While there are specific distributions of Linux that are optimized for
specific purposes, none of those you mention, Ken, are that type, and I'm
disinclined to believe that there are significant measurable differences if
one benchmarks them. Among the various mainstream distributions there's
almost always a "server" version (meaning sans GUI and with am install-time
preselected set of apps) and "desktop" version (choice of GUI and different
install-time app selection), but the major significant between Debian
"family" (including Ubuntu) and Fedora "family" distros, for example, is
the packaging tool used. Lately, there's very little difference in
available packages in the different family repositories, at least until one
gets out of mainstream distros. There is, though, sometimes significant
difference in available documentation--which is a reflection of the ability
of one distro or another's particular demographics, more than anything else.
Regarding photo editing, as with other "major" applications that one might
use to decide which OS, I'd take an opposite view to yours. Choice of
application tends to severely limit one's choice of OS. Many of the various
Linux-compatible choices run equally (or nearly) as well on Windows or Mac,
or both. Certainly not always the case, but to summarily reject other OS
choices because one application (such as Photoshop) doesn't run on them is
to completely ignore all the other considerations that go into choice of
hardware and OS.
People have many other constraints to consider, and knowing all the options
open to them and being encouraged to check them out does them no
disservice. I, for one, will gladly learn a new application over having to
deal with all the add-on crap required to run a Windows machine in anything
like a secure fashion while still enjoying a general purpose machine. Not
having to pay for the privilege is just a bonus.
As far as needing to run "natively" for Adobe labeled applications, that's
just plain incorrect. Virtualized Windows *is* native, as far as the OS is
concerned, and Adobe applications don't know any more than the OS lets them
know. It's a much more useful method of running dual OS, than the
wait-for-shutdown/wait-longer-for-reboot dual boot method. Especially for
those who might have to switch multiple times per day, and as Windows boot
loader does NOT play nice with many of the others.
One of the nice features of Linux' excellent support for VMs is precisely
the ability to spin up any other OS on demand, just to be able to play
around and figure if one might be missing out on a much better app that
better suits one's needs. Once a VM is spun up and a base snapshot created,
you can try apps and other sorts of madness all you like. Screwed up the
install? Revert to base snapshot in mere moments. Hate the applications?
Revert to base snapshot with no registry cruft. OS is no better? Nuke the
VM and you've got all your disk space back with no gymnastics required.
Better app/OS combination for the task? Keep the VM and app and have both
the VM and the base Linux OS, with no reboots required.
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 8:38 AM Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Check Your Premise"
>
> I'm at a loss as to why a person would select the OS first and then
> try to stuff the application into it. That's like a person who buys a
> sports car and then tries to stuff a family of eight into it.
>
> I would recommend selecting the applications first and then build the
> system, including the operating system that supports those
> applications.
>
> For example, I have a couple of Linux machines operating here at the
> house. One is running ZoneMinder for the security system. Not just any
> form of Linux, though. It's running Debian. While programs like
> ZoneMinder will work on Ubuntu and other flavors of Linux, it either
> doesn't have an installer package, or there are custom settings
> required to get it to work correctly. I have another system running
> Ubuntu for the same reason. The apps on it don't install easily or run
> efficiently on Debian. Even among those specific brands of Linux,
> there are specific builds that fine-tune for the class of computer or
> class of application. LAMP is best served with one flavor of Ubuntu,
> multi-media with another.
>
> If your photo editing axe of choice says "Adobe" on the splash screen,
> you better be running Windows or Mac OS natively. If you want to do
> XYZ things that require Linux, then either have a second machine
> running Linux, or set the computer up as dual-boot or whatever.
> Personally, I recommend multiple machines. Just because you CAN have
> both on one machine doesn't mean you should.
>
> AG Schnozz
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
> --
---
Scott
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|