In my experience, a lot of open-source systems are managed by terrible teams with their own priorities or ideas, regardless of what the actual community wants.

In my experience, a lot of open-source systems are managed by terrible teams with their own priorities or ideas, regardless of what the actual community wants. For example, The GIMP has been notorious for this for its entire history, and it still is[1]. I remember ages ago, the discussion basically went like this. > "Thanks to The GIMP, people can ditch Photoshop and Windows and move to Linux and an open-source workflow!" > "But The GIMP doesn't support a lot of features, like CMYK color." > "Sure, but nobody actually uses CMYK color though." > "Literally everyone who designs for print uses CMYK color, like print shops, magazine editors, etc., and that's a huge market." > "Well it's open source, so if it's so important to you then fix it yourself!" > "But I'm a photographer and magazine editor, not a programmer, so I'm just going to keep paying someone else for software I can use, instead of switching to a free version of something that literally refuses to add the features I need." Cue tons of Slashdot comments talking about how non-technical people are so rigid-minded that they're not willing to learn anything new and just make excuses instead. Blender is an exception, not just because it's an open-source success, but because it's managed by a team who are building it for the people who need it, and not just to stick it to closed-source companies by making a pale imitation of a production app, an all-too-common scenario in open-source development. [1] https://medium.com/linux-gossip/the-gimp-has-a-marketing-problem-edced42b0158 https://medium.com/linux-gossip/the-gimp-has-a-marketing-pro...