5 ms·

Exactly. According to the membership page[1], Microsoft will be paying between €30k/year and €120k/year[2] to the blender foundation, along Intel and Ubisoft. O

Exactly. According to the membership page[1], Microsoft will be paying between €30k/year and €120k/year[2] to the blender foundation, along Intel and Ubisoft. On the other hand, Nvidia, AMD and Epic games[1] are contributing €120k+/year each.[2] All of these companies get "direct access to the Blender team for strategical discussions. Roadmaps and priorities will be aligned with your requirements as good as possible."[2] I don't see how they're going to "extinguish" blender. With this kind of reasoning, OpenBSD was also "extinguished" in 2019.[3] _____________________________________ [1] https://fund.blender.org/#credits https://fund.blender.org/#credits [2] https://fund.blender.org/corporate-memberships/ https://fund.blender.org/corporate-memberships/ [3] https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/campaign2019.html https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/campaign2019.html

read_if_gay_ 6y ago
The extinguish phase is supposed to come after the embrace phase. Even if Microsoft wanted to extinguish OpenBSD, it's no wonder they are still fine if MS just donated last year. That is not "this kind of reasoning" at all, that is just a strawman.
SamPatt 6y ago
>"direct access to the Blender team for strategical discussions. Roadmaps and priorities will be aligned with your requirements as good as possible." Call me a language snob but this writing is so poor. "Strategical" "As good as possible" Can I submit pull requests to that page?
- acatton 6y ago
  I don't think so, this seems to be managed by a wagtail based django project: https://git.blender.org/gitweb/gitweb.cgi/blender-dev-fund.git/tree/HEAD https://git.blender.org/gitweb/gitweb.cgi/blender-dev-fund.g... So this text copy is most likely in their CMS database.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- oblio 6y ago
  If I'd have to venture, it was written by a non-native English speaker.
  - yashap 6y ago
    Yup, Blender are based in Amsterdam.
cle 6y ago
The whole point of this kind of thing is to be able to influence the software that your business relies on. It's certainly possible that Microsoft (or any other company with the $$$) can influence the strategic direction of Blender in ways the harm competitors and/or other Blender users. I'm not sure why that's such a controversial concern to have, that kind of thing happens all the time. There are likely mechanisms in place to protect against it, but what are they and are they good enough? I don't think "just trust me" is a good approach to take.
- freehunter 6y ago
  Whenever I complain about any piece of OSS, I get told to submit a pull request or fork it on my own. If people are that concerned about MS having influence over Blender, why don’t they just fork it and maintain their own branch? That’s the point of OSS right?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - cle 6y ago
    Theoretically sure you can "just fork it". In practice, for complex software, it carries enormous cost. In that case "just fork it" means "organize dozens of engineers willing to volunteer their time (or pay them)". For software complex enough, forking just isn't a feasible option.
    - freehunter 6y ago
      And now we see why big companies are willing to pay the Blender team to continue development.
      - cle 6y ago
        That was never a mystery to begin with.
        6y ago
yashap 6y ago
Yeah, Blender make it super clear in the link you provided ( https://fund.blender.org/corporate-memberships/ https://fund.blender.org/corporate-memberships/ ). Pay 30K euros per year, and a Blender dev will work on the features you want for 6 months per year. This is way cheaper than Microsoft forking Blender, and paying their own fulltime devs ~$200K USD/year to work on the fork. Plus the Blender devs know the software really well, and are going to be far more productive, don’t need a Microsoft dev manager, etc. No conspiracy theory needed, this is just a cost effective way to get the features you need added to Blender.
- sushshshsh 6y ago
  Damn that's really cheap. I wonder what happens if deliverables are for whatever reason not delivered? What visibility and cadence does a corporate sponsor have with their assigned dev?
  - rowanG077 6y ago
    I assume it's not full-time for 6 months. More like this feature is concretely assigned to a dev.
    - pookeh 6y ago
      Also it's a donation not a contract.
rbanffy 6y ago
They probably can't extinguish Blender any more than Oracle could extinguish MySQL (Larry must have been really mad for that), but I remember what happened when they acquired and ported Softimage to NT. It worked for a couple releases, then it was abandoned, after killing killing SGI by validating NT as a 3D animation OS. The Softimage acquisition, as a business, made little sense to Microsoft - it was a low volume high margin business, completely opposite to what MS does. SGI made plenty of suicidal moves by itself, but I remember the Softimage thing was a big blow.
- Olumde 6y ago
  I always thought Microsoft did this in order to make inroads into the high-end graphics market, which they did.
  - yodon 6y ago
    That was why they bought Softimage (the then leading 3D animation tool) back in the 90's. Today Microsoft has ample presence in high end graphics.
- kayfox 6y ago
  Microsoft acquiring Softimage made perfect sense at the time, Microsoft was wanting to push NT into the CG/VFX market, but because of the risk around companies producing for a platform that noone uses, someone had to throw the capital at it, and so Microsoft did. Softimage|3D survived for a while after Microsoft sold it off, its eventual obsolescence seemed to came about from the drive to more extensible platforms, hence the new platform Softimage|XSI put out to compete with Maya. Its also somewhat perfect irony that the company known for its Windows NT based 3D animation software (3DS MAX), Autodesk, would eventually end up owning the products which brought the big players over to that platform. SGI also helped contribute to IRIX's obsolescence by producing NT based systems for this new Softimage|3D on NT move.
  - rbanffy 6y ago
    > Microsoft was wanting to push NT into the CG/VFX market That's what I meant. In isolation, the business meant no sense. It was a PR move to validate NT as a graphics platform. With that goal accomplished, I got the impression the product languished without significant development. > SGI also helped contribute to IRIX's obsolescence by producing NT based systems for this new Softimage|3D on NT move. Indeed. Microsoft assisted SGI in its suicide.
eggsnbacon1 6y ago
I used blender since the beginning. It makes me so happy to see it evolve over the years, first to open source then to a widely supported project. Donating my meager highschool pocket money to help buy the source code ended up being the most impactful thing I've done in life so far.
- eggy 6y ago
  My story is similar. I was near broke, but I was having so much fun with Blender at the time that I made the donation. I had been an Animation Master user on Amiga in the years before Ton bought the source code. Good times and great to see Blender flourish.

read_if_gay_ 6y ago

The extinguish phase is supposed to come after the embrace phase. Even if Microsoft wanted to extinguish OpenBSD, it's no wonder they are still fine if MS just donated last year. That is not "this kind of reasoning" at all, that is just a strawman.

SamPatt 6y ago

>"direct access to the Blender team for strategical discussions. Roadmaps and priorities will be aligned with your requirements as good as possible." Call me a language snob but this writing is so poor. "Strategical" "As good as possible" Can I submit pull requests to that page?

acatton 6y ago
I don't think so, this seems to be managed by a wagtail based django project: https://git.blender.org/gitweb/gitweb.cgi/blender-dev-fund.git/tree/HEAD https://git.blender.org/gitweb/gitweb.cgi/blender-dev-fund.g... So this text copy is most likely in their CMS database.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
oblio 6y ago
If I'd have to venture, it was written by a non-native English speaker.
- yashap 6y ago
  Yup, Blender are based in Amsterdam.

cle 6y ago

The whole point of this kind of thing is to be able to influence the software that your business relies on. It's certainly possible that Microsoft (or any other company with the $$$) can influence the strategic direction of Blender in ways the harm competitors and/or other Blender users. I'm not sure why that's such a controversial concern to have, that kind of thing happens all the time. There are likely mechanisms in place to protect against it, but what are they and are they good enough? I don't think "just trust me" is a good approach to take.

freehunter 6y ago
Whenever I complain about any piece of OSS, I get told to submit a pull request or fork it on my own. If people are that concerned about MS having influence over Blender, why don’t they just fork it and maintain their own branch? That’s the point of OSS right?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- cle 6y ago
  Theoretically sure you can "just fork it". In practice, for complex software, it carries enormous cost. In that case "just fork it" means "organize dozens of engineers willing to volunteer their time (or pay them)". For software complex enough, forking just isn't a feasible option.
  - freehunter 6y ago
    And now we see why big companies are willing to pay the Blender team to continue development.
    - cle 6y ago
      That was never a mystery to begin with.
      - 6y ago

yashap 6y ago

Yeah, Blender make it super clear in the link you provided ( https://fund.blender.org/corporate-memberships/ https://fund.blender.org/corporate-memberships/ ). Pay 30K euros per year, and a Blender dev will work on the features you want for 6 months per year. This is way cheaper than Microsoft forking Blender, and paying their own fulltime devs ~$200K USD/year to work on the fork. Plus the Blender devs know the software really well, and are going to be far more productive, don’t need a Microsoft dev manager, etc. No conspiracy theory needed, this is just a cost effective way to get the features you need added to Blender.

sushshshsh 6y ago
Damn that's really cheap. I wonder what happens if deliverables are for whatever reason not delivered? What visibility and cadence does a corporate sponsor have with their assigned dev?
- rowanG077 6y ago
  I assume it's not full-time for 6 months. More like this feature is concretely assigned to a dev.
  - pookeh 6y ago
    Also it's a donation not a contract.

rbanffy 6y ago

They probably can't extinguish Blender any more than Oracle could extinguish MySQL (Larry must have been really mad for that), but I remember what happened when they acquired and ported Softimage to NT. It worked for a couple releases, then it was abandoned, after killing killing SGI by validating NT as a 3D animation OS. The Softimage acquisition, as a business, made little sense to Microsoft - it was a low volume high margin business, completely opposite to what MS does. SGI made plenty of suicidal moves by itself, but I remember the Softimage thing was a big blow.

Olumde 6y ago
I always thought Microsoft did this in order to make inroads into the high-end graphics market, which they did.
- yodon 6y ago
  That was why they bought Softimage (the then leading 3D animation tool) back in the 90's. Today Microsoft has ample presence in high end graphics.
kayfox 6y ago
Microsoft acquiring Softimage made perfect sense at the time, Microsoft was wanting to push NT into the CG/VFX market, but because of the risk around companies producing for a platform that noone uses, someone had to throw the capital at it, and so Microsoft did. Softimage|3D survived for a while after Microsoft sold it off, its eventual obsolescence seemed to came about from the drive to more extensible platforms, hence the new platform Softimage|XSI put out to compete with Maya. Its also somewhat perfect irony that the company known for its Windows NT based 3D animation software (3DS MAX), Autodesk, would eventually end up owning the products which brought the big players over to that platform. SGI also helped contribute to IRIX's obsolescence by producing NT based systems for this new Softimage|3D on NT move.
- rbanffy 6y ago
  > Microsoft was wanting to push NT into the CG/VFX market That's what I meant. In isolation, the business meant no sense. It was a PR move to validate NT as a graphics platform. With that goal accomplished, I got the impression the product languished without significant development. > SGI also helped contribute to IRIX's obsolescence by producing NT based systems for this new Softimage|3D on NT move. Indeed. Microsoft assisted SGI in its suicide.

eggsnbacon1 6y ago

I used blender since the beginning. It makes me so happy to see it evolve over the years, first to open source then to a widely supported project. Donating my meager highschool pocket money to help buy the source code ended up being the most impactful thing I've done in life so far.

eggy 6y ago
My story is similar. I was near broke, but I was having so much fun with Blender at the time that I made the donation. I had been an Animation Master user on Amiga in the years before Ton bought the source code. Good times and great to see Blender flourish.