On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Johnny Ferguson <hyperfle...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 07/21/2010 05:24 PM, Bernardo Barros wrote: > > They can still make money with GPL. Yes, they are not going to do that. > > <rant> > > I think it's far too easy to make a statement like "They can still make > money with GPL" especially in light of the fact that there ISN'T a GPL > equivalent to FL. I think you're right when you state this. The best example is Ardour, they can make a living, but it's not easy. There is LMMS btw. > IL has been making FL since I was in high school (time ago). In all that > time, no one has managed to make a non-crappy GPL DAW. I suspect it has > something to do with the fact that most of the programmers are not artists. > The only good audio app I know of that's native for linux is Renoise (and > it's not GPL). > > This is not true. You have Ardour and qtractor for instance. If you know how to work with JACK there are things possible for sure. I know people who where using FL Studio and Ableton Live and use now Ardour, Qtractor and Renoise instead on Linux. > I just have a hard time dealing with GPL fanaticism, some attitude that > seems to believe that anything created under a morally superior guideline > must also be a better product or tool (essentially a non-sequitur). While it > holds true for most GPL software, tools for audio and graphics are complete > rubbish. > I do not agree. Ardour, JACK, Qtractor for instance are good tools. The problem is that most people are not able to configure their system properly or refuse to learn how to work with JACK properly. \r
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
