[art] The $64,000 Question

[Mr O]

The ability to have commercial software to run under a free OS is also a 
good thing to many. So many people like to look at linux and see only 
free software. I didn't buy Unreal Tournament 2003 because it would run 
in Windows. I bought it explictily for use in linux. It has never been 
installed in Windows. Same thing in regards to what Disney and other 
animation studios did in contributing to the Crossover WINE project 
because they tried GIMP but NEEDED Photoshop. They didn't need or want 
Windows though. Sure I'll use a free alternative when available but a 
well supported commercial product is also worth considering if it meets 
your needs on a 'now' basis and not 'in development'
How about Maya? Another example of a commercial program ported to Linux. 
Albeit spendy but for those in the know it's the way to go. Sure Blender 
and other programs are coming along and they each have their place but ...

Anyway, each individual is going to have their own needs. Now for a 
short post to the main list in partial regards to this..

That's all my thoughts.

Mr O.

Jacob Meuser wrote:

>>>Adobe PhotoShop -> The GIMP.
>>>      
>>>
>>Yep, The GIMP is the best known example of an open source design tool
>>success.
>>    
>>
>>None of these compare to what Dreamweaver does, with productivity-oriented
>>tools for generating mostly-ready to use server-side code as well as client
>>code.  This is what will keep Windows on my work laptop.
>>    
>>
>
>Another major difference, IMO, is that we're talking about commercial
>software "suites" that have good import/export integration, as compared
>to separate programs by separate development groups.
>
>  
>