[Ardour-Users] Ardour 2.8.5 released

[Ralf Mardorf]

John Rigg wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 11:14:05PM +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>   
>> No doubt about it, you're a gifted coder, but I'm pissed, because of the  
>> comparison to proprietary software, at least there could be packages for  
>> often used distros.
>>     
>
> Considering the most recent versions of Ardour won't even compile on
> some of the current Linux distros (Debian Etch for example) that would be
> an impossible task. Besides, that's a job for the distro package maintainers,
> not the software developers.
>
> If your chosen distro doesn't have a recent enough Ardour package, perhaps
> you could volunteer to make one.

Paul's work is important for Linux, even if I'm not using Ardour, I'm 
using JACK2. Paul uses libraries other people wrote, but he also gives 
code to the Linux community. This is something I really respect.

I'm not fine with shady inquiries for donations. There's nothing wrong 
with fair inquiries for donations.

Coders of proprietary software need money for their lives too, they 
aren't robbers, they need clothes, something to eat and a flat. If they 
sell their product, then they don't expect others to build packages and 
to solve dependency hell.

A product like Nuendo is a complete different product, because of 
quality and quantity. Even Reaper seems to be on a higher level than 
Ardour 2.8.5 seems to be. Fraudulent representations shouldn't be used 
to ask for donations. I'm fine with comparative advertising as long as 
it isn't deceptive advertising. Btw. I never tested energyXT 2.5, it's 
for Linux and costs 49,-€.

A big plus for Paul is, that he shares his code, while proprietary 
coders don't do this, OTOH proprietary software like Nuendo is build 
with bought in addition algorithms that solve a lot of issues that 
aren't solved for Ardour.

It's unfair, Steinberg and other companies maintain jobs. It's okay to 
ask for donations, but the comparison is bad. You can't compare an Ural 
motorbike with a BMW motorbike. 1. BMW was before Ural and did a lot of 
research that Ural just needs to copy, 2. the quality of an Ural isn't 
comparable to the safeness a BMW secures.

Taking advantage of the gratuitousness of a donation in this importunity 
is manipulative and against FLOSS.

Why not simply asking for donations without making untenable comparisons 
to other software?
Why not selling a complete solution, a package for Ardour that is 
solving all dependencies?

I completely agree that 45,-US$ are a fair price for Ardour, by a 
package that does solve all dependencies. But don't forget that people 
downloading Ardour's source code often also give something back to Paul. 
They do bug reports and often do download several versions because of 
this. The amount of users, without fail, is less than the amount of 
downloads.

People are willing to pay for Linux. Don't forget that if you pay for 
Nuendo, you'll get a very good printed manual, it's the same for Linux, 
if you pay for Suse, you get a printed manual too. It's not that easy 
for Steinberg or even others who get money for Linux. Perhaps a printed 
manual for Ardour should be included, when making comparisons to 
proprietary software.

Just my 2 cents,
Ralf