For you non-coding people out there != means "does not equal".

I wanted to post this thread to hopefully dispel some of the more common Linux myths out there. For most people, the thought of running linux ranks somewhere below cutting your own arm of with a rusty knife and dental surgery without novacaine.

This really couldn't be further from the truth. I've been running linux for the past 3 years, and many people I know have switched (including Stephanie, my brother, and my 60 year old mother!).

First, a few things so everyone understands the linux philosophy:

There are several distributions, or flavors, of linux. I personally use Ubuntu, but several other popular ones are OpenSUSE, Knoppix, and Debian. Each is maintained by it's own community, and have slight variations, but all run a linux kernel, or core. Each distribution may even have it's own derivatives. Ubuntu, for example, is based on Debian. Derivatives of ubuntu include Kubuntu (which uses the KDE desktop, more later), Edubuntu (which is focused towards education), Xubuntu (which is very lightweight for older machines), and Linux Mint (which is designed for simplicity, and has most multimedia plugins already installed).

Unlike Windows or Mac, linux offers several desktop environments. KDE and GNOME are the two most popular, but there are others. For simplicity, KDE has a more "windows" feel (with a start button and floating widgets), while GNOME has a more OSX feel (with the menu bar across the top). Both are feature rich and totally customizable, and have their own strengths. You can have both installed on the same computer and use them interchangeably.

Most linux distributions have a built in Package Manager, which is one of the great strengths of linux. To install software, one usually just goes to the package manager (known as the Software Center in Ubuntu), selects the software they need, and hit Install. The package manager automatically downloads the software from the repository (an online storage center for the software), and configures it for you. Think of it as an "Add/Remove Programs" on steroids. This also greatly simplifies updates, as the package manager not only automatically watches for updates in the OS, but if any changes are made to the software you have installed, it will usually automatically update that as well.

That being said, let's look at some myths:

Myth #1: Linux is too hard.

This really couldn't be further from the truth. Most desktop linux distributions are amazingly easy to use, very intuitive, and have several features that make them much easier than their windows or mac counterparts. Yes, some things are different, but different does not always mean hard. The software center, for example, is a great system to keep everything up to date and find new software. As far as installation goes, every system I've installed took less than 20 minutes, and it automatically detected and configured everything, including dual monitors, network printers, wacom tablets, you name it. To borrow from apple's great marketing, It just worked.

Myth #2: My _________ isn't supported.

This is kind of a vague myth, but a common one none the less. People seem to think that linux doesn't work on new or certain hardware. To be honest, I have yet to find something that didn't just work. Printers seem to be the most common, but lately not only have I not seen it work, but when I went to configure it after installing linux, it had already done it for me. I'm currently running dual monitors, several external hard drives, just purchased a new dvd burner, and had to do exactly ZERO config (unless you count telling it which side each of my dual monitors sits, but that's hardly difficult!)

Myth #3: I can't calibrate my monitor, so I can't use it for photography.

This is really a two part myth. First, you CAN calibrate your monitor under linux. ArgyllCMS supports many calibration devices, including the spyder and huey. It is actually creates a much more detailed profile than the software that came with my spyder, which results in even closer color matching. For those who don't have a calibration device, you can easily install the gamma adjustment software (like Adobe Gamma) to get a "close enough" manual calibration. Secondly, most of the software (both free and commercial) that runs on linux does support monitor profiling, so you can use it for photography.

Myth #4: My software doesn't work with linux.

This myth is probably true. There is a program called WINE, which emulates windows interprets windows calls from windows programs. Many windows programs work under WINE, without any speed sacrifice. (In fact, batching in photoshop is actually faster under WINE, because it doesn't redraw the screen every time. Go figure.) It isn't perfect, though, and can be a source of irritation. (Canon's DPP has a glitch that makes the folder tree look weird. You have to hide and show the tree to fix it).

The thing is, practically every program you currently use as a linux equivalent, and it's usually FREE. Yes, you read that right - free. The linux community has millions of people, and if a vendor doesn't provide a linux version, someone has probably written one. For example:

Photoshop -> GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program)
InDesign -> Scribus
Illustrator -> Inkscape
Premier -> KDENLive
MS Office -> Open Office
Lightroom -> Raw Therapee (or my personal favorite, Bibble)

Yes, I can already hear people screaming: Well, GIMP doesn't handle 16 bit, this doesn't do that, it's DIFFERENT, yadda yadda yadda. I'll get to the 16 bit editing in GIMP in just a second, but honestly, most of the issues are the fact that it is different. It will be. There are some big advantages (as well as the big disadvantage: the learning curve).

Myth #5: GIMP doesn't handle 16 bit, so it's useless for photography work.

You're right - GIMP (in it's current form) doesn't handle anything higher than 8 bit images. Here's the thing: when do you need 16 bits of information? The development stage. When you're converting from RAW, you absolutely need software that can handle all the information stored in that format, otherwise it's pointless to even shoot raw. A good conversion program (such as Bibble or RAW Therapee) will allow you to convert your raw file into a well exposed 8 bit JPG. How many of you actually export to 16 bit TIFFs? While I'm sure there are some, for the most part, it's a waste of space. Printing on photographic paper? 16 bit TIFFs are overkill. You just won't see the difference between a high quality (8 bit) JPG and a 16 bit TIFF print. Pixel peepers aside, the end result is, for all intents and purposes, the same.

So now that you've converted your RAW files into high quality JPGs, GIMP handles them just fine for you final retouching, actions, and finishing.

You say I haven't convinced you that 8 bit is good enough? Fine. Get Cinepaint, the 16 bit version of GIMP (although it's based off an older version of GIMP, and doesn't have quite as many features).

Myth #6: Linux isn't professional enough for photography.

Well, hopefully you feel that we're professional, but in case you want further proof, take a look at Hollywood. Most of your big name studios (Pixar, Dreamworks, Sony, ILM) all use linux rendering farms. http://www.linuxmovies.org/

So there are some of the more common myths. The question remains, why should I bother? It seems like lots of work just to get back to where I currently am now. Well, here are some of the linux advantages:

No viruses.

There are currently no viruses that affect a linux desktop (a la Macs).

Faster (oh so much faster).

With such a small overhead, running linux usually results in a 10-20% increase in speed. Boot times are in the seconds, not minutes. In fact, Ubuntu 9.10 gets to the login screen on Steph's computer in under 30 seconds from totally off. From standby, it's even faster.

Stays faster.

With no registry to corrupt, linux practically stays as fast as the day you installed it.

Lower cost.

Seriously, this is a huge benefit. When was the last time you got free updates on practically ALL your software?

An amazing community of support.

Linux users are extremely helpful, and chances are if you're having a problem, several hundred have had the same problem before you. Google gets you results faster than most support companies can even finish their first pre-recorded welcome message. If you want "commercial quality" support, that's available too from several places. Canonical (the company that sponsors Ubuntu) offers professional level support at an amazingly low cost: http://www.ubuntu.com/support/services Google sponsors the Summer of Code, where they pay students to update, create, and fix bugs in open source software.

More hardware options.

Macs are great, but when was the last time you saw a 32 core mac? I know there's a rumor about a 16 core, but 32? Last year at WPPI I worked with Bibble Labs and got to play with their 16 core AMD. Talk about amazingly fast. It appears they may have some other stuff in the pipeline too:

Macs are limited to their own hardware. While the products they offer are top shelf, they are hardly cutting edge. With linux, you get the best of both worlds: fast, secure OS with cutting edge hardware. You also get all the other perks too (not least of which everyone thinks you must be a genius to be able to run linux! [;)] )

Ok, so that's all I have. I've tried to be as un-biased as possible, and if I've missed anything, I'd love to know. Hopefully this will have opened some minds to the thought of linux as their next operating system. If you have any questions, I'll be more than glad to help in any way I can.

Shan