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

Affinity for Linux


Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, m.vlad said:

I disagree, if anything what I got from that comment is that some people want to pay for things, as long as they're FOSS because when the company fails, at least people will be able to learn from the available code of the FOSS app, instead of starting from scratch

If the company fails, then the product wasn't very good. That's something that the market has decided. I understand the argument more with DRM related things, like, what happens if I buy some music, then my the company disappears, and I've lost my music forever, however, this isn't the same. If the company goes away, then the software still remains. But as I say, if the company has gone, then it means a better product has arrived.

27 minutes ago, m.vlad said:

Also, Mark, for the same reasons you mentioned you could say "oh people use free browsers, play free games and use free apps like inkscape, figma, gimp, photoshop online and others on windows, we don't know if we will make any money at all from it." and yet you did.

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mark Ingram said:

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.

Fair enough. That's why we hope to get the WINE support. I would recommend a WINE check in your software though, so you can gather telemetry on how many users run your Windows version on Linux. You'll get an insight for free. You may notice that there aren't enough Linux users and your suspicions were right. You may even want to share the percentages after a year or two, to stop this discussion with some statistics as opposed to suspicions from both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Redsandro said:

Fair enough. That's why we hope to get the WINE support. I would recommend a WINE check in your software though, so you can gather telemetry on how many users run your Windows version on Linux. You'll get an insight for free. You may notice that there aren't enough Linux users and your suspicions were right. You may even want to share the percentages after a year or two, to stop this discussion with some statistics as opposed to suspicions from both sides.

Yeah I'd definitely be interested in seeing how many users we had via WINE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mark Ingram said:

Yeah I'd definitely be interested in seeing how many users we had via WINE!

There are certain places you can check to see if your Windows program is running on WINE. Perhaps there are more modern methods.

  1. ntdll.dll:wine_get_version
  2. HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Wine
  3. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Wine

I have no idea how simple/complex the WINE problem is, so I don't know if we can expect WINE to work soon or never. But if you can build some checks now, they will already be there once WINE starts to work with Affinity products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Mark Ingram said:

If the company fails, then the product wasn't very good.

That is definitely not always true.  A bit off-topic, maybe, but there are often several things that contribute to a company's failure.  Creating a good product does not guarantee success.  Businesses should focus on creating customers, whatever that means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 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.

You saw <10 people saying that they would rather fund FOSS software (fund, as in give money to free open source software) and that means that you won't make money? That's less people than here on this thread saying they'd pay for another license if it were ported.

I honestly find it laughable that you'd rather argue numbers in potential market size with us, users, while disregarding out opinions that hey, this is an entirely free market that has professional software for video editing, photo editing, UI design, etc, all except graphic design, and that's a niche you could target and be the first to market. I'm not the best person to talk to about potential market size, I'm just a user. That's why I recommended you talk to a company that's already in the business on linux and can actually give you stats for this, Black Magic Design.

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.

 

Lastly, I'm sorry if this sounded too confrontational, I'll try to be more calm in the future, for now I have a meme that fits the situation

 

download.jpg

Mădălin Vlad
Graphic Designer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bog said:

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. 

The IT market is well represented in Linux land, and is one separate from the more day to day and design demographics that Serif would be targeting.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mark Ingram said:

Yeah I'd definitely be interested in seeing how many users we had via WINE!

I'm one of those people who's willing to pay more a Linux version and buy enough copies for everyone at a small VFX studio.  However, I would not buy any if it means I have to run it under Wine.  I'd pay only only for a proper Linux version for these users.

It would be a mistake to count "wine users" as a good metric to go by in order to determine market potential.  There are many more of us who would not be represented in those numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Mark Ingram said:

Basically all that post did was highlight the concerns that we have, that people outright reject the concept of paid software on Linux.

One last quote: This made me think of that Hiri commercial email client.

Quote

Hiri says it didn’t initially consider Linux support. They assumed that Linux users wouldn’t want to pay for software.

Indeed, some early feelers put on Reddit reinforced this hesitation, with the general paid software = bad mantra in full flow.

“Linux users got in touch to see if we had any plans to support Linux. We gave them [an early alpha]. the users stuck around. Not only did they stick around, they gave us thoughtful feedback and were willing to send logs etc. to help us squash bugs. (...)

We learned that the more we were willing to support the community, the more willing they were to invest the product – with feedback and a bit of cash.”

And the efficiency of Snaps made it even easier still.

The result: Hiri’s gamble paid off.

The company now has a “very healthy stream of revenue from Linux users” according to Power, who adds that Linux “are a pleasure to deal with compared to others. They just love this stuff.”

https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/07/linux-users-are-more-valuable-customers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, justajeffy said:

IIt would be a mistake to count "wine users" as a good metric to go by in order to determine market potential.  There are many more of us who would not be represented in those numbers.

Considering your Windows keys would work in Wine, you could still continue to use those, and help contribute to the total without any out of pocket costs.

Though this does illustrate the one biggest problem with Linux, that it's users are a rather finicky, hard to predict bunch. What may appeal to Group A won't appeal to Group B, while Group C won't care either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Renzatic said:

Though this does illustrate the one biggest problem with Linux, that it's users are a rather finicky, hard to predict bunch. What may appeal to Group A won't appeal to Group B, while Group C won't care either way.

The biggest problem with linux is human individuality? That's an "issue" on all platforms.

Mădălin Vlad
Graphic Designer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Renzatic said:

Considering your Windows keys would work in Wine, you could still continue to use those, and help contribute to the total without any out of pocket costs.

Though this does illustrate the one biggest problem with Linux, that it's users are a rather finicky, hard to predict bunch. What may appeal to Group A won't appeal to Group B, while Group C won't care either way.

It has nothing to do with being finicky.  Anything we install for our users, we then have to SUPPORT.  If we have trouble with the software, how much help can we expect to receive from Affinity when we tell them that we're running it in Wine on Linux?  My experience tells me that most companies would reply with something like "sorry, we don't support running it that way.  Please run it on Windows."

We pay for software because we want the official support that comes along with it.  The official support is valuable to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mark Ingram said:

Exactly that. And that's exactly why apps and games aren't flocking to the Linux desktop. Because we just don't know if we will make any money at all from it. Let alone cover the initial costs of development.

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...

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.

 

  

2 hours ago, Mark Ingram said:

Basically all that post did was highlight the concerns that we have, that people outright reject the concept of paid software on Linux.

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.

 

  

2 hours 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).

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently some of the downvotes were because someone already posted about the thing the same day.

 

These have quite a high number of upvotes and comments, I hope this proves that the FOSS-focused people do not represent the entirety of the linux userbase.

Mădălin Vlad
Graphic Designer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, m.vlad said:

I hope this proves that the FOSS-focused people do not represent the entirety of the linux userbase

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, m.vlad said:

Apparently some of the downvotes were because someone already posted about the thing the same day  . . . These have quite a high number of upvotes and comments, I hope this proves that the FOSS-focused people do not represent the entirety of the linux userbase.

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. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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? 🤷‍♂️  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michael Tunnell said:

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. :D

Sadly they've already declined wanting to do a crowd funded campaign. They said that it doesn't align with their brand image or something like that, i.e: "we're better than crowfunded software". Well, not good enough to look into Linux compatability it seems. If only there was a way to get funds from a crowd of users with a low business risk... 

Mădălin Vlad
Graphic Designer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, m.vlad said:

Sadly they've already declined wanting to do a crowd funded campaign. They said that it doesn't align with their brand image or something like that, i.e: "we're better than crowfunded software". Well, not good enough to look into Linux compatability it seems. If only there was a way to get funds from a crowd of users with a low business risk... 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bog said:

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.  

To me, the one biggest advantage of FOSS software is that you don't have to worry about your favorite apps being shuttered, or bought up by a large company you don't like, a'la Allegorithmic and Adobe. The source code is always there for someone to pick up and fork.

As far as the ideology is concerned, I'm one of those people who doesn't really care one way or the other. I see them as different structures to reach the same end goal. One is a company creating a privately owned product to sell to a customer base, the other building a community around a product offered for free, but accepting donations to further its development. Either way you go, someone's getting paid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Michael Tunnell said:

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.

I see it as them being highly risk adverse. They're not doing what we want them to do out of spite or meanness. Rather, they're taking an overly cautious standpoint on the matter.

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • 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.