Bog

Yea as I said a few weeks a go- if a designer sends me an illustrator file (or pretty much anything else besides image files), what do I do? I'm left with terrible options, nothing of the "native" set is any good. And it's not just reading the file, I can't edit it as well to send it back. And that's a 30% market share). That's why using "3%" is a terribly unfair number.

Ok I have no idea how I was "belligerent"; that sounds desperate. Just because you don't agree doesn't mean I'm "belligerent". Should I accuse you of being "belligerent" too? No, come on. Anyway go ahead and "continue to make it known that we want it for as long as we still want it", but it does require effort, obviously. And it's weird that you're in favor of doing so "ad-infinitum". Here- does anyone else reading this agree with him; should "re-iterate our desire ad-infinitum"?

Ok this thread has been here for 7 years. How long do you think we should "continue to make it known that we want it and are willing to pay for it."? And who's disagreeing that "That's their prerogative."? That's an empty statement, right? Anyone reading this disagree that it's their prerogative? Well I mean- what would the counter-argument to that statement look like? "No it's not their prerogative because ............ ................?" I daresay the sky is blue! Yea they should be cautious (another obvious statement). How many years of bending over backwards to convince them should we go on? Another year? Another three? We're basically giving them free metrics. No. They should do their own metrics. (Or pay us.) We don't work for them.

No, I could not disagree with this more; we have opposite opinions. (Well obviously I agree that we shouldn't take it personally.) No, it's not our job to convince them. That's over with; done. "A minute or two"? hahaha, this is page 41. This thread started 7 years ago. They still have the attitude that they have, like, "the golden prize" and we're supposed to be clamoring for it (which sadly we (well most of the rest of you)), are. No no no, we're the gold. It's 7 years and they still don't get it. They're Adobe all over again. Give up, we don't serve them, let them fail for their ignorance.

I can back that up; they're metaphorically like "religious fanatics". That's the best metaphor- it's as incorrect to point to them as representing the overall attitude as it is to point to the KKK as representing right wing politics.

Yes of course, soo.... ergo... you should put more people on porting to linux, instead just having some of your developers do it in their spare time right? 🤷‍♂️

Yea this is what I've said in an earlier post two weeks ago- he/they don't get it and probably won't get it. We should stop trying. The great irony here is the self-fulfilling prophecy- by not being first-to-market, there's inevitably going to be FOSS versions of the products they already sell. Adobe didn't support photoshop and so GIMP happened; it got souped up. Gradually the FOSS versions will get better..... thanks to commercial solutions not filling the void first. They'll permanently lose the fertile market by neglecting it. We should stop trying, they've made up their mind, they're obtuse on the subject, it's over.

a) Ok sure gimp causes a reduced market size.... for photo editing. But the other parts of your suite have like terrible-to-zero competition. Illustrator being the first example, but that's only one. b) "people outright reject the concept of paid software on Linux"? Really? Do you have any idea how many server technologies run on linux that are commercial; not FOSS? I've said this before here- this is a chicken-and-egg scenario: The reason you're (missing the big opportunity by) not supporting linux makes people less likely to run linux, thus reducing the market size.

Cool be sure to point out that it's really to get other affinity products too because they're all just going to say "nah we've got gimp." So we need to explain that doing so would help support the base of the platform. Also obviously point out the three checkbox thing. gl

Woo! We have to explain to people about clicking the three checkboxes when they vote, I don't think most people realize that... This is fun, I fell like we're pulling a short sell on wine like reddit did to the hedge funds with gamespot stock haha.

Yea we (well yall) should probably also go to the winehq forum and post about our existence. I mean literally the only apps I miss since having switched to linux are illustrator and premiere. (The only reason I need to run a virtualbox is for them.) I'd post it myself except obviously I'm the cynical naysayer here lol. If you guys do, don't "flood"! haha, trickle in a few at a time right. gl.

Yea actually I already did, dude, scroll up. 👍

I agree with what a lot of you are saying- Serif (mistakenly) doesn't understand the opportunity here, so I think this is futile. As exemplified by @Mark Ingram recently using the idea that the number of people here talking about a linux version is a metric. That's an absurd lame "metric". It's a circular argument: In essence it goes like this: "Why should we approach the linux community, obviously they don't want it because we haven't heard very much from them." That makes no sense; for example I had never even heard of Affinity until like 3 months ago. ..... because I run linux. See the circle there? "The reason aliens don't exist in the universe is that I haven't seen one." "The reason we don't support linux is that there's no demand." Should instead be stated: "The reason there's no demand is that we don't support linux." They have this attitude that they're the gold and we're supposed to be bending over backwards to get it. No, they' don't understand, *WE* are where the gold is; a wide-open hungry market. They should be bending over backwards for us, not the other way around. We shouldn't need this whole plan of getting votes for wine support, they should have some of their devs in their making it happen, regardless of whatever votes there. I say we should just give up. They don't get it.

Me too voted just now. I really just want an illustrator alternative. Does anyone know where to get old illustrator versions? This seems to indicate it only goes as far back as CS6: https://community.adobe.com/t5/illustrator/install-older-version-of-illustrator/m-p/10360849 I'd totally settle for Illustator 8 from 1998 if I could find it somewhere! I bet that's pretty much impossible... Btw one foreseeable drawback to this plan of voting for Photo even though we want Designer is that others who aren't tuned in to our strategy will look at that and just go "I'm good with gimp, why bother with this?"

I agree with most of that except well what do think of this; as I posted above- it's not as simple as just taking 3% and within that applying the same percentage reduction of potential users to it as mac or windows; there's three things that make the linux platform unique: They'd be in a new market that's starving for products like theirs (and no, not just photoshop). A big bonus besides the sales there is that they'd also get first mover advantage. Linux users are largely developers, or least relative to the developer populating of win and mac. We're not running linux just do mundane things like email and web like the majority of w&m users are. It feels like when it comes to a native version answers like yours are doing an apples to oranges comparison, which is missing out on important factors. Although yea I agree starting with an emulator (well in the case of Wine it's not an emulator haha) is correct.

Nonetheless the team would be dramatically smaller than native linux. In fact to the point that they wouldnt need a "team", they're need like two guys of their existing developers or whatever just spending some hours on it. (btw do you write software- just asking.) (And hell I've been arguing that even a native linux version is going to be profitable but you don't agree so ok then fine.)

No- by supporting wine they'd be leveraging their support for windows.They'd sell more windows versions. If they're "looking to sell" more windows versions then it's in there interest to support wine. That's windows versions. And the difference in the cost for them to make a native linux version vs. just tweaking the windows version to work in wine is *massive*.

Yea obviously and the entire 35 page is about why they should be, but apparently based on what he said they're "open" to it but only "if approached"? Why "if approached"? Extending the metaphor: If they hypothetically didn't support macos and then gave in, would they say "ok well we'll support it if Apple approaches us"?

Did Apple or Microsoft reach out to you? I don't see the difference. I mean why do you assume that wine is eager to support you and not the other way around since you're the one who makes the profit and they make nothing? If you only had Windows versions, and MacOS users were here clamoring for a mac support, would you expect Apple to reach out to you? I don't understand the logic.

Yes, exactly, and that's where differ. Glad we nailed that down. Well, obvious question: Why isn't it the other way around, why wouldn't you being the one reaching out to Wine? You'd be making more sales. I mean, should they be catering to you or the other way around?

Ohhh that's brilliant I love the idea of the crowdfunding being pre-orders; I hadn't thought of that!

Wait where was I off-topic? Ohhhh wait wait you mean by responding to his accusing of "insulting" and "disrespectful". OK well what you do? I pretty much have to respond right? I can't let that sit there.

Where did I insult someone?

I don't know why you're using "number of posts" as the metric. No all linux users even know about serif products, mainly (and ironically) because they're not supported in linux! I hadn't heard of it until 6 months ago for that reason. So a lame (circular) metric to use. It's not like we represent a proper sample size of linux users. We're the ones who heard of this affinity stuff and the within that bothered to post and comment about it. Also (I said this before in a post like 6 months ago (I don't blame you for not reading it and/or forgetting it, it's a needle in the haystack of 35 pages): It sounds like you use the same metric applying the same formula of of "percentage of buy-in" that you do to macos and windows. Like "x number of users translates to the same percentage of buy-in". No, a) you'd be in a market that has little competition, and/or the competition is weak. (Again I'm not just talking about photoshop). You have to adjust the percentage for that; that's the whole point here; the lack of viable competition. And b) Further, linux users are largely developers, or least relative to the developer populating of windows. We're not running linux just to like, check our email and serf the web like the majority of macos and windows users.

All I gotta say is look at my response above, it covers what you're repeating. I explained the logic that if they make bad decisions they're not good at this so shouldn't be recommended, and explained the lack of emotion. I don't know how else to help you here.