Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Michael Tunnell

Members
  • Posts

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Michael Tunnell

  1. This is circular reasoning and is therefore flawed. You dont think Affinity should support Linux because the marketshare is smaller. You think the marketshare is smaller because the apps arent there for people to use Linux. This is an endless Catch 22 loop of reasoning. If Adobe were on Linux, again I would not care if Affinity was or not. Affinity has the opportunity to take advantage of the lack of Adobe and become a bigger player and even a posterchild for promoting Linux. Affinity is though so the debate for other apps is irrelevant to Affinity supporting it. You realize that ONE PAGE on a website can be very long. . .. its not like printing where the pages are limited. This is a very sad argument. Also you realize that Wikipedia is not a good source for your argument. I didnt even know about this page and I've been using Linux for over 20 years. You are trying to claim this is a definitive list and you should most certainly know it isnt. I mean it doesnt even have a Snaps & Flatpaks section. please stop pretending your arguments make sense I've also heard things claimed about Linux over the years too from people in your perspective. "Linux will never being for gaming" and now it is. "Linux is super hard, you always need a terminal" and no it doesnt. Just because you have heard things doesnt make you right. It sounds like your information is based on years of out of date context. You even used package managment tools to sound informed neither of which are used anymore. Example: yum was replaced by dnf. apt-get was replaced by apt. You dont need to know these anymore thanks to the software stores and whatnot but you used them as examples of difficulty but really they are just proof you are out of date by many years.
  2. Not just Servers. like I said, it is the dominant OS for everything. Embedded, Supercomputers, Mobile (Android is powered by Linux), and so on. Desktop is only limited by availability of applications. Because its true. No one looks at Windows and thinks "well this is engineering perfection". It is always "I need this specific app that is only on Windows or Mac". Windows has nothing to write home about other than it happens to have the widest userbase and thus has the widest catalog of apps. Its not like Windows earned that status, Microsoft paid for it with exclusive deals and institution lock-ins. what? Linux has GUI, its not just a server system. Do you think Linux requires command line to use it? Linux is lower resources with GUI as well. Every single GUI in Linux is lower resource usage than Windows even the heaviest of Linux GUIs is still MUCH lighter than Windows. Storage is also a factor of waste too such as Windows requiring 40GB of space in order to just install it. Linux distros only need around 8GB to 10GB to install. Licensing cost is only for Enterprise. All of the desktop options from the big companies are free. Ubuntu, Fedora, openSUSE . . . are all free (gratis) thus zero licensing cost. They make money from Enterprise so desktop users can get it without cost. Yes management of hundreds/thousands of machines is easier on Linux but you dont need command line for that either. There are many GUI tools for Linux that let you do that very easily compared to Windows tools. That doesnt change anything related to resources though. A lot of people use Linux as a GUI desktop not related to automation or management of a huge set. This is another dismissive assumption. This is an assumption based on no data. I admit I also did that though so I guess you could say equally weak. Your point negated nothing. It is obvious that app catalog is a factor . . . and if you missed it, that's the point of this thread. To help Serif see why being a part of the catalog building is valuable to them. The moment Adobe moves to Linux, Affinity will be irrelevant and I will cease to care if it supports Linux or not. People have argued if Adobe doesnt why should Serif and obviously thats why they should. If Linux had no future why would Valve spend $$ Millions to make Linux Gaming a feasible alternative to Windows gaming? It requires someone to try something and it either works or it doesnt. For Valve it has worked, gaming on Linux has increased from basically zero before Value to millions of gamers thanks to Valve. Really? You are using the opinion of someone promoting Solaris (an Oracle product) as a way to prove Linux isnt good enough? Linux has the argument of the best because of its growth and importance while also being better than Windows and Mac engineering. Its not dubious. What is dubious is you trying to negate my point about Linux importance using something that contradicts your own stance. You think Linux being a smaller marketshare means no one should care so you try to negate my point by using an OS with an even smaller marketshare? That seems a bit of a weird tactic. Plus Solaris has its own issues just like any software does. Based on what do you say this? Qt yes. also .NET/C# and Flutter work on Linux as well. What exactly is missing that is a necessity in your mind? Side note: how is this related to Affinity line? On this forum, the only thing that matters is discussing the ease of development for Affinity . . . not the landscape of app development entirely. Mac is a UNIX OS so its weird that you would use that term as a way to negate validity. Desktop Linux is not a pain and yes I do have people using Linux that are grandmas. The people in their 70s and 80s that I know using Linux love it because they don't have to deal with any Windows nonsense and they dont have to do anything with yum, or apt-get or any other command line stuff because command line is not a necessity that you think it is. I mean apt-get is not even used anymore on Ubuntu or Debian and it hasn't been for years, your info is very very dated.
  3. This is just an assumption based on no clear data. Linux is just a better platform for a variety of reasons but the drastically lower resources is a huge piece of why people switch over. You can save wasted resources from Windows and thus get better FPS in games and better rendering in various tools. The FOSS concept is not even known by a lot of people until after they switch to Linux. I switched to Linux prior to learning what the philosophy was for example. There are many people who also want to switch to Linux but the only thing holding them back is needing a professional graphics tool. I know many many designers who are in that position. It's just a Catch 22. Interestingly enough, the low resource need is a big reason why some industries use Linux heavily, take Disney for example. Disney uses Red Hat in their animation studios and computer graphics studios because it offers so much flexibility and lowers complex render times. If Disney sees the value for paying for Linux why would people think Linux is not viable? There are people who want to use Linux but dont because they need specific programs and if they had an alternative they would use Linux. There are people who use it for FOSS and a lot who don't. I have been using Linux for over 20 years and I do not have a FOSS only requirement . . . and a lot of people are in my pragmatist position as well. I like the philosophy of Open Source but that doesn't mean its the only viable option to be successful on Linux. Linux is a very powerful OS and is arguably the best OS engineering of all the OS available but for some reason Desktop Linux just continues to lose where in literally every other form of computing on the planet, Linux is the dominant force by a lot. Anyway, I already presented a way Serif could end this debate and definitively find out if Linux could be a viable option or not but nothing has come from it. Maybe some day, I wont be holding my breath for this but maybe someday Serif will realize there is a market willing to pay.
  4. Linux operating systems typically do not have telemetry which means that market share is effectively unknown. What do you base the 3% on? NetMarketShare website? Are you aware of that website closed their efforts to measure that due to Google breaking functionality? Essentially, we have even less of an idea now. It's unfortunate that Linux ecosystem, doesn't really know how many users it actually has because it makes this discussion quite difficult to have. However, the 3% number is just a guess based on a network of websites that don't specify which sites and what target audience it relates to. It's fine to use that data to measure trending but that's all it really can do. You are saying the market share in general is around that but no one really knows what the actual number is. With that said, it may be unreasonable to ask them to make it based on speculative data but I think it is totally reasonable to ask them to find out for themselves and stop using speculative data . . . because it's actually rather easy for them to put an end to this debate if they really cared to do that. All they have to do is setup a crowdfunding campaign to find out. I explain more about how this works and why it should be done in this post.
  5. You should join the DLN Community then because that is a very welcoming place. In other places, there might be zealots popping out of no where but in the DLN Community, that stuff doesn't fly. DLN Community is about helping anyone who wants help on whatever they need it on and also having a community that is enjoyable to participate in. like you said, if they can make it work on Mac and Windows they can make it work on Linux but I understand your overall point. I agree that they are possibly thinking about these types of things and that is what makes them hesitant. I just wish they would give us the chance to prove those fears, if they have them, are unfounded. . . . even if that means having a chat with me for 10 minutes on Zoom about it.
  6. Ideological zealots are problematic regardless of subject, my point is the Linux community is not filled with zealots. We are pro Open Source of course but pro open source does not equal anti-commercial. I don't see where there is a PR nightmare possibility. They get good PR from letting us prove ourselves and if it fails they get good PR for at least giving us the chance. It sounds like they are worried about having their software compared to the jank stuff that is on Kickstarter and other services that are just scammy nonsense. They don't want a guilty by association outcome is what I think creates the hesitation. However, there have been thousands of successful campaigns from reputable companies, otherwise those sites would have never worked and wouldnt still exist. Ultimately, the only people who are doing ANY RISK at all is me and the Linux community. I am risking my reputation to promote a crowdfunding campaign that I have hope that it would work but no evidence that it would or not. The Linux community would be risking future companies using a failed crowdfunding campaign as a metric for not considering a Linux port of their software. Serif is at risk of basically nothing if they handle it well and especially if they partner with me to promote the campaign. I am willing to risk my reputation for proving the Linux ecosystem is strong enough to justify it if the company is behind the effort to find out. . . I am not willing to risk my reputation on a "maybe if this then we might consider thinking about it".
  7. Hold up. The Free word in FOSS does not mean free as in money but free as in Freedom. Yes it was incredibly dumb for them to choose that term back in the day but that is what it means. Your scenario suggests one is for paid and the other relies on donations however you can absolutely have open source software that is also commercial. Bitwarden, Nextcloud, Docker, OpenStack, Vital synthesizer, and the list goes on. These are all open source software products that have a commercial model. Yes, there is a subset of people in our ecosystem that doesnt understand this either but they are not the majority. Most people in the Linux ecosystem do not consider proprietary evil, most simply don't care. There is zero risk involved at all. They either get the money or they get a definitive answer to end the debate. There is not risk in any way. Serif doesn't have to promote they are doing it, they can simply say "here Linux peeps, good luck". We will then take it from there and I guarantee I will get it in front of thousands of people in order to promote the campaign and Serif will be looked at as a company who is willing to let us prove ourselves and instantly get appreciation from the Linux community without having to write a single line of code. I also never took it personally, I said we have our answer. Why bother trying to convince them still when they have been given a chance to find out and the only option they will consider is a method that skews it in the favor of No. This is not taking it personally, it's simply not continuing to waste my breath. (or types? in this case) I did attempt to offer an example of a professional company who used Kickstarter to gauge interest and at no point did they look bad for doing so. I want Serif to give us the chance to prove ourselves and there is a simple direct way to do that . . . refusal to do that, is an answer in itself. ---- Edit: let me clarify something. I am the host of 3 podcasts and I also have a fairly large YouTube channel that I can promote a crowdfunding campaign on. Obviously, I am not going to go on my shows and tell them about something that is so absurdly skewed. If there isn't a crowdfunding campaign to prove it and instead they insist on WINE as an option it would be like me going onto my show and saying . . . "hey everyone, this company that makes this software has said they will maybe consider making a Linux version if we prove to WINE that they should make that company's software work under WINE and then have people pay for the WINE version and then based on how many people do that then they will consider making us pay for a Linux version?" . . . what? vs "hey everyone, there's this company that is doing something very awesome. they are letting us prove that Linux is a platform that should be considered in their development. They setup a crowdfunding campaign to see how many people in Linux community want some great software. All you have to do is pledge $50 to a kickstarter campagin and if we reach their goal, they will make a Linux version. Let's prove the Linux ecosystem is a platform worth developing for." The first one, I wont do because I am not going to promote "let's get a 3rd party to do something for this company and hope its enough to get people to buy their stuff and hope that also is enough to convince them to do the work". The second one, is "hey this company is letting us put our money where our mouth is" and since that's basically unheard of, even doing that is going to get points from our community.
  8. If that's the case then we have our answer. They refuse to let us prove it and thus they refuse to even consider it. If that's how they look at it then it seems they do not care if there is enough people to sustain it or not, they just don't want to do it at all because the only thing they are willing to consider is stuff that will skew it in such a way to justify it to themselves to not do it. If they genuinely wanted to know then they would allow us the chance to genuinely prove it but instead they want to put on tasks that will take a very long time to build momentum on the hope it will be enough. This is like a older sibling giving a video game controller to their younger sibling that isn't plugged in to trick them into thinking they are doing something while you know it accomplishes nothing. Quick note to Serif: the argument of "we're better than crowdfunded software" is an excuse and bad one, because a lot of people have used crowdfunding as a way to gather interest and backing to become a massive success. Font Awesome for example did crowdfunding to find out if enough people would back it to justify extra work and when they did it we proved that we wanted them to and thus it was successful and it got even better. (for reference: Font Awesome on Kickstarter = 35,550 backers. They only asked for a $30,000 goal and the total raised was $1,076,960 . . . for a icon set! They gave us the chance to prove we were willing to pay and we did.
  9. This is a perfect example of what I was saying about skewing statistics. If it is left up to an unorganized effort things like this happen and misinterpretations can be done. Crowd-funding campaign by the Serif company, like I mentioned in my previous comment, would solve all of the complication and provide a way for a definitive answer. Let's push for them to attempt this.
  10. The problem is that most people do not adhere to this at all, yet companies listen to the loud hardheaded people as if they represent us all. They don't. We talked about this issue in our recent episode of Destination Linux related to Open Source vs Commercialism, and the point comes down to the fact that Commercialism is not only a good thing in many cases but also required for sustainability. We received a lot of feedback in favor of this stance. It highlights that there are very loud people who don't want to pay for stuff. Yea, thats true for every ecosystem but depending on where they ask the people are louder. They asked on Reddit. The r/linux subreddit is very often considered a problematic place even in the eyes of the majority of Linux users so they based their opinion on a place that is very loud and not open minded. They tried it to find out and realized that r/linux did not represent the ecosystem at all. This is the point. Here's the problem, you can't find out unless you give us the option to tell you. Waiting on WINE to see if there is enough is a very bad idea. WINE usage would require to it to be worked on for support, then it requires users to know that WINE is working on it, requires users to know WINE has made it usable, requires users to know that Serif is using that data to make decisions on real support and etc. The amount of skewing of statistics is so high that using that as a basis is essentially creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. The solution to find out is simple. Create crowd-funding campaign to gauge interest. You set the price for the campagin to whatever you think it will cost to do the development and we as a community promote the campaign to gather support. This allows us one thing to promote and allows us to consolidate the effort of people knowing where to go to share their support. It also is a method of seeing not only how many people want it but also how many people are willing to pay because we would have to put our money up in the campaign. You find out how many Linux users are willing to make this happen, you can make larger tiers than regular price to see how many people are ultra-interested. All sorts of data can be used from them. If the campaign is successful you get the money to make the software support Linux without worry about if there is enough people to justify it. If it isn't successful, no one loses any money and you get a definitive answer to the question "is there enough people in the platform to justify the upfront cost?". I think any other method of trying to find out will take years and will be heavily skewed. This method will allow us to consolidate effort to promote it and gives us a chance to actually prove it.
  11. This is not a practical thing to do. What incentive is there for a community campaign to support a proprietary piece of software that has no interest in supporting the platform? If Serif were to ask the question it means they have some level of interest to make it happen which in turn means people would be excited to participate. If Serif has no interest then where is the incentive for anyone? WINE would be doing work to make it function on the platform and the only outcome of that work is that Serif gets paid for people who use the software off of the work of WINE. Why would WINE be interested in that without Serif's involvement? If Serif said "yes we would like to know how many people are interested and we want to do this survey" then that is something worth promoting because the company who makes it is behind finding out. If Serif has no interest and will never have interest then I don't see how we can excite the community or developers to be interested in it as a Photoshop alternative. Adobe is big enough so they get WINE work regardless, Serif is not big enough . . . it is what it is. Serif could easily find out the level of interest if they really wanted to and I can help them do that but I do need them to want to.
  12. This a very flawed way of judging interest. The community is very large, I mean it dominates literally ever form of computing except for the desktop so it's pretty significant. The size of the community should never be judged by how many people post on a forum thread, or vote on the WINEhq website. For example, I have never bothered to vote on the WINEhq website for any of Serif products, yet I have commented many times on this forum thread. There is no way to actually gauge interest without Serif themselves asking the question. I switched to Linux well over a decade ago as my only OS and this was before Affinity Photo existed so I only heard about it last year. This means there are a LOT of people who would be interested but just dont know of the software because why on Earth would they be looking for Windows alternatives to Photoshop? If Serif truly wants to know how many people are interested and if it is worth doing they should just ask the question to the Linux community. I have a podcast with a decent sized audience so I could get the word out of them asking the question but I do need them to ask the question and provide a way for Linux users to answer it. Serif could go one step farther with a Kickstarter to not only see people's interest but also to let people put money where their mouth is and buy pre-orders of the software. I would gladly do that for example. Serif has the ability to easily find out if it is worth their time or not but likely they will just assume it isnt because research is rare these days.
  13. Why would any Linux user put effort into finding out why something doesnt work when the company making it doesn't care to consider supporting it even if they do fix it? Your logic can be applied both directions. This kind of thing is a scenario where both sides need to be willing. Linux users are VERY willing to help provided that the company involved commits to at least having some interest. If there is no chance of even having interest then Linux community look for software where the company might. In this case, Mark said they would talk to the WINE team if contacted. Luckily I have been in Linux for over 20 years and I know some people at WINE so I might be able to make that happen. So in this particular case the Linux community is reaching out and are more than happy to do so. I saw Mark's comment and immediately reacted with excitement because its not about who needs to put the effort in more . . . it's a collaboration thing and Linux is all about collaboration. If a company is interested and willing to work with us we will do everything we can to make it happen. I mean a great example of that is Apple M1 Mac . . . Apple gave ZERO help with getting Linux on M1 Macs BUT they made it possible for us to do it if we want and there are already 2 projects making that happen. Apple didn't help but they got out of the way. This is not really possible for Serif to do because its proprietary software but knowing that our efforts isnt a complete lost cause makes us willing to attempt. My real point of participating in this thread is just to see if Serif is willing to attempt it even if it takes involvement from us in some way. The answer is always no if you never ask the question so that's why I am here asking the questions.
  14. I might be able to make this happen. threads shall be pulled 😎 LOL that's messed up. You would stop using something because Linux users might get attention? That's a very weird perspective to me. We can't have nice things because you insist they care more about your needs when they dont even have a Linux version or even the inkling of considering one at the moment. Honestly, that's very messed up.
  15. It may also surprise Serif that Linux platform and the Mac platform are very very similar. A lot of works on one can work on the other so at least some percentage of Linux support is already there since they are essentially "platform cousins".
  16. It most certainly is not a good indicator at all, not even slightly or at least it shouldnt be. Adobe has industry dominance they have zero incentive to devote time to a port when they already have the dominant product. Bigger companies do not innovate in regards to trying new platforms. Also if Affinity is waiting for Adobe to do it before they do then they will always live in Adobe's shadow. If Affinity brings their software to Linux after Photoshop did, then why would I care about using Affinity? If I'm able to to go back to using Photoshop, why would I bother with Affinity? Affinity taking marketshare from Adobe on Windows and Mac is always going to be an uphill battle. Affinity on Linux would be competing with no big players and thus the market is ripe for an option and hungry for the option. The Linux market will start promoting Affinity as a reason to use Linux to people so they'd get promoted not just for being a good product but also being a product that supports Linux. right now Affinity is a small fish in a big pond and it relies on the "willing to pay but not willing to pay for Photoshop" market vs becoming a big fish in a small pond that has vast potential to grow into the biggest pond. It just needs companies willing to jump in early to make it happen. Linux really only suffers these days from the lack of applications and the app developers always say "we will when there are users", well this is a catch 22. . . something has to come first otherwise it is just a endless cycle of waiting. Why is it that people think Linux is not worth it? Linux dominates literally every form of computing except for the desktop. Why is that? Well I think it is because the large companies realized the value and embraced the platform for their needs like servers and whatnot to the point that they took the risk and it paid off. I mean, 65% of Microsoft's own Azure platform is powered by Linux. Even Microsoft has given up the fight against Linux there. I am curious what the technical holdouts are because I believe they are all gone now. With Snaps & Flatpaks the development nightmare of multiple distros and version locking is completely gone as well so there is more and more reasons to make a Linux port. In regards to the initial cost, I'd like for y'all to do a crowdfunding campaign to really test the interest in having Affinity on Linux. You set a campaign on whichever platform you want, calculate how much you think you need for support and let's see if the platform will help make it happen. I think it absolutely would be on board for it and until someone tries its all just speculation. Let's say you setup an IndieGoGo campaign, or whatever, and set it for $500,000 to bring it to Linux and in this case, backers would be just pre-orders. If it makes it to the number then you port it obviously and if not you don't. You create multiple tiers for the campaign so that people like myself can purchase multiple copies or put in more just in general. For example, $50 for Affinity on Windows is a good price but if it will help bring the software to Linux I am willing to pay $250 to get it. There are also many others in my position where the base price is great but also willing to pay more for the chance of it being on my platform. It would need 10,000 at $50 and 2,500 at $250 . . . are those numbers reasonable? I'd say absolutely and not only reasonable that would be very easy to get. I'd probably be able to put a massive dent in that just with my podcast/youtube audience. If the crowdfunding campaign doesn't make then Affinity is basically out nothing and at a minimum can prove they were willing to try to those who ask in the future. I'd call that a win / win.
  17. I stand corrected. 😎 Edit: I would like an updated response from the team. I expect the answer to still be no unfortunately but the issues addressed in 2014 have all been solved for developers so I am very curious what the opinion of the dev team is these days
  18. I dont think they've even read anything in this thread for years.
  19. well I should probably clarify that it isnt something that is likely to come up, the only reason I had the conversation with the friend of mine is that I was talking to them about the GIMP app itself and he said he hated the name of it and then I asked why. So it's not something I bet any of them want to talk about but since it was directly in his face due to the application discussion he couldn't help it. That experience might have been rare in itself for me to have heard about it too. I am curious what she says if you ask her but I also totally understand not wanting to ask her about it. this is cool in a company setting when you can manage one thing for everyone, that is a very cool value. I also have something like this setup for some tools because I can just keep them on a separate drive and that is nice. However, the average user wont have someone like us managing their updates and that is what makes it a terrible structure to not have a built-in update system . . . even if it is just notifications and a link to get the latest download. I do use AppImages for some things but I think they are inferior to both Flatpaks and Snaps due to this lack of updates and lack of a security mechanism. DEB & RPM files are fine for the most part but they have a MASSIVE flaw and that is version locking. I explain the issue with DEBs in this post on AskUbuntu.com however I didnt mention that DEB files have zero security mechanism just like AppImages although in a way they are worse than AppImages because they run as Root while AppImages only run in the user level. So DEB files, and partly RPM as well though RPM is better, are not ideal because of arbitrary version locking. Side note 1: apt-get is legacy, all a user needs these days is apt: here's a video and an article I made on the subject. Side note 2: yum is replaced with dnf these days except for in stuff like RHEL.
  20. I like Snaps but it depends on the application whether Snaps are an issue or not. Some of the apps I use work fantastic as Snaps and some don't. I also think Flatpaks are a great option too and honestly I would prefer it if Affinity were to make a Flatpak version because it would pretty much cover all bases in regards to support and ease of use. I don't recommend AppImages because they have no security mechanism and most don't even have a mechanism for updates. I'd rather use Flatpak or Snaps and then maybe an AppImage if there necessary but AppImages have a lot of issues unfortunately.
  21. It never surprises me when people haven't heard this term, it's usually because they don't have a direct connection with someone who has received the insult. I didn't know it was bad until I started hanging out with someone who was on the receiving end of it and he told me about it. Then I realized it was very widespread after researching it. I mean rarely would I ever use urban dictionary as a source but oddly, this time it is relevant. GIMP as a project has known about this issue for decades and the reason it was originally chosen was also incredibly stupid. The team at the time thought it would be funny to name it after the Pulp Fiction version which sealed the fate of the project because no educational institution or corporation will even consider to use such an app due to association with those things. anyway, you may have not heard of the insult version or even the pulp fiction version but you probably have heard the term "gimp leg" as in referring to an injured leg. That is just a very tame version of the usage.
  22. well thats not really an option in my opinion since it is a 3rd party version and it doesnt offer any kind of builds. You have to build it yourself with npm and to me that's not worth the hassle compared to using it in a Firefox tab. I would like a standalone but meh it doesnt need to be.
  23. Let me clarify, this was a reason I had a developer tell me why they don't accept bounties. I am not throwing out anything, you said you don't know why they wouldn't and I gave you a reason. I think there can be value to them but there can also be downsides, just like everything really. There's also a legal grey area of whether or not these bounties are considered contracts depending on the country. This is another reason a developer said he'd rather not bother with the concept. I agree. Back on topic of Affinity for Linux. I think there are more benefits to Affinity in doing so than downsides and I expressed why in this post but it's admittedly a bit long so no idea if they even read this thread anymore.
  24. That's great you haven't had people say it to you, but that doesn't change how often it happens to others. It has been an insult to people with disabilities for decades. It is also used as a term to casually refer to something being limited on purpose such as "they made a new laptop but gimped the processor so why even buy it". I actually heard a YouTuber yesterday say that about a new Intel laptop with 4 core CPU. There are instances where when someone is hurt they say that they "have a gimp leg". Many many variations. I am glad you hadn't had it said to you as an insult but it is very very common depending on your location and also depending on the level of physical issue. I have a friend born with muscular dystrophy and he said when he goes out in public (prior to covid) that he would hear it about once a week.
  25. I think it makes sense to accept them and also to not accept them. I mean what professional wants the client to decide how much something costs? The bounty system puts the power in the person offering the bounty and I've seen people want stuff that would take weeks and only offer $20 USD. That's not worth even having the conversation yet the developer becomes the bad guy for not considering it. There are many issues with software bounties. side note: Linux Mint doesnt accept bounties last I checked either. Maybe you are thinking about elementary OS, I am fairly certain that they do accept them.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.