If people are smart they can make money of open-source software, they can offer support contracts etcetera.
Except there hasn’t been a public compile of liquid for years, to my knowledge. Are there any mac Maya 2011 builds floating around? Id love to try it!
There haven’t been any updates for over two years now, and last I knew both Colin (the original creator), and Moritz (the most active developer when RSP Sydney still was) have done nothing with it or mentioned it in years.
Unless somebody else picks it up (for a while a couple places in London seemed to intend to resurrect it), I think it can be considered dead, or at least comatose.
Given all the changes to the API and all in the last three years, I’d be surprised if it it even built for 2011 without at least some work.
Jake I’m sorry, but I have to disagree with you again. There is a lot of “for pay”, “free” software out there, especially in the financial and security sectors. One example of free software that is “for pay” is the very popular is Crossover Office. Their earnings rise every year. (Actually, they use gpl WINE code add their own proprietary code and then contribute it back to the community after a certain time period).
The for pay Free software model of doing business, may seem like banging your head against the wall and it’s doubtful whether anyone (besides CodeWeavers), makes any money that way. However, the open source “support” model is very, very lucrative. Canonical, a relatively new company, has an annual revenue approaching 30 million a year. That’s on an initial startup fund of 10 million!
Red Hat now has a market cap of over 7 billion
and Mozilla’s earnings (though not a “support” model) were 104 million in 2009 and rising.
There are plenty of open source developers making money out there and there are literly hundreds of very successful open source projects that don’t charge a penny for software but have very impressive success rates (BSD, OpenSolaris, Wine, WordPress, Samba, Blender, MediaWiki, drupal, Apache, Thunderbird, VLC, Tomcat, PHP, MySQL, Python, etc,). I could go on for pages especially if I start naming FOSS in the medical community and if I include dual-license projects like sun’s virtualbox and novell’s opensuse/suse linux enterprise.
An unfortunately common belief many people have regarding open source software is that they believe that the only way for a software company to make money is to charge for software. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but it’s not the only way and when you consider that 80% of all for pay software is pirated anyway, open sourcing your code can sometimes keep you from getting lot’s of headaches.
this trend isn’t on the immediate horizon, but I think it’ll become more prominent as Apple moves closer to open standards. I say Apple, of course, because they’re a big dog right now. But with Google releasing Chrome OS open-source, and Ubuntu holding enough share that it’s now sold with Dell’s and on the shelves of Best Buy, I think software will eventually have to follow suit.
I fear that you are confusing “Open Standards” with “Open Source”. It’s not your fault as it is very common to confuse the two. Open source and open standards are two very different and at the same time subtly different things. Open standards has very little to do with this thread other than the fact that much open source software uses open standards. But proprietary software can use open standards (.png, usb) and open source can use closed standards (.psd, .doc, .gif) But that is beside the point and not really what the discussion is about. Open standards are royalty-free, publicly available standards that are usually sanctioned by some sort of governing body such as the ISO (International Organisation for Standardization). This is different than say, an industry standard which is not necessarily open and is definitely not sanctioned though everyone uses it. MP3, .doc, .gif are good examples of non-open industry standards. Problem with non-open standards are that the license holder can decide to change the standard or to try and charge for it at anytime. This is what happened with both .gif and .mp3.
Open Source is usually software where the source code is publicly available with out royalty under the protection of one of the many open source licenses. I know it’s not a good explanation, but here is a very good article explaining the difference
here is another very good article about open source vs open standards
Regarding Apple and open standards. Unfortunately they aren’t embracing open standards. Google is totally committed to open standards, but unfortunately Apple is not. They claim to embrace open standards, but this only in market areas where they are the little fish, but wherever they have market dominance, they create an impenetrable walled garden.
Apple is actually killing open standards. We’ve finally gotten to a place where flash works in every os and now they are trying to push h.264 on us which is more closed than flash ever was.
Some other articles on Apple’s “Open standards” hypocrisy.
I would be very interested in that thread!
I don’t know that you understood me on this, as you are actually proving my point. Open-source is growing, and if there is any money to be had by it, the way by which developers get money is going to have to change. Not everyone can benefit from a “support model.” Not everyone can benefit from whatever Mozilla is doing to make money If we assume, momentarily, that open-source will become a lucrative area of development, developers will have to charge for it (okay, to be fair they won’t HAVE to charge for it, but the same old economic model won’t work for every bit of software). As you point out, some developers are already doing this, and are MAKING money! Mozilla and Canonical and the like are (and probably will continue) making money, but I’m not talking about them. I’m talking about developers in the future, particularly those who won’t be able to benefit from a “support model.”
I was actually making the point that Apple recognizes the importance of Open Standards. They realize that by embracing standards which are managed by a broader organization instead of a single corporation, you can distribute your product to more than just, for example, Windows users.
Let’s take a look at Flash vs. HTML 5 (hot button, I know, but it’s the best example I can come up with right now). If Adobe decides they want to reign in Flash, they have every right to do so. Adobe has the right to say “Flash will now only work on Windows” and there’s not much we can do about it, because it belongs to the corporation. Meanwhile, the W3C has no legal way to do the same thing! Nor does it have any interest in doing so, because they want their standard to be universally accepted!
The two are reliant on each other, aren’t they? With no open standards, you can’t develop code that is free (as in speech) because you’ll be developing on a proprietary platform (which not everyone necessarily has access to). And with no open source software (or free [as in speech] software for that matter), there’s no need for open standards, only standards which are beneficial to corporations.
This is something I absolutely disagree with. The fact is that Flash is proprietary, no matter how many OSes can run it. Adobe owns it. There are still web browsers out there which cannot support Flash past a certain version because Adobe refuses to deal with these issues (take the Wii browser, for example, which is Opera based). HTML (version 5 in particular) is supported by Apple as the successor to Flash, and is an open standard. I can’t speak on H.264, as I know very little about it, but I understand h.264 to be better supported than any other standard out there.
My only other comment is that you’re use of the word “free” is a bit confusing. It would certainly be helpful if you could designate (beer or speech)…but that’s just me.
http://www.sculptris.com/ - similar to zbrush. actually… freeware prototype of zbrush!
My suggestion would look something like this:
Celtx - Script Writing
Blender - Modeling, Sculpting, Animation, Video Editing, Compositing, Visual FX
GIMP - Textures and Painting
Audacity - Sound Editing
AVIDEMUX - Video Encoding
Teambox/Gmail/GoogleGroups/Skype - Collaborative Communication
Dropbox - Used as “Production Lot” (file sharing/version control)
I’ve just found a great resource for open-source game engines. It allows you to search based on your preferred license, most of which are open-source but proprietary and commercial engines are in there as well:
And only somewhat related, a site that specializes in showcasing indie games, most of which are free (though I have yet to find specifically open-source games):
Oh, and of course all of the id Tech engines (save 4 and 5) are open source.
I just used Clonezilla to create a disk image used to back up and restore a full drive because I got a bigger drive and i was blown away by how simple it is to use and how well it works. Not only that, it only clones the used parts of the disk so the image is smaller than the original. It is also really fast compared to other imaging software I’ve used. It really is a fantastic FOSS project. Only draw back is that it doesn’t yet support backing up a raid 0 array to a single disk or vice versa.
Also, for those of us who have a need for advanced, cross-platform ftp. Filezilla is terrific. For quick and dirty ftp, I just use fireftp from within Firefox, but for serious FTP I use Filezilla.
If you need to ssh from a windows system, PuTTy works really well. Apparently, it version 5 works under WINE.
This is definitely one of the better free game engines out there.It’s not open source and it’s still in beta but the programmer has said he will always offer a free version of the engine.I was able to get good performance out of the engine even on a pc with integrated graphics.The engine should work on a wide range of video cards.
Does anyone know of any free 2D animation packages (Pencil/ sketching and/ or vector based)
I’ve tried Pencil but it’s not really up to the job (Too many crashes and issues), not knocking the software, it looks promising, but I need something a little more tried and tested [I](and not Synfig, tried that, but don’t like it at all as far the interface goes)
I don’t think that Synapse has been mentioned yet.
A really promising start to this FOSS node based compositor. Check out the node setup, it is quite an innovative design :eek: Also check out the custom GLSL node…niiice:
Hope this gets lots of support so that it doesn’t go the way of Ramen The graphics world really need a good FOSS compositor…aside from all the cool new work being done on the mighty Blender.
I have friends who are using a combination of inkscape and blender with great success. This is a very powerful combination.
These two are done with inkscape and blender:
Here is a web2 type animator with a gpl license
qflash is an oss flash animation program
dogwaffle is a freeware painting and animation program
ktoon also looks promising
I don’t know if someone allready mentioned about mypaint
It’s great for sketching and drawing.
For vectors I use inkscape, http://inkscape.org/ , I think it’s the best but check also sk1 project
i was reading somewhere that pixar might realese their subdivions surfaces as open source?
is this true?
Great thread! Can this be ‘sticky’ as it’s very useful info.
Haven’t heard about OSS. They are releasing them with PRMan I believe, with a fairly accessible licensing scheme as far as nodes or something like that, while before past what you could get from the rendering API you had no real access to it outside of PRMan.
This is largely about consistency and being able to pipeline to PRMan though, the libraries themselves aren’t something out of this world and some of the features are dated and clunky (RR creases etc.).
Either way it’s probably nothing to get overly excited about unless you use PRMan.
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.