3 ms·

Good for them, I'm sure it's a nice shot in the arm. But jesus, it's not much, really. You certainly don't do open source to get rich. 25k is about 18 minutes

Good for them, I'm sure it's a nice shot in the arm. But jesus, it's not much, really. You certainly don't do open source to get rich. 25k is about 18 minutes of Fortnite revenue, if I've done the math right.

preommr 7y ago
It's pretty insane. Tech in general has so much money that is more or less 'wasted'. Just people throwing billions at useless startups in the hope that it grows big. I know wework wasn't a tech company, but it got invested in like it was one. If even a trickle of that money had gone into projects like blender or krita, it would make such big difference. It's not exactly an apples to apples comparison, but it's still a thought that pops into my head from time to time.
- beering 7y ago
  And I think there's a good case to be made for big companies flush with money to throw a bit of that money at open-source products: you're hedging your bets on your future software needs and signalling to vendors that they're not invincible. Considering Epic's given grants to Blender and Krita while they have many employees using rival 3D and painting tools, it feels pretty strategic. If they never end up using either internally, they still get the good will that it fosters.
ronilan 7y ago
I once had an independent project that was both awesome and positioned extremely well for the needs of big co. But, life, it needed support. So, big co sent someone with a fat salary and stock options to take care of things. He mailed to “brainstorm” what can be done so that “folks like yourself could successfully build” stuff that benefits them and how to make it “worth a developer’s while”. So yah. That was bullshit and the way Open Source is funded is (also, among other such piles) bullshit
- stuaxo 7y ago
  Yep, money is what would make it worthwhile - at same rate as they pay internal developers. Still - it may be possible to come up with a support contract that allows it.
webboynews 7y ago
Going by their donation this month, this is roughly equiv to 12 months'

preommr 7y ago

It's pretty insane. Tech in general has so much money that is more or less 'wasted'. Just people throwing billions at useless startups in the hope that it grows big. I know wework wasn't a tech company, but it got invested in like it was one. If even a trickle of that money had gone into projects like blender or krita, it would make such big difference. It's not exactly an apples to apples comparison, but it's still a thought that pops into my head from time to time.

beering 7y ago
And I think there's a good case to be made for big companies flush with money to throw a bit of that money at open-source products: you're hedging your bets on your future software needs and signalling to vendors that they're not invincible. Considering Epic's given grants to Blender and Krita while they have many employees using rival 3D and painting tools, it feels pretty strategic. If they never end up using either internally, they still get the good will that it fosters.

ronilan 7y ago

I once had an independent project that was both awesome and positioned extremely well for the needs of big co. But, life, it needed support. So, big co sent someone with a fat salary and stock options to take care of things. He mailed to “brainstorm” what can be done so that “folks like yourself could successfully build” stuff that benefits them and how to make it “worth a developer’s while”. So yah. That was bullshit and the way Open Source is funded is (also, among other such piles) bullshit

stuaxo 7y ago
Yep, money is what would make it worthwhile - at same rate as they pay internal developers. Still - it may be possible to come up with a support contract that allows it.

webboynews 7y ago

Going by their donation this month, this is roughly equiv to 12 months'