[Karunamon]

Professional-grade certainly isn't, at least not until there's enough demand for it, for tools like Vegas and Final Cut to be ported.

I don't know. but I hear about all these projects and my mind immediately starts thinking about OSS pretenders (all missing features) to professional/enterprisey apps. GIMP to Photoshop being the canonical example. Aside from the lack of feature parity and the legendarily bad UI (apparently designed by people who do not edit images regularly), the single biggest problem is lack of support. If I'm doing something like a magazine, and something breaks, I get to keep both pieces aaaaand that's about it.

Am I being overly cynical, here? Honest question. Maybe I'm overly sensitive to many years of FOSS advocates proposing solutions ignorant of professional workflows.

[deathcakes]

Sorry, you have also missed the point - I'm not defending the gp's point by saying that there is in fact software available currently that you can use to video edit on linux.

I am saying that stating that linux _can't_ do video editing is disingenuous. It demonstrably _can_, because it is an operating system and the capability is there. It _doesn't_ at the moment because no one has written a high-enough quality application to do it yet.

[Karunamon]

Are we talking about Linux the kernel or Linux the operating system? The kernel can do whatever it's programmed to do, of course - but I think we're splitting hairs here. It would be like me saying OSX can't do mainstream gaming. Sure, it's an OS, it'll do whatever it's told to do, but the games library available is downright abysmal.

Everyone knows what's meant here - if you work in an audio/video/graphics production shop, Linux is not a viable choice.