On 27 Apr 2012, at 16:15, STF wrote: >> >> We have nothing to sell... > > Well, no idea if you are serious in this answer.... > > "to sell" is a way of saying. Take it as "attract more people to use > it" if you like
Yeah, I got that - but I think you are also missing my point, somewhat: this is not a popularity contest, or we'd all be working on QT or gtk right now. What we are doing is making something that works, and works for us. It'd be real cool if others liked it too, but that's not the issue, really - true art is doing something that you believe has merit, regardless of what the critics say of your work...! > Sure, if you had prior knowledge, you knew where to look at. And 't were ever so - have you spent much time reading the docs for, well, anything technical these days? Most of them are just impenetrable gibberish until you've been using it for a while, then it starts to make some sort of sense, if you are lucky. I remember the first time I read the early intel 8086 manuals back in '83 or so and it was just impossible to find anything I wanted - two years later, once I understood what they were trying to tell me, I thought they were great manuals, but initially... hopeless. Doesn't always work though - I still can't really make any sense from the XFT and Fontconfig docs. I have no idea where in that spectrum the fltk docs sit, but at least I can make some sense of them... > Same reason as above: I had already seen some other tutorials and knew > what I had to expect from FLTK -- so I was not interested at all to > look at another "video tutorial", no matter how "sexy" it was :D I'm not sure, but I don't think "sexy" is what Greg was going for... > > If you don't see this difference, don't be disappointed > that your user base is getting smaller and smaller. I don't think we are disappointed, are we? _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
