Without Blender we probably couldn't have started to develop our VR app as a small startup. Also, Ton seems to be genuinely nice and super funny guy.
Blender Is Free Software
171–180 of 335 posts
Re: Blender Is Free Software
#172I‘m using blender every day and absolutely love it. the fact that it’s run by such a genuine and inspirational guy like Ton makes me like blender even more :) if you want to know more about him and his plan for Blender watch this interview https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qJEWOTZnFeg&vl=en
or the tour of their new office (it’s really funny)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkKPXn6QBx8
Re: Blender Is Free Software
#173Can someone provide some context for this post? Are there calls to change Blender's license? Are add-on developers violating GPL? The post mentions that a bridge between open source and proprietary needs to be open source but the add-on itself doesn't? Is it just a "how dare you sell products closed source products on top of blender?" The business model of providing support is all well and good but it's just one. If…
Somebody recently launched a new site "Blender Depot" which hosts a bunch of Blender add-ons and provides a batch install feature. Some of the add-ons on this site are commercial plugins available for sale by their authors. All Blender plugins have to be GPL so this sort of redistribution is legal but some of these authors have been rather upset about it. So a large argument ensued on the Blender forums about the GPL…
> Some of the add-ons on this site are commercial plugins available for sale by their authors. All Blender plugins have to be GPL so this sort of redistribution is legal
Only if the people between blender depot has a copy distributed under the gpl? Granted, the most likely way they'd get a copy would be under the gpl (get a copy from someone that purchased the plug-in).
But it does not immediately follow that its trivial to legally redistribute the latest copy of a gpl plug-in, unless you purchase new versions as they are released.
Re: Blender Is Free Software
#174Blender is a great application some day I will put more time into learning it. I have always loved drawing, photography and video. Even as a kid in the 80s when two of those were very expensive. I was into it so much that as a child and teen I was labelled as "that kid that likes to draw". Later in life I was moments away from apply to an art college (NSCAD) but backed out.
Also as a kid I liked programming but I never did make anything. BASIC from magazines typed line by line into an Atari 600XL no storage, in the winter when power interruptions or outages were common.
You would think with those interests Blender would be my thing but I was a generation too early and too poor.
By the way I think many people don't know of all the capabilities Blender. Those that do use it may believe it's only for 3D graphics. But it's so much more than 3D graphics it has video editing, green screen even 3D printing and a game engine.
Re: Blender Is Free Software
#175When 90% of the plugins and tutorials are available for proprietary software it’s hard to support blender. It also doesn’t help that the UI of the blender is extremely hostile for new users. When other tools are easier to use and have better tooling it’s hard to justify the usage of blender.
This. Back when I was trying to learn Blender as a hobby I had no issue finding tutorials, but they were for a variety of Blender versions. For most programs that would be a non-issue but Blender seemed to radically alter its UI with every update. Buttons were moved to different submenus, entire menu categories were added or dissolved, and keyboard shortcuts would either not work or do something different than described in a tutorial that was only a few months old.
Re: Blender Is Free Software
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
> plugins are available for proprietary software I’m genuinely surprised that FOSS projects like Blender (or, for another example, GIMP) don’t offer ABI compatibility to allow the use of plugins made for the specific nonstandard ABIs of popular proprietary systems. Anyone know why they don’t? Is it just a platform thing—e.g. having to support those plugins would mean having to compile winelib into your project?
Can whomever is downvoting explain why this approach wouldn’t work? I think the above is a very insightful comment.
I didn't downvote, but I would expect most programmers to be able to guess at the gigantic amount of effort required to maintain compatibility across a considerable semantic mismatch and at least understand the choice to spend resources elsewhere, especially in the context of open source, where there is no payroll to mitigate drudgery.
Re: Blender Is Free Software
#177From the article: "And if you think you ‘suffer from piracy’ or find it hard to do business with Free Software? Just distinguish yourselves with the proven successful free/open source business model: provide docs, training, content, frequent updates and support. Your customers will love you!" Well, then why does Blender need a development fund? [0] I honestly agree with most of what this article says and I admire the…
Why? People want to donate. Would be silly not to take their money and use it to improve the project even more. I would argue that donations is a key part of this style of FOSS business model.
The realty is that donation-based is not a sustainable business model. You basically can't always afford to eat based on it, leave alone to rent an apartment.
Ditto for the much touted GPL “service model” - charging for support and training. Realistically, this just does NOT work for anyone except for RedHat, because otherwise there would’ve been plentful examples everytime this subject surfaces and there’s always none. Also saying this as an ISV with tens of years of experience - making living off GPL-licensed software through secondary services is an absolute suicidal pipe dream. Even the double-licensed model (which is not applicable in Belnder's add-on case) is dramatically inferior to more conventional licensing models.
Re: Blender Is Free Software
#178Can someone provide some context for this post? Are there calls to change Blender's license? Are add-on developers violating GPL? The post mentions that a bridge between open source and proprietary needs to be open source but the add-on itself doesn't? Is it just a "how dare you sell products closed source products on top of blender?" The business model of providing support is all well and good but it's just one. If…
Somebody recently launched a new site "Blender Depot" which hosts a bunch of Blender add-ons and provides a batch install feature. Some of the add-ons on this site are commercial plugins available for sale by their authors. All Blender plugins have to be GPL so this sort of redistribution is legal but some of these authors have been rather upset about it. So a large argument ensued on the Blender forums about the GPL…
Thank you for providing this context.
> All Blender plugins have to be GPL
Didn't the blog article just point out an obvious loophole of turning the addon into a bridge to an external non-GPL module, and putting some critical functionality into the non-GPL part?
Of course, developing such addons will be harder, but even moving just some pointless, trivial, easily rewritten code to the non-GPL part would force people who want to redistribute it to rewrite that part.
Or even completely subverting the spirit (but probably not the law) of the GPL by building a small non-GPL "DRM server" that is called and checked from the GPL'd module, and having the open source part refuse to work if this server isn't present? Of course, anyone would be invited to take the GPL'ed code and remove the checks, but it would shift the cost from "redistribute the version for free" to creating and maintaining a fork, which might be enough to get people to pay instead.
Re: Blender Is Free Software
#179I try to say libre software rather than Free Software , and I wish the FSF would back the libre term fully. When RMS is giving a speech, he has an opportunity to expound on what's now wordplay about "free software", to a captive audience that's perhaps already receptive or prepared to listen. But low-level grassroots advocacy opportunities often happen in contexts in which people are talking for some other purpose, a…
I'm a soon-to-be third year CS student. If I started to use the term "libre software" I'd be ridiculed to hell and back. I think you overestimate the receptiveness of developers.
I would use that term, but then I would do the rest of the speech in Spanish, just for consistency.
Re: Blender Is Free Software
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never uttered "full stack" with a straight face. Actually, in the last interview I had with a CEO where he asked if I was a "full stack developer" I just laughed.
I don't get it - what's laughable about the idea of someone who can write both the front-end and back-end of a web application? I know people who do that in practice.
Yeah, I can do that too. And a LITTLE bit more.