Thread: Lightworks to go Open Source

Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 51 to 53 of 53
  1. #51  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    160
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Kovax View Post
    I just downloaded this beta, and tried to load it.. as soon as it looks for the console which i dont have) the program closes down and simply does not start...
    Restart your machine...then it should work fine.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #52  
    Senior Member Cory Petkovsek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    163
    I installed Lightworks and the matrox codecs and it opened up right away; no board needed, no admin mode, no adjusting shortcuts, nor reboot. Version 10.0.1 on Win7/64.

    Supposedly the most intuitive editor; while it may be a very powerful editor, I wouldn't call it intuitive. There is potential, but we'll see.

    Editshare is releasing the NLE for free. It is not yet opensource, but will be next year. They must verify they have rights to all of their code before they can release it.

    Support for codecs like xdcam, r3d, dnxhd, dpx, prores are not available yet and will be licensed plugins. This is editshare's means to support their development. No details available.

    Linux and OSX and 64-bit windows will be available later; prob Q4 '11.

    Those of you repeating your questions could have found all of the above information here: http://www.lightworksbeta.com/

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben Brainerd View Post
    The main reason this happens is licensing. Most of the OSS licenses (BSD, GPL, etc) require that any associated development be open-source as well.
    Ben, this isn't quite true. The BSD license you mentioned allows code to be used in other products, even commercial ones without license restrictions (both Windows and OSX have Berkley's Unix-like BSD code in them).

    The GPL requires that if any code is added to GPL licensed code, it too is licensed as GPL. There are many Open Source licenses all with varying restrictions; however the GPL is the primary viral one.

    However plugin interfaces are not always code compiled together. Plugins are often independent code bases, thus can be licensed however the programmer desires. Even when it requires an SDK, this can be licensed under th LGPL which was designed so plugin or library interfaces could be compiled under their own license, while the sdk or library itself could continue in the LGPL fold.

    I suggest commercial vendors usually don't write plugins for open source programs simply because of the market. Customers who are dropping money for a commercial software package are more likely to pay money for a commercial plugin. Open source software attracts pros, businesses, and hobbyists. Those willing to actually pay for a plugin are a much smaller percentage of the audience base, and possibly may already be biased against paying for them, since the main system was free.

    Cory
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #53  
    Senior Member Peter Moretti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,593
    Interesting Cory. I think that Lightworks will only do well if it is a superior product, not b/c it will save someone one or two grand upfront.
    1110001100010102
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts