If the alternatives are not there or lacking then people can’t switch. If people don’t use it and contribute (e.g. reports, donations) then it is difficult to justify creating alternatives.
This is not a stalemate however. It is a slow transition of pioneers frustrated with the status quo.
More importantly, the reason why all of those apps don’t have Linux versions is not because of some anti-Linux conspiracy, but because Linux userspace has for most of its existence prioritized distro-packaged-and-provided software, at the expense and sometimes even exclusion of binary software distribution.
This is not just a technical limitation, but I’d also argue a cultural one, driven by folks who consider proprietary/nonfree software irrelevant and not worth supporting in a first-class way. Unfortunately, the companies who make both the software that entire industries are built around and the games that you play when you get off work disagree. Valve was probably the company in the best position to make native Linux games a trend, and the fact that they’re more focused on Proton these days is pretty telling.
The only developers in the Linux ecosystem who I feel are taking the problem seriously are the Flatpak developers. They do amazing work, with great tooling that builds against a chrooted runtime by default. But it needs more widespread usage and acceptance, as well as better outreach to developers from other ecosystems who might’ve had horrendous experience making Linux builds in the past.
There is a future out there with native Linux builds of industry-standard tooling and even games. But it’s a future the Linux community has to willing to actually work towards.
Is it not “serious” to work towards a better future because that’s more difficult to obtain? There is a future out there where more industries are dominated by software that respects user freedom. The games industry has changed over the years and it is my hope people will not tolerate it forever. Even if I achive no impact with my games I can look back and see I tried for what I thought was the better moral outcome.
Is it not “serious” to work towards a better future because that’s more difficult to obtain? There is a future out there where more industries are dominated by software that respects user freedom.
I do not believe that distros ignoring the problem of binary software distribution is actually accomplishing anything productive on that front. All it does is put a gigantic KEEP OUT sign for most outside developers who might have briefly considered porting their software. Package maintainers are also incredibly overburdened, and are often slow to update their packages even on rolling release distros.
Worse, it also inconveniences their userbase, pushing them to solutions their that bypass the distro completely such as third-party repos, Steam, Wine, Flatpak, Docker, or even running Linux in WSL. All of them function as non-free escape hatches, but all of them are inferior to distros getting their act together and deciding that binary software distribution is a problem worth collaborating on and solving together.
Why not both? I don’t see how proprietary software on Linux will slow down FOSS at all, and it’ll only bring more users to Linux who otherwise have to use windows for their software, so overall more FOSS users in the community
And programs like Blender have already matured to a professional level, so I’m pretty optimistic that other FOSS apps will eventually follow, too
If the goal is software freedom for everyone then proprietary software working on Linux isn’t the end goal. Maybe it’s good - a step towards the end game - but I worry it’s a peak which is difficult to get down and up to a higher peak. Proprietary software on Linux is convenience above freedom.
AutoCAD has been industry standard for 40 years now, and it’s never going away. Can’t run it on Linux. It and Revit are 100% mandatory in construction/ arch / engineering
I have heard of those examples before but I have no use for that so I have not learned specifics to talk about.
Would bet it is harder to combat that “this will never change” mindset in the userbase than actually making alternatives. For 20 years from the 50’s it was normal for ALL software to be public domain. Times change, and it’s up to us users if they want better.
Yeah, that’s what I’m getting at, proprietary software on Linux is just a step forward towards a fully FOSS future
For the most part, there aren’t many professional fields that have a good FOSS option, so in the meantime their only option is to keep using the industry standard until a good alternative matures like Blender has
At the very least, people would have the freedom to not use microsoft or apple while still working professionally in their respective industry, so that’s more free overall
Yep, definitely have to pick the right tool for the job. If you use these things, you’re stuck with Windows. Would be nice if you could install needed software on whichever OS you choose.
And, no, VS Code is not a comparable replacement no matter how many extensions you add. I say that as someone who uses VS Code for almost everything…except C#.
AutoCAD, Revit, Photoshop, InDesign, SteamVR.
Pretty much sums it up.
If the alternatives are not there or lacking then people can’t switch. If people don’t use it and contribute (e.g. reports, donations) then it is difficult to justify creating alternatives.
This is not a stalemate however. It is a slow transition of pioneers frustrated with the status quo.
More importantly, the reason why all of those apps don’t have Linux versions is not because of some anti-Linux conspiracy, but because Linux userspace has for most of its existence prioritized distro-packaged-and-provided software, at the expense and sometimes even exclusion of binary software distribution.
This is not just a technical limitation, but I’d also argue a cultural one, driven by folks who consider proprietary/nonfree software irrelevant and not worth supporting in a first-class way. Unfortunately, the companies who make both the software that entire industries are built around and the games that you play when you get off work disagree. Valve was probably the company in the best position to make native Linux games a trend, and the fact that they’re more focused on Proton these days is pretty telling.
The only developers in the Linux ecosystem who I feel are taking the problem seriously are the Flatpak developers. They do amazing work, with great tooling that builds against a chrooted runtime by default. But it needs more widespread usage and acceptance, as well as better outreach to developers from other ecosystems who might’ve had horrendous experience making Linux builds in the past.
There is a future out there with native Linux builds of industry-standard tooling and even games. But it’s a future the Linux community has to willing to actually work towards.
Is it not “serious” to work towards a better future because that’s more difficult to obtain? There is a future out there where more industries are dominated by software that respects user freedom. The games industry has changed over the years and it is my hope people will not tolerate it forever. Even if I achive no impact with my games I can look back and see I tried for what I thought was the better moral outcome.
I do not believe that distros ignoring the problem of binary software distribution is actually accomplishing anything productive on that front. All it does is put a gigantic KEEP OUT sign for most outside developers who might have briefly considered porting their software. Package maintainers are also incredibly overburdened, and are often slow to update their packages even on rolling release distros.
Worse, it also inconveniences their userbase, pushing them to solutions their that bypass the distro completely such as third-party repos, Steam, Wine, Flatpak, Docker, or even running Linux in WSL. All of them function as non-free escape hatches, but all of them are inferior to distros getting their act together and deciding that binary software distribution is a problem worth collaborating on and solving together.
I tried to get wine to work on my RX580, and the card could t even support it. It’s only the last few AMD video card generations that do.
Why not both? I don’t see how proprietary software on Linux will slow down FOSS at all, and it’ll only bring more users to Linux who otherwise have to use windows for their software, so overall more FOSS users in the community
And programs like Blender have already matured to a professional level, so I’m pretty optimistic that other FOSS apps will eventually follow, too
If the goal is software freedom for everyone then proprietary software working on Linux isn’t the end goal. Maybe it’s good - a step towards the end game - but I worry it’s a peak which is difficult to get down and up to a higher peak. Proprietary software on Linux is convenience above freedom.
AutoCAD has been industry standard for 40 years now, and it’s never going away. Can’t run it on Linux. It and Revit are 100% mandatory in construction/ arch / engineering
I have heard of those examples before but I have no use for that so I have not learned specifics to talk about.
Would bet it is harder to combat that “this will never change” mindset in the userbase than actually making alternatives. For 20 years from the 50’s it was normal for ALL software to be public domain. Times change, and it’s up to us users if they want better.
Yeah, that’s what I’m getting at, proprietary software on Linux is just a step forward towards a fully FOSS future
For the most part, there aren’t many professional fields that have a good FOSS option, so in the meantime their only option is to keep using the industry standard until a good alternative matures like Blender has
At the very least, people would have the freedom to not use microsoft or apple while still working professionally in their respective industry, so that’s more free overall
deleted by creator
Yep, definitely have to pick the right tool for the job. If you use these things, you’re stuck with Windows. Would be nice if you could install needed software on whichever OS you choose.
I’ll add Visual Studio.
And, no, VS Code is not a comparable replacement no matter how many extensions you add. I say that as someone who uses VS Code for almost everything…except C#.