Bog
-
Posts
50 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Bog
-
-
4 minutes ago, justajeffy said:
We should continue to make it known that we want it for as long as we still want it. It requires almost no effort to re-iterate our desire ad-infinitum. The rest is out of our hands and no amount of bitching, whining or insulting comments from anybody in this forum will change that. You're obviously tired of waiting, and that's ok. It's understandable. Perhaps you should move on, then. In fact, please do. Unless you can contribute something of any usefulness to the discussion without being so belligerent all the time, it might be better if you unsubscribe from this thread.
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"? -
1 hour ago, justajeffy said:
That statement does not seem true to me and certainly not fair to Serif. It's perfectly reasonable for them to be extremely cautious in their decision-making with regard to possibly developing for another platform and then having to support it. It would also be perfectly reasonable for them to say they won't make a Linux version because they simply don't want to. That's their prerogative. All we can do is continue to make it known that we want it and are willing to pay for it.
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.
-
35 minutes ago, Renzatic said:
It's our job to convince and/or annoy them into thinking otherwise. It may take a minute or two to do so, provided it ever happens at all, but the last thing we should do is start taking it personally.
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.
-
6 minutes ago, Renzatic said:
They don't, but they generally are the most outspoken on any Linux oriented messageboard.
The really hardcore FOSS contingent really weird me out. They're such a hyperbolical bunch, always talking about closed sourced software in terms of good and evil. That's not evil. The secret police kicking your doors in at 2AM to eat your babies is evil. Proprietary software is just a business model.
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.
-
3 hours ago, Mark Ingram said:
People need to realise that yes, FOSS can be great, but often these projects need massive sponsorship to be successful. Relying on 1 or 2 developers using their spare time in the evenings to make a competing app isn't going to deliver the kind of quality that you would expect from a piece of proprietary software. And then you have to consider product support, documentation etc...
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? 🤷♂️
-
18 minutes ago, m.vlad said:
I'm not trying to assume that talking on these forums is all you guys do, but sometimes it feels like instead of being proactive and either talking to CodeWeavers or Black Magic Design, you'd rather pick and choose your proof and just say here that it's not viable to port to linux, despite all the links and info we give.
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. -
9 minutes ago, Mark Ingram said:
Yes, because there's a massive market there (Windows and macOS), and we believe we can compete with those alternatives. On Linux however, we don't know if there are going to be enough people willing to pay for the software, to fund the development. i.e. what's the _potential_ market size of photo editing on Linux? (It has to be potential, because the current market size is zero).
Basically all that post did was highlight the concerns that we have, that people outright reject the concept of paid software on Linux.
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. -
4 hours ago, m.vlad said:
I was thinking of making a post today on a few subreddits.
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
- Snapseed and Bez Bezson
-
1
-
1
-
1 hour ago, Snapseed said:
It turns out that everyone has been really amazing and Affinity Photo is now at position 13 within the top 20 with 131 votes. By continuing to encourage our contacts to use their three votes for this app, I think we can realistically get Affinity Photo into the top ten.
Well done everyone!!
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.
- Mark Ingram and Snapseed
-
1
-
1
-
1 minute ago, Snapseed said:
As our friends in Italy say, "Eccellente e grazie" and it is very good to hear this. What we now have do is let all our Linux friends and contacts know that now would be a very good time to register with Wine HQ and do quite a bit of voting!
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.
- Bez Bezson and Snapseed
-
2
-
5 minutes ago, Snapseed said:
However, there is now a no-cost opportunity for us to collectively and practically demonstrate our interest in getting the Affinity products to work on Linux but it involves not whining but getting off our asses, registering with Wine HQ and voting, voting and voting again right here: https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=39311
Yea actually I already did, dude, scroll up. 👍
-
4 hours ago, Redsandro said:
I don't think Serif has interest at this point in time, but we have interest in getting Wine support.
3 hours ago, Michael Tunnell said: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.
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
3 hours ago, Requester said:Illustrator has Platinum for Version 8.0 only (Which had been released at 1998!) and most versions are Garbage rated.
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?"
-
4 minutes ago, Snapseed said:
With respect, those are, and should be, two entirely different issues and insisting that Serif Affinity starts producing software directly for an operating system that only commands 3% of desktop operating system market share is quite rightly going to get a definite No! for an answer. Getting the Serif Affinity apps to work with Crossover is possibly going to be an order or magnitude or two or more cheaper and easier than full operating system ports.
...
I think it is wholly unreasonable at the present time to ask Serif Affinity to port over their apps to Linux.
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.- Bez Bezson and m.vlad
-
2
-
5 minutes ago, wonderings said:
It is not as simple as that. They would now need to support a product running on Wine and need a team to handle that. If they are going to market it as working on Linux they need to support it, again they are not wanting to do that.
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.)
-
6 minutes ago, wonderings said:
Because Affinity working on Wine would not be something Serif is looking to use to sell or market their software, so why invest any time reaching out?
...
If they were going to support Wine then they might as well just jump in and do a proper Linux release, which they are not wanting to do at the moment.
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*. -
5 minutes ago, wonderings said:
They chose to develop and market and sell for Mac and OS, they are not choosing to market or develop or sell for Linux or Wine
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"? -
17 minutes ago, Mark Ingram said:
They should be reaching out to us. We support Windows and macOS desktop platforms, and never once claimed to be compatible with Linux or Wine. Wine's goal is to run Windows apps on POSIX platforms. If there is an app that doesn't work, then that would fall under their remit to investigate and fix (I'm being rather flippant here, I realise that there may be other priorities for Wine or other projects).
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. -
Just now, wonderings said:
I would judge them based on their product not what you think is a bad business idea.
Yes, exactly, and that's where differ. Glad we nailed that down.
6 minutes ago, Mark Ingram said:We use Direct3D11 for rendering the document, Direct2D for rendering the tool layer, and now, optionally, OpenCL for hardware acceleration. These should all be things that Wine can cope with, so I'm unsure why there would be a specific problem with artboards. If someone from the Wine project wants to reach out and discuss it with me, I'd be happy to talk.
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?
-
17 minutes ago, Michael Tunnell said:
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.
Ohhh that's brilliant I love the idea of the crowdfunding being pre-orders; I hadn't thought of that!
-
1 minute ago, m.vlad said:
Guys you're going off-topic.
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.
-
2 minutes ago, justajeffy said:
You continue to be very disrespectful. Insulting people doesn't help your argument.
Where did I insult someone?
-
7 minutes ago, Mark Ingram said:
You can use a bit of maths to work out potential income from getting the apps on Linux.
35 pages of 20 posts.
Assume zero duplicate users (we know that's not true, I've posted several times, other users have posted several times too), that's 700 posts. Assume every individual purchases two Affinity apps. That's $70,000. And I'm being generous with the figures there.
Unfortunately, $70,000 really wouldn't justify the development of 3 apps on a new OS.
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.
-
1 minute ago, wonderings said:
Seems very emotional as you are upset that they are not doing what you think is right. They have their business plan and direction and doing it. It may one day involve Linux, it may not. You are not owed a Linux version of Affinity and if you are going to dissuade people from using good software for a great price simply because you are not happy with them not developing for Linux I would say that is very childish. If the software is good then recommend it. Obviously you could not recommend it for a Linux user but why you would go ahead and dissuade people from using on Mac and Windows is beyond me.
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.
Affinity for Linux
in Feedback for the V1 Affinity Suite of Products
Posted
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.