I'm with you on that. If my limited knowledge is correct, you could even include lightworks as part of the distro package. In this case you wouldn't even have to install anything at all after the distro itself?

In any case, that would be awesome.

rhinox202 wrote:

No, Lightworks started out as an MS-DOS based program. Initially it ran on a 33 MHz 80486 processor, and had two full length double height video processor boards, two full length custom audio cards, and assorted other custom hardware.

I still think that the original metallic black turnkey box was one of the sexiest NLEs ever!

Not really relevant to the current thread, I know, but the MS-DOS history does partially explain why the Lightworks GUI is not platform specific.

Rumblebuffin wrote:


BAD IDEA main thing is to make lightworks work across all main types of linux:
debian
fedora
arch
gentoo
etc.

whatever it will be instalation from binary or via apt-get pacman or yast,

yet another distro probably based on (crappy) ubuntu NO NO NO.

@pinkflood

I may be being wildly naive here, but why is Ubuntu (which is what we're working on with the Linux version at the moment) "crappy"?

If you're going to say things like that, you need to say why you think that.

I think that when the open source release happens there will be Lightworks related distros created. This could be more useful than you suggest. Having a distro with realtime kernel patches in place, a minimal set of specific applications and 64 bit support might be welcome to some who may be using a standard Ubuntu or Fedora release for instance. I used 64 Studio for audio recording for some time and the optimisations made it far better than a mainstream Ubuntu installation.

How the pro codecs would be made available in a remix I don't know. Maybe a paid download from Editshare?

Rumblebuffin wrote:


That would be the purpose of the whole thing. No need to worry about operative systems (this include Windows and Mac...) specific (mis)configurations and

osaeris wrote:


these are very good examples of possible features, and I'm sure there would be a lot more.

pinkflood wrote:


That's the priority of course, but it shouldn't be so difficult to package a program for a distro, I mean, it has been done so far for thousands of programs.

Forum Admin wrote:


Ubuntu brings a pretty much 'standard' set of packages and kernel configuration, in order to run on much computers as possible; so, compared to a well configured, tinkered, Gentoo or Arch, the overall os performances can be reduced. I had a personal experience with Gentoo and I must say that the difference is visible, especially using multimedia and video editing software.
That said, I use Ubuntu now

pinkflood wrote:


The goal wouldn't be to have ANOTHER distro, but THE distro to (almost) only run lightworks, a sort of turnkey solution, but hardware indipendent.