On 2014.04.05, 19:32 , Bob wrote:
In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:
[ ... ]
All that said, when you're serious about photography and raw you should
seriously get away from Linux and The Gimp.

Why would you write this?

Short answer: it's the truth and perhaps helpful to the OP (if not in
the short term). Don't exclude the rest of the answer I gave him that
may also be of use to him.

Long answer:

I know an awful lot of photographers.

I know an awful lot of professional graphics artists.

I know an awful lot of computer programmers / computer "geeks".

I'm very experienced with many OS' (that predate Windows and OS X and
even Unix by a pretty long period). I'm very proficient in Windows
(well, perhaps less so these days) and OS X. I was moderately
proficient in Linux (of course I'm talking about maintaining systems,
command line use, etc.)

On a Venn diagram, there some is overlap between these worlds. And in
the world of photography the overwhelming choices of OS's are Windows
and OS X.

In the professional photography domain it's roughly an even split
between Windows and OS X.

In the professional graphics domain it's heavily weighted to OS X.
About 80 - 90%.

And absolutely NOWHERE (in my experience) are there professional (or
even advanced "amateurs") in photography that use Linux or The Gimp.

It's just not a common, useful platform because it is not supported by
the professional apps makers. Professionals in these domains don't geek
out over freeware and the "free software" movement; they get and pay for
the best applications available - and the best "plugins" and add ons and
extensions (what have you) for those applications. Don't forget that
these people have to communicate (photogs, editors, designers, writers,
printers ... the whole lot) ... the common exchanges are those files
created by the apps used by these companies and agencies. Linux may be
in their servers, but not on their desktops.

That is not to say that Linux/Gimp and other applications in the domain
cannot be used (or are not used), they are just rare in the professional
domains of photography and graphics.

So Linux/The Gimp is just not a good place to be if one is serious about
photography over being a computer geek/programmer.

As to Linux, its desktop environments (yes there are several) are
mediocre as desktop systems compared to OS X. They're probably mediocre
compared to Windows 7 (with which I have little experience but I beleive
to be one of the few that MS "got right").

I had hope of Linux being the Great One - and in those days I spit when
anyone mentioned Apple and MacIntosh and OS X.

But, when a) I found Linux to be all but useless as an "office" and
photography platform and b) MS released Vista and c) I needed a new
computer ... I abandoned all hope and bought an iMac.

My Motto has been, since then in early 2008: "OS X: What Linux wants to
be when it grows up."


[1]: Linux' strengths are in servers, database systems, embedded
systems, super-computing and other specific, somewhat narrowly scoped
areas.

Not desktop.

Sorry for the long reply, I didn't have time to compose a short one.

--
Those who have reduced our privacy, whether they are state
or commercial actors, prefer that we do not reduce theirs.
- Jaron Lanier, Scientific American, 2013.11.