I was not speaking generally, but specifically for toolkits such as Qt and Fabric used to create applications - and regarding our CGI industry context.
Nothing wrong not being agree though. Thanks for the hint about your intentions. Cheers, Guy. -- guy rabiller | raa.tel | radfac founder/ceo | raafal.org founder tel: (+33)977 195 006 | mob: (+33)675 183 146 | fax: (+33)972 288 293 Le 28/09/2012 17:10, Paul Doyle a écrit :
Hi Guy - if your suggestion is that not open-sourcing software is a flawed business model, then I'm not sure there's much to discuss. I disagree. Thanks, Paul On 28 September 2012 11:02, Guy Rabiller <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Paul, Here is my feedback: Now that you've realized you had to move away from browser integration (at least for now), perhaps you will realize that you still have a flawed business model. That is, unless your intentions are to sell Fabric to Autodesk (or someone else) as soon they will make a move, of course. You talk about Qt and Python in the industry, but both provide open-sources, Fabric does not. So instead of becoming a new 'standard' - if not a true revolution in the DCC area - Fabric will just be 'another' commercial toolkit we cannot trust. Until someone or some community redo the all thing as an open-sourced toolkit. Qt wouldn't be a 'standard' by now without having provided a dual license at first: 1) free and open-source for integration in non-commercial/open-sourced applications. 2) paid for closed/commercial applications. Of course, if your intentions are to sell Fabric as quickly as possible, please ignore this message. Cheers, Guy.
