[Ardour-Users] tax deductible Re: Ardour 2.8.5 released

[Ralf Mardorf]

Paul Davis wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Ralf Mardorf
> <ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net> wrote:
>   
>> Paul's work is important for Linux, even if I'm not using Ardour, I'm using
>> JACK2.
>>     
>
> I didn't write JACK2. You can thank Stephane for that, not me.
>   

I know that, but anyway you paved the way. So you should earn respect.

spinymouse-sudo at 64studio:~$ jackd -v
jackdmp 1.9.3
Copyright 2001-2005 Paul Davis and others.
Copyright 2004-2009 Grame.

>> I'm not fine with shady inquiries for donations. There's nothing wrong with
>> fair inquiries for donations.
>>     
>
> Shady: there are about 5000 downloads a month by people who want
> Ardour on OS X. These people generally have no idea how much they
> should pay for software like this. And "software like this" ranges in
> cost from about $50 to over $2000. I therefore consider offering
> comparisons with existing, comparable software to be sensible.
>   

There's nothing wrong with asking for 45,-US$, but your comparison isn't 
correct. 2000US$ software comes with algorithm Linux is missing, printed 
manuals and a guarantee. How many of those 5000 downloads are users, how 
many of those downloads are testers?

> I think that the open source
> model leads to better software, in the long run, although it makes the
> economics of development quite a bit harder.
>   

Full ACK.

> If you are calling my comparisons with other software fraudulent then
> you can go to hell.
>   

To still, let me call it "rash".

> The first times I tried to run Logic, Cubase and Samplitude, they all
> crashed several times in the first hour of use.

Cracks or original software? On an audio machine or on a Machine with 
Microsoft office suit drivers?

> You don't Ardour can stand the comparison to Reaper or Nuendo or Logic
> or Samplitude - that's fine. You're welcome to say so. Others don't
> agree with you.
>   

And others do agree with me. I don't use Ardour, but I tried to use it 
and I can compare it to Reaper, Cubase (not Nuendo, but on good 
authority I know that it's better than Cubase), Logic and Pro Tools. I 
also can compare it to Rosegarden and Qtractor and some other software. 
There's nothing wrong with Ardour, but comparison to 2000,-$ software is 
"rash" (on German "unüberlegt, unbedacht").

If people do agree with this, than you don't need to do such comparison.

>> I completely agree that 45,-US$ are a fair price for Ardour, by a package
>>     
>
> That isn't the price. There is no fixed price. Do you not recognize a
> text entry box when you see it?
>
> And I didn't even call you names. Aren't I nice?
>   

There at least is this recommendation and a special 2 step form. Why 
this advice that you didn't even call me names ;)?

People writing proprietary software do this, because they need a job to 
survive. Asking for donations is a good thing to do. I only question 
your way.

Why don't you sell Ardour for instead 2000,-$ like proprietary companies 
sell their products, for 900,-$ by a bundle with manuals in different 
languages and dependency support for Linux, you nevertheless could share 
the source for free, but give a bundle that is comparable to proprietary 
software. If Ardour is comparable this would be a more than fair price 
and if even 5 of 5000 people just for Mac would pay for it, you should 
get enough money by such a bundle. Dunno, but 5 x 900,- = 4500,-, okay, 
let's they it should be 10 or 20 users from that 5000 users each month, 
after paying the printing and duties etc. all your problems should be 
solved.

There are 1000th of cracks on the market for those software that 
shouldn't be better than Ardour, but anyway those companies give work to 
many coders, because enough people are willing to pay for the software. 
Especially professional studios don't use cracks, but pay and if Ardour 
should be good enough, they will pay for it too.

*It is tax deductible for professional studios and they would pay for an 
Ardour that is comparable to Pro Tools, Samplitude, Nuendo*. Why don't 
you go this way?

Enough said by me.

It shouldn't be an assault.  Especially the tax deductible for 
professional studios isn't an assault, but a hint. This is the way how 
proprietary companies work. All the kids are using cracks, but studios 
pay a lot of money, when the quality is good. If Ardour's quality is 
comparable, than there shouldn't be a problem to sell Ardour.

Hth,
Ralf