" as a counterbalance to "informative". Your stupid comment sure needs one, although I guess "troll" suffices. Now get back under that Redmond bridge, troll.

Re:Open source names

[Jesus_666]

In this case it does but depending on how many people misspell which name you might end up with the product getting a much lower rank. I'd still stay away from Disney names. ;) Plus it's not that big on the speakability front, either - people who only hear it might end up spelling it "Cinelara", which only gets results because of Google's autocorrection feature.

It's certainly a better name than "Kdenlive", though, although I find Kdenlive to be rather pronouncable if you say "k-den-live". Sounds horrible but is fairly easy to say and to write correctly after having heard it.


The real problem is that product naming is really hard given that you don't want your product to be buried under millions of Google results for the same word in a different context, the namespace of easily-remembered names is limited and you ideally want a name that describes your product, as well.

Open source developers have long just looked for unique names that describe the program and are comfortable to type in a shell. Which is perfectly fine if you don't intend on competing with commercial software as it sidesteps a lot of issues you don't need to optimize for. Once you do compete on the market, however, you should consider a rebranding.

Re:Open source names

[jo_ham]

Hilarious. I post on slashdot all the time, and have been called "one of the most disgusting mac fanbois ever to exist".

I haven't used Windows in... well, some time. At least a decade. It depends if you count tech support for relatives.

Your post is *exactly* what my post is all about, and in fact with the other troll reply we are so for 2 for 0 on "douchebag replies" to a post that is critical of the Linux experience, from someone who has personally experienced it.

If you read carefully you'll note that my install went fine - I've done it a few times actually with different versions of Ubuntu, but that anything beyond that steamlined experience becomes very unintuitive very quickly.

My experience with the wireless drivers for my Airport card, for example. Now, I'm sure there's a gui way to install and configure them, but the help, located by a forum search, uses the shell to do so. Fine by me, I use the shell all the time in OS X - it's very handy, but I'm fortunate to have some experience with it. Someone less computer savvy is going to be totally lost.

Or we have the "works fine on the Live CD, then fails to work when installed". Sure, it was nice and smooth but I still can't fathom why it stopped working properly when it was installed vs running off the CD on the same hardware.

And then we get to the main point. My post is not "savaging" Linux, or calling it useless, or "a toy OS that's worthless for any real work" - you know, the sort of criticism I get levelled at my primary OS (OS X) on slashdot all the time, yet when I raise my concerns with an OS that I am seriously trying to get to grips with and be as comfortable using as OS X I get called "an ignorant little Windows user" in the most derisive, derogatory and condescending tone that is possibly to convey in text. Not only is it inaccurate (I haven't personally owned a windows box since Win 2k), you also then laughably go on to dismiss my issues and instead talk about how streamlined the Linux install process is.

My issues with the wireless card are after install, when it's sitting at the desktop having *not installed my wireless drivers correctly during the smooth install process* that were working *perfectly* from the Live CD, and my subsequent attempts to reinstall and tweak them.

This is the attitude I have come to expect from many Linux users when bringing up issues with the OS. It's somehow never Linux's fault, and always that we're "ignorant little Windows users" that really should be kissing your fucking feet for even *daring* to suggest that we're having anything less than a perfect and seamless experience with Linux, and that any problems are of our own making.

It's no wonder so many people say "it's just not worth the hassle". Colour me unsurprised that the marketshare for desktop Linux is so low, if this is how newbies are treated.

You should be fucking ashamed of yourself. You're doing more to hurt Linux adoption than a thousand obscurely named programs. At least you can look up what they do so you can find the one you need. With people like you it's a struggle not to just turn off the computer and say "well, fuck it then, I'm clearly not 1337 enough to just suddenly know everything or have it all work instantly on the first try".

Re:Open source names

[jo_ham]

For further context, my other post in this article, re: Linux issues from personal experience.

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2117310&cid=35991006

Of course, if you want me to get back under my *Cupertino* Bridge, then by all means.

Windows user! Ha! The most hilarious assumptions in the course of a "someone dared criticise Linux!" butthurt reply ever.

Re:Open source names

[knotprawn]

The guys at KDE aren't really known for coming up with the best names, but get your facts straight. KDE has been naming their apps with Ks right from KDE's inception. It's not a clone of an Apple meme.

Re:Open source names

[devent]

You really should learn that taste is different. There are a lot of Gnome users but for me I can't use anything else but KDE. I try Gnome, Xfce, and other, but I can't use them and go every time back to KDE. At least for me KDE improves my productivity big time. If anything else, KDE would be the only reason I would stay with Linux.

For me MacOS looks like eye candy with no functionality. You complain about bad UI but MacOS have the split-view in their file manager, the top menu bar and the dock down below. Further it has only one mouse button and the horrible keyboard. That and the mirror-like monitors for the Macs makes for me Linux >>> Windows > MacOS.

KDE and Gnome have a common UI with Windows, because that is the common denominator. Only MacOS have the "think different" UI. With is good for some, but not for me and not for the millions of Linux and Windows users out there.

Further, I have to yet encounter really bad UI design in Open Source projects. Most of the time the UI may lack eye candy but it is highly functional and you tent not to fight the UI but the UI is supporting the work flow. It is much better than some commercial projects, for the reason that usually the developers are using their own application. Actually, my desktop contains 99% open source applications and I wouldn't say that any of them have a bad UI.

Re:Open source names

[linuxpyro]

Don't forget Shake and Nuke.

Re:Open source names

[Tom]

You really should learn that taste is different.

What makes you think that I don't know that?

Taste certainly is different. Good design vs. bad design - not half as much a matter of taste as most people think. Design isn't the question of "which colour", but stuff like putting the light switch near the door instead of into the middle of the corridor.

For me MacOS looks like eye candy with no functionality.

I'm certain if you only look, then the eye candy is the most obvious thing. Use it for a while if you want to talk about usability ;-)

MacOS [...] has only one mouse button and the horrible keyboard.

Are you mistaking the user interface for the hardware that comes with the computer that the operating system that contains the user interface runs on? That's three layers off the target.

Oh, also: Apple mice have had 2 buttons for years now. And yes, as an old Linux user I need at least three so I own a Logitech mouse for use with my iMac.

Further, I have to yet encounter really bad UI design in Open Source projects.

Too bad the Interface Hall of Shame was discontinued before Free Software became so popular, I'm sure there would be plenty of examples with detail explanations in it.

Re:Open source names

[Tom]

I'd still stay away from Disney names. ;)

Maybe everyone else thought of the 1977 movie. ;-) (to be honest, I had to look that up, but like most Disney stuff, there are a lot of other works on the same subject.

"k-den-live". Sounds horrible but is fairly easy to say and to write correctly after having heard it.

I'm sure almost everyone who only hears it would write down "Kaden live".

The real problem is that product naming is really hard given that you don't want your product to be buried under millions of Google results for the same word in a different context, the namespace of easily-remembered names is limited and you ideally want a name that describes your product, as well.

Absolutely. There's a reason there are marketing agencies specialized on just product names.

Open source developers have long just looked for unique names that describe the program and are comfortable to type in a shell. Which is perfectly fine if you don't intend on competing with commercial software as it sidesteps a lot of issues you don't need to optimize for. Once you do compete on the market, however, you should consider a rebranding.

Exactly what I keep saying in this thread: Make up your mind. If you write stuff for yourself and only publish it because others may find it useful, by all means use whatever name makes you feel good about it.
If you write software for the mainstream because you want to immanentize the year of the Linux desktop, you have to do what the mainstream requires, and a good name is just one of those things.

Re:Open source names

[Hognoxious]

Proprietary software can afford to hire a designer to polish their UIs. And even then it's hit or miss.

Not a surprise, if that's the approach they're taking. Usability needs to be designed in from the start, it's not some kind of paint you apply as the last stage.

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I've used Kdenlive once, many moons ago. I still remember what it is. And how it crashed. And how I never looked back (my vote goes to LiVES at teh moment).
So, if you're really going to base it off "anyone", please press the big red "WRONG" button yourself.
(However, I do agree that the K-everything thing is kstupid and ktired and should be kkilled.)

Re:Open source names

[slashqwerty]

• 1984 - MacWrite is released with the first Apple Macintosh. Many other Mac* products follow.
• 1991 - WinZip 1.0 is released. It was probably not the first Win* product but many others followed.
• 1996 - KDE project begins. An entire suite of KDE software follows, most of it named beginning with a K.
• 1997 - Gnome begins along with a suite of apps that begin with G*.
• 1998 - Apple announces the iMac. In 2001 apple begins selling the iPod building on the success of the "i" prefix trademark.
• 2011, Slashdot user Tom (822) accuses KDE of basing the "K" prefix on Apple's "i" prefix.

Prior to the iMac, the prefix identified the operating system. With the iMac, the "i" meant internet.

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

how you can name a free 'clone' of photoshop after what Wikipedia calls "a type of sexual submissive in BDSM who may wear a bondage suit" and expect to be taken seriously

No, I think GIMP is still one of the stupidest of these naming blunders.

from http://www.gimp.org/about/ancient_history.html

GIMP had a lot of neat stuff attached to its first public release, version 0.54 (January 1996). It had an undo feature the likes of which was not found in any known image manipulation program. It had rather frequent crashes, that could be caused by plug-ins or problems in the main code. And GIMP had people making absurd claims that it was already more stable than Photoshop.

They didn't announce grandiose plans for vaporware - Spencer and Peter delivered a product that did something. It was not perfect, but it was an amazing feat for two college programmers without any outside influence.

In one corner....we have two people with a program still being maintained 15 years later...

and the challengers...two people sitting around complaining, wondering why nobody takes them seriously.

My personal belief is they call it the GIMP in reference to you two, and it is quite apt. What do you think?

Re:Open source names

[semi-extrinsic]

If you think this is bad, you obviously haven't tried Awesome WM, with libraries like "Wicked". You try googling for "Awesome Wicked clock widget"...

Re:Open source names

[deathguppie]

I know I'll get modded down, but I feel like I'm the only person who's actually used this software extensively. I have no idea how anyone could claim that KdenLive's interface is difficult to use. It is as simple or even easier to use than a lot of commercial NLE's out there. I was able to figure it out within minutes without looking at a single tutorial.

1:add a clip
2:add another clip
3:drag and drop them onto the editor portion as needed.
4:right click on the clip in the editor to add or subtract or modify effects

You can get to the cut/move all/select from the menu, from the icons to the lower right, or through hot keys. Everything is right in plain sight. If you have an effect selected then the left panel shows the options for that effect. If you are used to using in and out's for you clip cuts you can do that in the viewer before adding it to the editor (or after for that matter).

KdenLive is by far one of the easiest editors I've ever used. It's not as powerful as some but very easy to use.

Re:Open source names

[Kjella]

On the one side there's the evangelists "Linux is so ready for the desktop, almost any hardware is supported, it has replacements for all your software, it's so easy your grandma could do it, there's lot of people in the forums that'll help you." Then it turns out reality isn't so great, a lot of the things you expect on the desktop is broken or missing. And when you ask for help, and it's all "fix it yourself", "its free, you got what you paid for" and "go back to windows if you're so unhappy".

It's like if at the front door there's welcome signs and people welcoming you in for coffee and cookies and inside there's this grumpy old man who'll serve you cold coffee, hard biscuits and if you don't like it sod off. It's no wonder people go like "So why the hell did you invite me in then, when I'm clearly not welcome???" I stuck with it for about three and a half years (late 2007 to early 2011) before I finally said fuck it, I'm tired of being abused, ridiculed and spoken down to and switched to Windows 7.

There's some very nice open source software I still use, but I don't think I'll ever go back to a Linux distro. They've drunk waaaaaay too much of the koolaid. It's like coming to the Amish, they have everything they want for their society but people from the outside like me want more and other things. It's like "This is enough for us, then it should be enough for you. If you're so unhappy with it and want fancy things like electricity, go back to the big city." Funny that, most choose to not live the Amish way...

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

how much would you like to wager? btw, you may want to look up the release date of pulp fiction...

Re:Open source names

[salesgeek]

If it's good software and you call it Eye Dee Ten Tee, people will still use it & like it. I think you were trying to make a point. Oh, yes, that you remember names that you like.

Re:Open source names

[salesgeek]

And if you give it for free to the world, they can adapt to your style or die for all you care, because in the end you're writing the thing for your own need.
I could be a dick and not share at all.

What too few people have realized is that Free Software (or open source, whatever term works for you) is a horrible development model for software you write exclusively for other people.
That's why no one uses MySQL, Apache, Joomla, WordPress, Thunderbird, Firefox, any browser with Webkit (Safari, Android, Chrome) in it (which is a fork of the browser component from Konqueror), or OpenOffice, right? Please. People use Open Source stuff all the time. It's not different than commercial software, some of it sucks, and some of it is amazing.

Look around yourself and you'll notice how most Free Software is seriously lacking in UI design.
If you want to fix user interfaces, then go help a project fix their craptacular GUI. Seriously. People actually would appreciate your contribution.

Re:Open source names

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm, yeah. I'm going to take advice from the same asshole that said Kdenlive was as good of a name as Vegas? I see at least 12 others who called out that bullshit for what it was. There is NO FUCKING WAY you can be a competent salesmen. You don't seem to understand the basics of giving people something they like, want, and need. Take your bullshit somewhere else.

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

Woah, easy there.

I'm as much an advocate of F/OSS as anybody else. I'm constantly posting links to RMS's Right to Read. I use Ubuntu as my (only) desktops.

But Linux won't be improved by sweeping away the problems. Partly it's due to hardware manufacturers, but we have to deal with it anyway.

Just the other week, I finally found out how to suspend without being permanently stuck suspended. It has to do with /etc/modprobe.conf.local, and, yes, kernel modules. $lsmod |grep agp confirms whether the module has been unloaded.
http://old-en.opensuse.org/NVidia_Suspend_HOWTO

And the way I suspend is:
$sudo s2ram -f --vbe_save

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

While I agree with you on having good names for FOSS software (sic), I think kdenlive is actually one of the better ones. I think it could use a capitalization fix, though:
kdEnlive (maybe with the kd in small caps).

Enlive is a very good name for a movie editor. The meaning should be pretty easy to grasp, if somewhat under the surface: You're taking some footage and enlivening it.

As good as Maya, which is named after the Sanskrit word for illusion.

In front of that you have a letter or two which is supposed to stand for something or another, but doesn't really matter.

KDE Enlive => kdEnlive
Internet Movie => iMovie

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

You can safely disregard anybody who disses Ubuntu because they've taken just a bit of extra time to make sure various components work together. And I don't think most Gentoo users care that someone's using Ubuntu as a gentle introduction.

The complaints about Unity and Gnome3 were that they would actually make things harder for most newbs.

Since most people already know how to use Windows unless they're the Unabomber, why go out of your way to make things gratuitously different? And losing discoverability (a key point for noobs), along the way?

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

rdf, bro

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

>In 2001 apple begins selling the iPod building on the success of the "i" prefix trademark.

Wait, Apple has a trademark on the letter i? When did that happen? And why did Apple have to give consideration in order to get the iPhone mark from Cisco if it already owned the letter I?

I have to say it was quite generous of Apple to let us non black turtleneck wearers have the other 25 letters of the alphabet so we can still talk about e-mail, e-commerce, m-commerce, a-bombs, h-bombs, and so on.

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

Woe that I commented in this thread!

Somebody mod this funny.

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

"k-den-live"

Really?

I'd say "Kay Dee Enlive", which, imho, also gets across the point of it having to do with art/multimedia.

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

Follow-up: Enlive is in the dictionary:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/enlive
n*live"\, v. t. [Pref. en- + live, a.] To enliven

Re:Open source names

[605dave]

Alright, I guess that makes sense. So why not just call it Enliven? why the Kd thing? (yes its part of the K scheme, but that's my point)

And for the record, I am not a troll. I was honestly trying to start a conversation about how open source programs shoot themselves in the foot marketing wise. I should tone down my snarkiness next time, so that the real issue can be debated.

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

It's unfortunate your original post was marked troll.

Hopefully you can open up a bug on the kdenlive.org website to put a bigger focus on the "enlive" part of the name. And I'll second it.

Re:Open source names

[mcgrew]

No OS is perfect, and no OS is for everybody, and I do have technical trouble with Linux from time to time. But the "you have to use a command prompt" is just stupidly incorrect. Only someone who hasn't tried Linux in over 10 years, or a troll, would make that statement.

Re:Open source names

[mcgrew]

Excellent troll, son. Again, "Yes maam, just load that kernel module dynamically using the following easy command, making sure you have root on your box...." is total bullshit and you know it if you've run any modern distro in the last ten years. Yes, there are technical problems with Linux but your post was so over the top that it was nothing BUT a troll.

And unintuitive? You press the "start" button to shut down is intuitive? That's Windows. Linux is IMO more intuitive (for most tasks) than Windows. When I had an Acer Aspire One it took me three weeks to figure out how to turn off the stupid "tap to click" mouseboard feature in Windows, and that was after asking slashdotters for help with it. It was about twenty mouse clicks five menus deep. It took me less than five minutes in kubuntu.

My issues with the wireless card are after install, when it's sitting at the desktop having *not installed my wireless drivers correctly during the smooth install process* that were working *perfectly* from the Live CD, and my subsequent attempts to reinstall and tweak them.

I had the same problem with Windows when I installed XP ten years ago. The first Windows update replaced my perfectly good network driver with one that was completely nonfunctional. It took a lot of tech support from both my ISP and Mocrosoft, and it all was in vain. I discovered the solution to the problem by accident; I was all set to buy a new network card.

As to getting help, I never had any trouble when asking for help, but I suspect it's the old "you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar". If you get on a message board and talk about how useless and shitty Linux is because your wifi driver doesn't work, you're going to catch hell for it.

As to Apple, IMO it's superior to both Windows and Linux. Its only drawback is its cost.

Re:Open source names

[jo_ham]

You clearly missed the "exaggeration for comic effect" with that comment, but the point still stands - there is a lot of messing with the command line for some estoteric tasks (like, fixing the wireless).

You also suspect wrong, re more flies with honey than vinegar - I am unfailingly polite when asking for help. What, you think I'm a total idiot? It doesn't have much effect on the way I'm treated in return though.

Re:Open source names

[Jesus_666]

I might not have chosen that pronounciation because I was unaware that "enlive" is a word. I know "enliven" but I wouldn't immediately think of that given "kdenlive".

Of course "enlive" could be the name of a different product but in that case I would really shy away from that name. Putting a competitor's name into your product name is a fairly risky move.

Re:Open source names

[Compaqt]

Well, the only product Google seems to show for "enlive" is nutritional supplements, I think we should be good, since it's in a different industry category:

http://abbottnutrition.com/Products/Enlive

Re:Open source names

[salesgeek]

Here's a little sales lesson for you: Giving people something that they like, want and need is the dream. It's what we all want to do in an ideal world that we don't live in. Reality is you go to market with the products you have, warts and all. We have a name for people who take their products and present them as they are perfect, without fault and capable of solving all problems: snake oil salesmen.

Regardless, I'm glad you have an opinion and are willing to share it. Your delivery is amateurish, and discounts your opinion.

How about making it stable first

[JewGold]

Before working to add new features, why not first make it so you can use it for 5 minutes without it segfaulting? How about making it so your savefiles aren't constantly becoming corrupt? Kdenlive shows great promise, but it's the least stable piece of software I've ever used.

Re:How about making it stable first

[jsprenkle]

Thanks! I wondered about the quality of this thing. I recently went looking for one of these. Of the ones I tried on Ubuntu they were almost completely worthless. Crash a lot, can't read anything but a one format file from cameras, the interface is so horrid only the author can figure it out, etc.

Re:How about making it stable first

[Anonymous Coward]

I haven't found this to be so, at least not using Archlinux on an amd 64 bit platform. I've edited a couple of music videos for myself to post on YouTube and spent at least a couple of hours editing on each. I did have two crashes that I could remember, both while just testing effects to see what they were, so they didn't cause too much pain. I haven't tested 0.8 yet, but will try it soon. I would say to upgrade all libs and dependencies and see whether it will run better, or pull a bit of disk space for an Archlinux install - nice bleeding edge but mostly seems to work distro.

Re:How about making it stable first

[Anonymous Coward]

For what it's worth, I've been using kdenlive for a few projects recently and have not had any stability problems at all. I'm using Fedora 14 (installed kdenlive 0.7.7.1-1 from rpmfusion). I have friends who crash constantly on Ubuntu 10. This guy seems to be using OpenSUSE. I wonder if the stability problems are related to the version in the distro or some other related package. YMMV

Re:How about making it stable first

[Urza9814]

Maybe it's specific to your distro. Works great for me on Arch. But I switched from Mandriva a couple months ago, and have noticed a couple programs that I used to think were somewhat buggy suddenly run flawlessly...

Re:How about making it stable first

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea- the big problems is not the ease of use any more. It is the stability. I use to use kino. It worked pretty well once they got to 1.0. It was fairly stable. Until that time though it was horrible although usable for a techy. Now I use OpenShot. It's pretty stable and really really really easy to use. My mom uses it. Though she did have trouble getting a DV camera hooked up and importing video. We also don't have a great (although we do have a workable) solution to burning DVDs. It would be nice if both these features were added to a stable video editing package. I realize that DV video has disappeared. She initially didn't even use DV. She learned with regular AVI files on SD cards. She's gotten pretty good too. Though the other day she needed me to help her get the DV content from the camera onto the system. What worked was the old old kino program surprisingly. The newer kdenlive just wasn't workable (stable) enough to utilize. I'm not sure how much of the problem is the lack of maintenance in the GNU/Linux distributions and how much is the code itself. Unfortunately video editing applications don't seem to be high on the priority list of companies like Canonical. What I still don't get is why Canonical bundles a shity video editor. I actually know why. It is smaller than gimp, eliminates makes all bundled apps have a standard save/open dialog box for consistency without them doing real work.

Re:How about making it stable first

[bill_mcgonigle]

Nope, crashy here on Fedora x86_64. Are you i686?

Re:How about making it stable first

[KugelKurt]

Before working to add new features, why not first make it so you can use it for 5 minutes without it segfaulting? How about making it so your savefiles aren't constantly becoming corrupt? Kdenlive shows great promise, but it's the least stable piece of software I've ever used.

Maybe you should get around the concept of what leading zeros in version numbers mean.
If you want the project to reach stable state earlier, hire one or more of its developers. Or at least donate some money.

NLEs etc, Linux, *deep sigh*

[Anonymous Coward]

Annoyingly, the painful to use NLE in blender is still more stable. Saying Kdenlive is the best NLE for linux is still not saying much unfortunately. All those 'advanced' features have been available on non-linux NLEs for many years now. Not that that's a problem, I do all my comp, roto and tracking work in Nuke which runs really well on Linux. I just want a simple NLE, that won't crash, that has basic functions I can actually rely on, and can work with HD footage. PiTiVi is the closest to a good linux NLE imo, KDenlive regularly fell over, sometimes just when dragging large clips. I mean, there are all those nifty gnonlin bits in the gstreamer library to make writing a decent NLE in Linux a lot easier, but it still seems to be mission impossible on Linux. I was holding out hope for Lightworks when it went open source, but then they shipped it for windows first, and that beta is completely unusable. Hey-ho, got to keep that windows partition for either Premiere or Vegas.

Can those who own it please open source Speedrazor and make a very old video editor really bloody happy ? If you want to do serious compositing then a node based app like Nuke, Shake and Fusion make so much more sense, we just want rock solid editing out of our NLEs and nothing much else frankly. After Effects is a bloody mess, trying to copy/compete with it is madness, NLEs should be for EDITING.

Disclaimer : I've not breathed near Kdenlive for about six months, who knows, maybe it doesn't collapse in a heap so often now.

Re:NLEs etc, Linux, *deep sigh*

[infolation]

The most promising vendor for developing a simple, stable linux NLE in the near future is actually probably The Foundry judging by their development with Storm, TweakRV integration, and EDL conforming. Which is ironic considering your comments on Nuke.

Not really

[PopeRatzo]

This is somewhat ironic given the heavy use of Linux in major Hollywood blockbuster film production.

"Heavy use" is a huge overstatement. Yes, there have been some notable films in which special Linux applications played a part, but I don't think there's been a single "blockbuster" that was produced on Linux gear start-to-finish. I would be surprised if there was a single big-budget film that used Linux for the audio work.

I'm not saying the day will never come, but it's not there yet.

Re:Not really

[Anonymous Coward]

God yes, good audio apps are even more lacking than stable NLEs on Linux. Seriously, all the good VFX and 3D CGI software does run well under Linux, its just in the areas of editing and the audio where there is a massive hole. Granted I am talking about commercial software, Nuke, Maya, Houdini etc. I posted earlier begging that whoever owns Speedrazor to open source it, but on second thoughts, just sell it to The Foundry, I'll happily pay good money to have a stable NLE.

Re:Not really

[andybabin]

A lot of the high end editing and finishing systems (Davinci resolve, anything autodesk, apple shake (old), maya, etc) as well as a lot of sound gear (namely the midas xl8) have their OS based on the linux kernel. The apps cost 6 figures and are mostly NOT open source, however. Most of pixar's stuff is nix based as well

All the high end autodesk feature film finishing apps require redhat or centOS: http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/item?id=16477734&siteID=123112

Lots of feature films rely heavily on linux, just not on the open source aspect of it. Linux as an OS is very good at handling the very large data sets that thousands of 2k and 4k film scan files are, they also scale way nicer than any windows of mac OS based system ever will. For the right price there are several of the above mentioned companies that will send you a totally closed linux box that "just works" much like apple was years ago, on a way higher level though. I don't even know if they'll give you the root password.

Re:Not really

[iluvcapra]

I've been doing sound effects in Los Angeles for 10 years now, worked on two of the Spider-Mans, Battle: Los Angles and The Hurt Locker among 60 or so other films, at Sony, Fox, Disney and Paramount, and I've never heard of a Midas xl8, and I've never seen a Linux platform on any video or sound editing system, ever -- Final Cut is quite happy to handle 2k and 4k files, all the RED tools are Mac and PC only, and write QuickTime files. Everybody uses Macs, and occasionally you meet a Windows user who wants to prove a point. Most Maya and CGI people I know run Windows if they have a choice. Linux runs the render farm, but you could switch it out tomorrow with a licensed *nix and the only people who'd notice was the accounting department.

Not to say that it's impossible for Linux to get a toehold in these markets, but even though we use computer all day, we aren't ricers who want to tweak every little thing -- we have money and we want the cheapest thing that works best, and not have to worry about distributions, or wether or not my kernel's is using the realtime scheduler (or which one?), and there's no one out there that offers any kind of support for professional Linux multimedia applications, albeit because those applications don't exist.

Re:Not really

[Locutus]

Speedrazor was owned by Matrox so send them an email and maybe get the ball rolling. It's not listed as a current product and the press release I found was from 1998.

LoB

Re:Not really

[Elbows]

Video editing is one thing -- I agree that's mostly owned by Final Cut and Avid which run on Mac (and Windows in the latter case). But for compositing and effects work Linux is used heavily. Flame (which used to be the gold standard for compositing before Autodesk bought it and started running it into the ground) runs only on Linux, and Nuke supports Linux as well.

If you go into a place like ILM or Sony Pictures Imageworks you'll see a lot of linux client machines. And their render farms are typically all Linux. I speak from personal experience as my employer makes good money selling Linux software to these kinds of places.

Re:Not really

[iluvcapra]

I dunno, a friend of mine is a compositor team lead for Imageworks in LA here, working on Green Lantern at the moment, and his rig is Windows 7. Do you have a lot of interaction with the artists?

Interesting sort of coincidence that the applicability of Linux software to your job seems to correlate with the propensity for your job to be offshored, huh?

Re:Not really

[Elbows]

I've seen demos of linux client software developed in-house at Imageworks, so they're definitely using it so some extent. But it probably varies depending on the team and job. Some of the high-end shops are almost entirely linux, others have more of a mix.

I get out on customer visits once or twice a year, and have some phone/email interactions from time to time, too.

Re:Not really

[rkww]

Uncompressed 4k film comes out at more than a gigabyte per second. It takes a fair amount of hardware (e.g. striping across 128 disks) to process (e.g. cross-fade between, in software) multiple 4k streams on the fly, but it can be done. See e.g. BaseLight used for film finishing. It has its own CentOS-derived Linux distribution, primarily for its xfs support.

Disclaimer - I work for FilmLight.

Re:Not really

[Urza9814]

Disney, Pixar, Dreamworks:
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/05/07/27/1551250/Disney-DreamWorks-Pixar-Go-Linux

1500 desktops and 3500 servers at Dreamworks alone running Linux. Sure, they probably don't do _EVERYTHING_ on Linux, but it's certainly a huge part of their operations. They obviously don't do _EVERYTHING_ on Windows or Mac either. With those numbers, it seems fair to say that there is heavy use of Linux in production...

Re:Not really

[juosukai]

I guess you really don't know much compositors or colour graders, then?

A lot of grunt work is being done on Windows machines (though I would rather run Nuke on Linux), and most work in feature films is grunt work. High End Grading and client driven compositing and finishing is much more demanding, and there you will still see a lot more Linux rigs (Flame, Baselight, Lustre, Resolve, Smoke Adv. etc.). Sure, there are some things that run on Windows (Quantel iQ, but that hardly uses the host computer for anything, they rely mainly on their own hardware), but even less on a mac (there is still a difference in speed there, a good Flame artist can still do things in real time that a Nuke artist just cant coax out of the machine).

I'd say that the advanced Linux systems that Autodesk sells are not for tweakers, they come with a very strict setup that the artist really shouldn't do anything about. Yes, they do come with a root password, and I have gone as far as running some of my own administration scripts there, but I really try to leave them be. The systems are quite limited in compared to a multipurpose editing machine on mac (in terms of running other programs, moving media from different drives, even support for different file formats is limited). There is also less risk of the artist trying to administer his own system and rendering it unusable (yes, this has happened to me with both win and mac machines, my own fault for giving them admin privileges). A well configured Flame/Smoke/Baselight requires no OS tweaking and is more stable than a normally configured (and used) Mac or Windows box.

The only place where Linux has no foothold is audio.

Also, the expensive systems mentioned above are mainly used for client driven work, where you have the director and DOP looking over your shoulder and asking if the sparks from the car could be a bit more like that and the colour in the actors face could be a little more like this etc. As long as some clients are still willing to pay silly money for a flame suite, people will keep buying them and using them.

Re:Not really

[infolation]

its just in the areas of editing and the audio where there is a massive hole

Except in the high end - i.e Smoke. And for anything beyond commercials, that's normally as a conforming tool, rather than an editing app.

Re:Not really

[internettoughguy]

Weta Digital, also.

Re:Not really

[PopeRatzo]

I've been doing sound effects in Los Angeles for 10 years now, worked on two of the Spider-Mans, Battle: Los Angles and The Hurt Locker among 60 or so other films, at Sony, Fox, Disney and Paramount, and I've never heard of a Midas xl8

But these folks have a link to a web article that says otherwise, so you'll just have to accept that your (and my) personal experience is unreliable next to such formidable evidence.

and I've never seen a Linux platform on any video or sound editing system, ever

I do a fair amount of commercial work every year for some pretty high-end sound outfits and that is also my experience. And believe me, as a fan of Linux, I have tried very hard to find Linux platforms in sound studios. I have tried very hard to implement Linux platforms in sound studios. I have seen exactly one of the Midas xl8 consoles used in a live venue in the UK but have never heard of one used on a feature film though I suppose it's possible that if there's a film (video) of a live Kings of Leon show they might have used one but only by the people doing sound reinforcement for the band, not the video outfit.

I've managed to get Linux platforms working very well in electronic music labs at a couple of universities, though, including the one at my own institution. I've got one that I use right here in my home studio. However, the best I've been able to do and get really satisfying results and workflow is use them to stream samples and other data to my production systems (mac and pc) and to offload rendering and real time effect processing chores using ReaMote in the excellent Reaper DAW. I have had great success with the latter and wouldn't work without it. But not yet with Linux audio production from top to bottom, despite my best efforts and boosterism.

Re:Not really

[PopeRatzo]

See e.g. BaseLight used for film finishing. It has its own CentOS-derived Linux distribution, primarily for its xfs support.

See, this makes some sense to me. I can imagine that there are lots of turnkey systems that are based on Linux kernels that are used in effects work and finishing.

I don't believe you'd see much that is recognizable as Linux in an editing suite though. Not yet. And nothing in audio. Again, not yet.

Re:Not really

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of the big Hollywood houses [ilm,dreamworks,weta] use Linux for the vast majority of their pipelines from about the time of Shrek 1 onwards before that it was Irix. For CGI features the vast majority of the work is in 3D,Rendering and Compositing which is done mostly on the linux platform. Video Editing and some of the 2D might be done on other platforms.
Off the top shelf software used in production includes Houdini, PRMan, Maya, XSI, MudBox, Mari & Nuke3.

Most Live Action films use Compositing quite heavily

Smaller studios are much less likely to use Linux in their pipeline.

Re:Not really

[Anonymous Coward]

This is somewhat ironic given the heavy use of Linux in major Hollywood blockbuster film production.

"Heavy use" is a huge overstatement. Yes, there have been some notable films in which special Linux applications played a part, but I don't think there's been a single "blockbuster" that was produced on Linux gear start-to-finish. I would be surprised if there was a single big-budget film that used Linux for the audio work.

I'm not saying the day will never come, but it's not there yet.

That day will never come. No big Hollywood blockbuster will arbitrarily use a single platform from "start-to-finish." There are simply too many companies involved for that to be practical. That said, pretty much every major film uses Linux for major parts of the visual effects pipeline. Maya and Nuke on Linux are about as common when doing film effects as popcorn is when watching them. Things like Smoke, Flame, and DaVinci Resolve have stripped down "lite" versions for OS-X, but the full version only run on Linux. VFX pipelines today basically all come from a history of Irix. (MPC, for example, still mounts home directories in /usr/people.)

So, yeah, I think it's really fair to say that there is heavy use of Linux in Hollywood.

That said, most editing isn't Linux. For some reason, a lot of people seem to lump VFX in with editing, but most VFX artists never meet the film's editor. They probably don't work for the same company, and it's not surprising that they would use different tool sets. Avid still rules in film, but Final Cut on OS-X is fairly well respected. Smoke has a niche, but tends to be used for cutting shorter things like commercials. (Though I imagine some films are probably cut on Smoke.)

Broadcast is mostly Windows. Commercials is where OS-X is the strongest. But, if you are talking number of CPU hours used in film, the overwhelming majority happen on Linux boxes.

(Said as an Engineer / Linux + OS-X Admin / TD who commutes through Hollywood every day, and the most recent film he worked on was the new Fast and the Furious. It may not have had a plot, but IMHO, it certainly counts as "major Hollywood blockbuster" type of film...)

Somewhat ironic?

[kenh]

From the above article:

"This is somewhat ironic given the heavy use of Linux in major Hollywood blockbuster film production."

No, it isn't - he is confusing a render farm with an editing deck - a film could easily have a thousand machines in it's render farm, but it is a rare film that uses more than a handful of editing decks. Typically you can count them on one hand, and have enough fingers left to go bowling with...

That throw-away line in his post above prevents me from thinking his "overview" of consumer-level editing of video on Linux will be anything worth spending time on.

Re:Somewhat ironic?

[Sycraft-fu]

No kidding. The big NLEs that I'm aware of are Avid Media Composer (Windows and OS-X), Adobe Premiere (Windows and OS-X), Final Cut Pro (OS-X), and Sony Vegas (Windows). As noted, none of them run in Linux.

Also just because you find Linux behind something in a pro field, it does not mean it is "ironic" that you don't see it in a similar consumer field. Where Linux excels is embedded applications. Basically if you have a specialized setup with specialized hardware that is dedicated to a purpose, Linux is a good choice for a basic interface to put under that. It is free, open, and (relatively) easy to customize to what you need.

However that has nothing at all to do with consumer Linux desktops. The software built to run as an exclusive app with special hardware is not something that'll run on a regular desktop.

So even if you can find special dedicated purpose Linux systems in Hollywood, that doesn't mean that they could take that software and release it as-is commercially for normal Linux desktops.

Re:Somewhat ironic?

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember working in a post production house some years ago and they were using Discreet editing and compositing applications that ran only on Linux and were very, very, very high-end.

Re:Somewhat ironic?

[Anonymous Coward]

I work for a major film studio and we have thousands of Linux servers in our data center(s), over a thousand Linux desktops, and you need more than one hand to count the edit suites.

But true, nobody there uses open source editing tools like this one. Other studios will vary of course.

Re:Somewhat ironic?

[Anonymous Coward]

How about the Autodesk Flame package? It started its life on IRIX, but I believe it's Linux software these days. You don't hear too much about it, but that's more because it's hideously expensive than because it's not good enough.

Re:Somewhat ironic?

[Phil06]

Jurassic Park

Re:Somewhat ironic?

[linuxpyro]

There is some confusion here, because Linux's use in this area is mainly for visual effects, which is different from editing. Of course Linux is used on renderfarms mostly, but it is also used on the desktop for things like compositing and 3D work. In fact, work on Avatar was mostly done on Ubuntu (the article mostly talks about their render farm, but also mentions desktops).

That said, I think some high-end editing systems do run Linux, like Flame which has been mentioned here.

Re:Somewhat ironic?

[Anonymous Coward]

A bit wrong. Autodesk software (Smoke, etc) runs on Linux. http://usa.autodesk.com/media-entertainment/film/

Also a lot of DI/colour correction/compositing (like Da Vinci Resolve http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/davinciresolve) is done on linux. I know, that its not editing, but for the high-end and "exotic" tasks it's easier to find Linux software than Windows and OS X software.

Marten

Re:Somewhat ironic?

[juosukai]

Smoke. Smoke runs on a mac, but Smoke Advanced (linux) is still ahead in some ways.

Sure, Smoke is not just an editor, (they like to call it a finishing tool), but I have seen very many features and spots onlined in Smoke.

Re:Somewhat ironic?

[Anonymous Coward]

GNU/Linux is getting allot of attention from non-techy users. I don't know how on earth the statistics don't represent the real user base. That isn't entirely true. I do know why. Partially at least. Everybody is using GNU/Linux on the desktop these days but with MS Windows hardware. I think the issue is mainly people right now are using Microsoft Windows computers they have purchased and then converting them to GNU/Linux. It doesn't work that well. None-the-less people are doing it. Unfortunately we don't have enough people buying GNU/Linux systems. ThinkPenguin is the only company even focusing on the desktop market. Couple years old. Linspire/Lindows, Corel, and others failed for one reason or another. Though ThinkPenguin isn't. So that is good news. I think it is going to take a smaller company to get the GNU/Linux Desktop into the hands of the masses. It isn't going to be Dell. And whoever does it is going to be extremely involved in enhancing GNU/Linux desktop applications and services in addition to just selling GNU/Linux computers or just producing a distribution. That is why GNU/Linux hasn't taken off. People have to have a source for your products.

arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year ago

[IYagami]

http://arstechnica.com/open-source/guides/2010/01/video-editing-in-linux-a-look-at-pitivi-and-kdenlive.ars

Conclusion

Demand for video editing tools is only going to increase. This is an area where Linux desperately needs to be competitive if there's hope for the Linux desktop going mainstream anytime soon.

PiViTi and Kdenlive show promise, but neither application is fully "there" just yet. PiTiVi is stable and intuitive, but lacks features. Kdenlive is very feature-rich, but needs to be stabilized just a bit; and some work could be done to make it more user-friendly. My first recommendation for doing video editing on Linux is definitely Kdenlive at this stage, though. It may not be as capable as a tool like, say, Final Cut Pro, but it does have most if not all of what many users need from a video editing application.

Progress is being made, but some work is needed to take these applications the "last mile" to be entirely suitable for mainstream use.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[Anonymous Coward]

As you said ... conclusions from that review are a year out of date.

The latest version of Kdenlive, which this Slashdot thread happens to be about, is a significant improvement over previous versions, one of which Ars Technica reviewed a year ago.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[inflex]

This is an area where Linux desperately needs to be competitive if there's hope for the Linux desktop going mainstream anytime soon.

Okay, look, I know we all believe that we know what's best for the market and what's in demand - but I am so sick of hearing this line pulled out. "What Linux really needs is ***** if it's to become acceptable in the mainstream". The reality is that there's no single app that will propel Linux into the mainstream magically, the best we can do is just continue to improve where we can and as we do we pick up more and more converts. We are long past a position where a single application will suddenly make Linux mainstream. For every application/area you knock off that list there will always be another one that raises its head.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be doing our best to deliver great new apps of good stability and functionality (like Inkscape, Scribus etc), I'm saying that the sky isn't falling if we don't deliver X Y or Z.

Paul.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[Seeteufel]

Video editors are a must. I don't miss anything else.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not saying we shouldn't be doing our best to deliver great new apps of good stability and functionality (like Inkscape, Scribus etc), I'm saying that the sky isn't falling if we don't deliver X Y or Z.

Paul.

A fairish point, however, why do I and many others who do creative video, animation and sound work spend more time in windows ? Apps.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[grumbel]

The reality is that there's no single app that will propel Linux into the mainstream magically,

A single up won't make Linux mainstream, but not having that single app can very certainly hold it back from ever getting there, as people want an OS that can serve all their needs, not just 90%. The second you give people a reason to boot back into Windows, Linux will become that toy OS again with which they might play around once in a while, but which they won't actually ever use for their daily use.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[inflex]

Video editors are a must. I don't miss anything else.

For you, yes - but that's not mainstream in a global user sense. You want it to be, but it isn't. Yes a lot of people would love a good NLVE, myself included (I even bought a copy of MainActor for Linux before the bastards took it away - still it crashed more frequently than even Kdenlive!) but it's not something that'll stop everyone migrating to Linux (just like the lack of 100% VBA script compatibility in LibreOffice doesn't stop people migrating), hell most people have no idea what a NLVE is, let alone use one.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[Seeteufel]

I never used or wanted to use Mainactor. Actually I would be happy with Pinnacle Studio Videospin, the freeware version. Until recently there was no comparable video editor available at all and no usable way to edit videos on Linux.

Hollywood and Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

A bit criticizing them, a bit just being curious: besides FilmGimp/CinePaint, they contributed something else back? I don't expect they buy Maya and release it with a BSD license, but I guess they have tweaks to other FOSS apps, and also some in-house stuff.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[inflex]

Maybe it's the developer in me. One becomes proficient with eye-rolling every time someone vouches for their wanted feature "because without it your software will not become mainstream". It's a self-serving tactic, trying to get what you want by pushing the fear of obscurity, which likely just takes time away from more needed work. We all have different ways of trying to coax the world to our bidding, that one tends to make me put it into the last position in the consideration queue. It happens in all areas, software, electronics development, hell even model aircraft design and most of the time where people have succumbed to the whims, it turns out the 'feature' really didn't make as big an impact as portrayed.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[inflex]

Good thing you didn't go with MA... the demo seemed to work okay... but the production version was like trying to stop a jello mould from wobbling. It wasn't the first or last Linux package I've ever purchased (Closed and Open) but it was certainly the worst purchase.

Going Mainstream

[oldmeddler]

If "going mainstream" means looking and acting more like Windows, then No!, thanks. I'm already pissed at default double-click, having to use Ctrl C and Ctrl V in Open Office, and putting the reload button on the location bar in Firefox. Please don't dumb down Linux any further. A decent Gnome video editor would be nice, though.

Re:Going Mainstream

[Compaqt]

Huh? I just copied your comment from the browser, opened up OOWriter, and hit Shift+Insert to paste it.

I don't disagree about double-click. In Nautilus, I have it set to use single click. After all, moving around in folders is one of the most common operations. Why force users to click endlessly?

The problem, though, is that the File Open dialog is still single click. This is where Windows get its right over Linux: If you go to single-click in Explorer, it's single click in the file dialogs, too.

While I'm ranting, anyone every notice how hard Linux (of whatever persuasion) is to use without a mouse? Disconnect your mouse one fine day (as if it were broken), and see if you can do common tasks (like access the panel buttons to be able to log off!). There are a lot of other problems, too, which you'll see if you disconnect the mouse.

Ironic since we're always talking about the way of the keyboard being superior.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[moonbender]

There's also OpenShot and, at some point, Lombard. I initially used PiTiVi but I found OpenShot to be superior in most ways, though PiTiVi's UI is a bit more polished (but then, it just does a lot less). Just installed Kdenlive, and it looks fantastic, I'll try that the next time around. For instance, it apparently supports freezing a frame out-of-the-box, something neither PiTiVi nor OpenShot can do AFAIK. Hmm... actually, I guess you can set the speed to 0x in OpenShot, that'd should accomplish the same thing.

Demand

[nekohayo]

There are many reasons why consumer/prosumer video editing for Linux still isn't there yet, and not moving at a very rapid pace. If my talk proposal is accepted, I'll be presenting them in detail at Libre Graphics Meeting next week (there should be a video recording of the talk afterwards). Off the top of my head, I can give you some broad clues: the very small market of Linux desktop users (1.5%) combined with the small percentage of computer users who actually do video editing, combined with the very small percentage of those who know programming, combined with the incredibly hard task that is making a full-fledged, stable video editor, combined with the general lack of economic incentives for it. Oh, and the fact that everyone keeps trying to reinvent the wheel.

Re:Demand

[drinkypoo]

Oh, and the fact that everyone keeps trying to reinvent the wheel.

Ugh yes. Every time I go to look for NLE for Linux I try everything I can find. Every time there's more tools than there were before. Every time they are all crashy or inscrutable and undocumented, or both. I sure wish we'd had more training in cooperation in school and less in competition. I know I'm not the only one around these parts who found that taking over groups was the only way to get shit done and there was always tons of dead weight that refused to get on board no matter who was leading. But having to run everything all the time is poor preparation for knowing when to let go...

Kdenlive is great

[supersloshy]

I've been using Kdenlive ever since it's port to Qt4, and it works very, very well. It has tons of options and effects, so even the most novice users can make something nice with a little effort. It has a bit of a leaning curve, but any "pro" software usually does. It fits in well with my desktop and Pulseaudio, even though I use GNOME and not KDE. If you've given up on video editing for Linux and haven't tried Kdenlive, you really should try it. It's not the most feature-filled editor, but it's great for casual and semi-pro users. And by great, I mean fantastic!

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[Anonymous Coward]

>

Progress is being made, but some work is needed to take these applications the "last mile" to be entirely suitable for mainstream use.

Didn't you hear? Nowadays, unix includes this wonderful video app targeted at mainstream users straight out of the box: /dev/null.

"mainstream" video editing? balony.

HD editing

[Wowsers]

I like Kdenlive, but I can't edit most over-the-air HD content. Most of the time when I import the video clip, the video is white (effectively no video), but there is audio.

Video plays in Xine (but audio messes up) and VLC after a brief stutter at the start plays the audio and video perfectly.

Despite posting samples from videos, nobody has come up as to why Kdenlive does this. I can only guess that the software starts recording in the wrong part of a GOP, and that's what is screwing up the playback / editing of video. It's also strange because Kdenlive will edit my HD video camera footage without problem.

Having said that, Avidemux is good basic editing apart from MPEG4 footage where it cannot keep frame accuracy with audio (keeps on warning to accept or reject it's recommendations on file opening, but makes no difference).

I suppose it's easier to summarise that video editing software is still a bit of a black art.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[jedidiah]

> Video editors are a must. I don't miss anything else.

That said. Any video editor should take the user's stuff in whatever form it come in and not give them any grief. It should "just work".

This is one of those areas where Macs intentionally make themselves more limited/difficult than Windows or even Linux.

Don't just focus on what might be a bad product with too much hype behind it. Also see what could use improvement.

Openshot

[sakti]

I don't do much video editing, but another one I've read is supposed to be decent is openshot.

http://www.openshotvideo.com/

They are at version 1.3 and have nice documentation.

Re:Openshot

[Timmmm]

I've tried it. It's still about as far from usable as Kdenlive, Cinellera, and the others.

In fact the only video editor I've used on linux that remotely works is blender. It still has a few issues but it is *much* closer to a proper solution than any of the others.

Re:Openshot

[deathguppie]

Hey, I've used openshot, lives, cinnelerra, kino.. and KdenLive is by far the most versatile with the exception of blender which is far beyond the scope of most normal users. To be honest with you this thread seems a bit like a hack job, and in some ways really insulting to the creators of KdenLive, and to anyone who's actually used it.
Try it out though, if you've used openshot, you'll feel right at home.

What about Linear Editing?

[Skinkie]

What are currently the options of linear video editors available on Linux? I know there is dvswitch, but any competing projects in that direction?

Nope, just checked. Still sucks.

[Anonymous Coward]

All of the Linux NLEs are a real joke compared to any of the real ones. These programs can't even handle a 2 minute clip much less a 2 hour movie.

Add in the pathetic codec support and having to use FUCKING COMMAND LINE UTILITIES to convert video means linux + video = hot garbage.

On the 3d side its great, why use windows. Even compositing has nuke. A good NLE isn't happening for years unless someone from win/mac ports it.

Re:Nope, just checked. Still sucks.

[Skinkie]

Ever tried Cinellera? Already years and years support for true HD editing and intermediate editing, before any Windows program allowed mortals to do so. Next to that, your 3d site program - Blender3D - also includes an NLE.

Re:Nope, just checked. Still sucks.

[Master of Transhuman]

And by all reviews I've ever seen, massively unstable - even compared to Adobe crap. And still doesn't support anywhere near the features of Adobe Premiere or Final Cut Pro.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[westlake]

'm not saying we shouldn't be doing our best to deliver great new apps of good stability and functionality (like Inkscape, Scribus etc), I'm saying that the sky isn't falling if we don't deliver X Y or Z.

The problem here is that Inkscape, Scribus, and the rest, are routinely ported to Windows or begin as a native Windows app. There is no compelling reason to migrate to Linux.

"PiTiVi" hurts my eyes - and "Pitiful Video" is an all too plausible mnemonic. I have never understood why the FOSS dveloper insists on shooting himself in the foot.

dci digital cinema?

[innocent_white_lamb]

I would be extremely interested in this if it could create and save digital cinema files for professional digital projector/servers for movie theatres. For creating custom policy trailers and pre-show ads.

NLV editing?

[Anonymous Coward]

North Las Vegas editing?
Nikolaev airport editing?
Norwalk-like virus editing?
National Library of Viet Nam editing?
This is all that Wikipedia gives me for NLV. That application must be for some very specialized kind of video editing, probably not for me.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[Kjella]

Okay, look, I know we all believe that we know what's best for the market and what's in demand - but I am so sick of hearing this line pulled out. "What Linux really needs is ***** if it's to become acceptable in the mainstream". (...) We are long past a position where a single application will suddenly make Linux mainstream.

Not one application, but one application suite - the problem is that one is a steep mountain to climb. Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Outlook = Microsoft Office Pro (plus a bit more junk, but they're not that relevant). Taking down one won't be enough because they sell as a package, if you try buying them individually forget all deals. The only deal you get is if you take the whole Office package.

If you could topple that then many, many office PCs would switch to Linux, together with web based apps most would not need Windows. I of course assume it is also available on Windows so all that depend on it can work with the rest of the company. Many people would start using at home what they use at work, if you've already sunk the cost of learning it that's great.

Good luck on that one though, Word is THE document creator, Excel THE spreadsheet, Powerpoint THE presentation tool and Outlook(/Exchange) THE collaboration tool. Each of them is a Photoshop-class giant in their own right and honestly OpenOffice and iWork has done little to change that. The rest is really chasing the home desktop, but that's so many different things to so many people it does take 100s of apps to cover.

Emacs!

[linuxpyro]

No, the proper way to edit video is to do it in Emacs.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't you get the memo?

This is 2011. Nobody cares or believes in Linux desktop anymore.

NLV editing?

[LocalH]

What the fuck? What is "NLV" editing? I've got years of broadcast and editing work under my belt and I've never once heard that term. Maybe it should be "NLE"? or just "video editing"?

This is a toy compared to the competition

[tyrione]

You cannot be serious about this application competing against Avid, Apple, Adobe and others, right? Final Cut X is the one to beat.

Re:This is a toy compared to the competition

[Master of Transhuman]

Actually, right now, Final Cut is behind Adobe Premiere in turns of features and speed - even on Apple hardware.

I came to the conclusion that Final Cut was behind Adobe Premiere. That situation may change when the new version of Final Cut is released, as it will finally be a 64-bit application. But right now, it seems a number of professional video editors have jumped ship to Adobe running on high-end PC hardware with NVidia graphics running Adobe's Mercury Playback Engine on their CUDA cores which speeds up effects processing and rendering by a factor of ten.

I recently researched the situation in order to spec upgraded machines for one of my clients who does digital conversions of video, film and stills. They are operating on a combination of ancient single-core Pentium 4 PCs using Adobe Premiere 1.5 and some dual-core iMacs and one quad-core Mac Server using Final Cut Pro. I decided on a six-core Intel i7 970 (or quad-core 950, they haven't decided yet) with 24GB of RAM and an NVidia GeForce card supporting CUDA running Adobe Premiere CS5. According to reports, this level system can render HD video at or near real-time - and my client mostly deals with SD video so far (but they need productivity to handle the order flow).

Cost-wise (the system comes in at around $3200), this system is superior to iMacs running Final Cut Pro and approaches the capability of a Mac Server running Final Cut Pro. I expect the productivity improvement to be massive for my client over the crap they're running now.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[Hognoxious]

Well most of us just consume gay donkey porn, not produce it.

When I say "of us" I really mean "people". It was, ummm, a typo. No, a palindrome. A pun, that's it.

Not Even Close

[Master of Transhuman]

Sorry, but there are no Linux video editing suites that don't suck compared to Adobe Premiere and Final Cut Pro. The ones that have the most features - and most don't even have enough for real consumer home video editing, let alone professional video editing - are ridiculously unstable - even compared to Adobe products which are notorious crap.

There is only ONE former commercial product which has been recently open sourced which seems adequate - LightWorks:
http://www.lightworksbeta.com/

Check out these features:

Editing

Resolution, format and codec independent timeline
Edit at 23.976, true 24, 25, 29.97, 30, 50, or 60 fps
Advanced Multicam editing with unlimited sources
Source/Record three-point editing
Insert and Overwrite editing
Replace, t to ll, backfill
Drag-and-drop replace editing
Extend and Split edits
A/V Sync indicators on timeline
Single-click re-sync of whole timeline
Multi-colored markers for edits and clips
Matchframe for clips and subclips

Trimming

Ripple
Roll
Slip and Slide
Remove and Delete
Asymmetric, multitrack trimming
Dynamic trimming during playback
JKL trimming
Trim window
Timeline trimming
Keyboard and numeric moving and trimming
Close Gap

Effects

Third Party Plugin Support
Alpha Channel Matte Transitions
Global Transitions adds effects between In and Out points
Real-time effects in SD, HD and 2K
Speed Tool for varispeed changes
Keyframe graphs
Transitions, effects, and filters included
Unlimited effects user templates
Copy and paste effect attributes to multiple clips
Effects layers with node-based compositing tool
Bezier curves with movable motion paths
Numeric control and keyframe capabilities

Tools

Real-time, hardware accurate video vectorscopes and waveform monitors
Multitrack Audio Mixer with full bus routing and multiple mixes
Keyboard and user interface customization tool with templates for Avid and FCP keyboard mappings
On-screen console controls
Voice Over tool for adding narration directly to timeline
Multi-split screen Viewer for original shot comparison
Shot Sync - sync two sources for playback comparison
Customisable BITC timecode and film footage overlays in Viewer

Colour Correction

Real time Primary color correctors
Real time Secondary color correctors
Image control filters

Audio

Subframe audio keyframing
Real-time audio adjustments during playback
OMF audio export with pan and volume levels
Real

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a

[waveclaw]

The reality is that there's no single app that will propel Linux into the mainstream magically,

On the contrary, the only thing that will propel Linux into the mainstream is are unique apps that are not available elsewhere. Otherwise users will just run those apps natively and continue to ignore Linux.

Yes, this is directly opposite the F/OSS ideal of software that is free for everyone. But it is reality.

The largest number of Linux converts I've ever been party to was directly the result of Compiz. Years of running Install-fests, going to various LUGs and discussing those pesky things that make a computer run were nothing. I did a 5 minute demo to a friend in public on my laptop of my flashy, sexy cube desktop and a real workflow that used it. The first words out of everybody's mouth was 'how to I get that?'

Apple has the 'iLife' experience (and BSD inside.)

Microsoft has Office, Video Games and Microsoft's Deal-making Marketing Machine.

What is Linux's killer app?

AviDemux

[DrYak]

avidemux is another popular linear editor.
it is very close to what VirtualDub is on windows.