Why is D unpopular, redux.

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Wednesday, 25 May 2022 at 13:57:30 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
> So there is a "debt vs asset" position to account for, it is 
> that the current community must be able to create net-positive
> 

Maybe your company could take the role of a publisher? So if I 
create a novel effect it would go into one of your stacks with a 
certain percentage?

Then I don’t have to deal with marketing, windows etc and you 
would get a cut? Or is that unrealistic?


> Now you must explain to users how to compete with you...

Yes... it would be better to cooperate and share marketing costs, 
some kind of umbrella brand? Or is it better to be small perhaps. 
I know nothing about this...

> If Vibrant had sold more than 200 copies :) perhaps it could 
> have a framework too. But it was a bitter commercial failure 
> and couldn't justify the maintenance, so everything about it is 
> retired.


I haven’t heard of Vibrant, but I guess it is typical in 
publishing to have a few products that makes up for all the 
others.

Seems to me that pooling would reduce the risk, but I guess 
cooperation online is a challenge...

If I knew how to make money off audio then I would give it a try 
by making weird effects for sure!!😁

> Cost of making the by-product available in open-source is 
> there, but you have unintended positive consequences too (more 
> ecosystem, input, community, things happening).

Understand, seems like attracting knowledgable hobby-users early 
on is important so that support is not done by devs...