342
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by Steamymoomilk@sh.itjust.works to c/linux@lemmy.ml

As a advid user of lightburn for my business, this truely saddens me.

I loved being able to have the freedom to run linux and have 1st class support.

Lightburn states in this post, about how linux is less than 1℅ of there users. They also state it costs lots of money and time to develop for each distribution. To which i gotta ask WHY not just make a flatpak or distribute source to let the community package it. Like its kinda dumb to kill it off ive been using zoronOS for 3 years running my laser cutter! And it works bloody great!!!! The last version for linux will be 1.7 which will continue to work forever with a valid liscence. I do not plan to switch back to ~~windows~~ spyware or ~~MAC~~ overpriced Unix. I hope the people at lightburn reconsider in the future, There software is the best software for laser cutters period. And when buying my laser cutter (60watt omtech) i went out of my way to buy one with a rudia controller as it is compatible with lightburn.

--edit just got the email this is what they sent

"To our valued Linux users:

After a great deal of internal discussion, we have made the difficult decision to sunset Linux support following the upcoming release of LightBurn 1.7.00.

Many of us at LightBurn are Linux users ourselves, and this decision was made reluctantly, after careful investigation of all possible avenues for continuing Linux support.

The unfortunate reality is that Linux users make up only 1% of our overall user base, but providing and supporting Linux-compatible builds takes up as much or more time as does providing them for Windows and Mac OS.

The segmentation of Linux distributions complicates these burdens further — we've had to provide three separate packages for the versions of Linux we officially support, and still encounter frequent compatibility issues on those distributions (or closely related distributions), to say nothing of the many distributions we have been asked to support.

Finally, we will soon begin building LightBurn on a new framework that will require our development team to write custom libraries for each platform we support. This will be a significant undertaking and, regrettably, it is simply not tenable to invest our team's time into an effort that will impact such a small portion of our user base. Such challenges will only continue to arise as we work to expand LightBurn's capabilities going forward.

We understand that our Linux users will be disappointed by this decision. We appreciate all of our users, and assure you that your existing license will still work with any version of LightBurn for which your license term is valid, up until LightBurn version 1.7.00, forever. Prior releases will always be made available for download. Finally, your license will continue to be valid for future Windows and Mac OS releases covered by your license term.

If you are a Linux-only user who has recently purchased a license or renewal that is valid for a release of LightBurn after v1.7.00, please contact us for a refund.

Rest assured that we will be using the time gained by sunsetting Linux support to redouble our efforts at making better software for laser cutters, and beyond. We hope you will continue to utilize LightBurn on a supported operating system going forward, and we thank you for being a part of the LightBurn community.

Sincerely,

The LightBurn Software Team

Copyright © 2024 LightBurn Software. All rights reserved. "

I appreciate that there willing to refund recently bought liscences and all versions up to 1.7 forever instead of DRM bullshit (you gotta buy the newest subscription service) {insert cable guys from southpark} But if your rewriting the framework then why kill off linux??? They said there working on a native arm build for MacOS which knowing apple your gonna half to buy the new macbook cause the old one is old and apple needs your money. So its not anymore of a reason to kill linux

TLDR: there killing linux support because its less than 1% of there userbase and they spend more money and time maintaining the lightburn build.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com 125 points 3 months ago

Many of us at LightBurn are Linux users ourselves, and this decision was made reluctantly, after careful investigation of all possible avenues for continuing Linux support.

If y'all use Linux, then how the fuck do you not know about Flatpak, or even AppImage? Christ.

[-] Sanguine@lemmy.world 58 points 3 months ago

Read the thread they said they have provided appimage for years.

Agree on the flatpak part tho, that would have solved this issue.

[-] rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com 57 points 3 months ago

So then why do they think that they must support every distribution? You would think they would jump on the chance to switch to Flatpak. The reasoning is ultimately pretty poor, so hopefully this isn't a shitty cover for some other decision like layoffs.

[-] Sanguine@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago

No idea, not the Dev and dont even know what product this is lol.. Go read the thread 🤙

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] transientpunk@sh.itjust.works 91 points 3 months ago

To our valued Linux users:

Fuck you.

Sincerely,

The LightBurn Software Team

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mactan@lemmy.ml 84 points 3 months ago

same old excuse. all they need to do is shit out a deb and the distros can all figure out their garbage from there

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 55 points 3 months ago

Just open source v1.7 and let the community make their "openLight" version. They said they're moving to custom libraries anyway, and people would be able to keep buying their products, so doesn't seem like they stand to lose much by going the open source/abandonware route.

[-] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 months ago

Given my experience with their .debs they're not great at that either. They should have pushed it as a Flatpak or Appimage.

[-] August27th@lemmy.ca 60 points 3 months ago

Tell me you are too oblivious to implement CI/CD without telling me you're too oblivious to to implement CI/CD. Their builds and packaging should have been fully automated if it was such a pain. If you can make a Mac version of any software, you can make a Linux version. The debate internally was likely management being dumb as rocks and overruling anyone who actually knows anything.

[-] skymtf@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 3 months ago

I mean the apis are totally different on MacOS, like MacOS is not Linux by any means

[-] semperverus@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Sure, but the CI/CD pipeline would take care of that for you for every single build. You build the pipeline once and then forget about it until Apple makes some breaking change. Meanwhile, you push the code to your repository one time and watch as the machine automatically builds all 50 installers for you in one go AND publishes them for you without having to lift a finger.

[-] inetknght@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 months ago

As someone who's written pipelines who do exactly that on Windows, macOS, Linux across x86_64, aarch64, and MIPS, with optimized, unoptimized, instrumented for ASAN, instrumented for TSAN, and instrumented for coverage, and does it all in a distributed containerized workflow... It's not as easy as it sounds. Honestly macOS is way more of a hassle to deal with than Linux.

Unless you need ROS. ROS is utter garbage. ROS is popular in robots. ROS is, unlike its name, not actually an operating system but rather a system of tools and utilities which do not follow any standards and certainly not the OS standards. I literally hate ROS. I would burn that shit to the ground and rebuild-the-world if I had the time to.

[-] ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 months ago

I don't think they're worried about packaging so much as the fact that what works on one distro might be mysteriously incompatible on another

[-] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 49 points 3 months ago

I was honestly looking at one. No more.

Are there any open source alternatives?

[-] 7eter@feddit.org 8 points 3 months ago

I was thinking about switching fron LaserGRBL to Lightburn becausethey had native Linux support... Guess I'll keep LaserGRBL + Wine following the guide in this comment

[-] krolden@lemmy.ml 49 points 3 months ago
load more comments (10 replies)
[-] communism@lemmy.ml 45 points 3 months ago

Crazy to me how developers would rather abandon a project (e.g. the Linux version of their software) than open source it so that the community can continue it. If you're abandoning it then it's not generating profit for you anymore anyway, so literally no reason not to open source it. Oh no, are you worried people will use that to build Windows versions for free instead of paying for a licence? Boo hoo.

[-] Psyhackological@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 months ago

If you can't maintain it let the community do that ESPECIALLY enthusiasts.

[-] flux@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago

Well that's exactly the worry. Why shouldn't it be? It is their business and livehood.

[-] greybeard@lemmy.one 35 points 3 months ago

As a LightBurn user and license holder, this is annoying, but I could see this being a good thing in the long run. Right now, there is very little opensource alternative to LightBurn. As of today, there is a much stronger incentive to make it happen. I'm hopeful this spurs on a modern tool in the open source community that works as an alternative. What LightBurn might have done is save them selves some support overhead and created competition. We'll see how that works out for them.

[-] MrPhibb@reddthat.com 4 points 3 months ago

Indeed, this would be nice to see. For me, the problem is really that LightBurn is over kill, for a cheap basic machine, you really don't need half of what it offers. Heck, I'd love to see an Android software for lasers, and am surprised that hasn't happened yet.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 32 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The only reason I paid for Lightburn in the first place is because it's the only even slightly mature laser software that supports Linux.

Given this news, what are our options?

LagerGRBL seems to be open source, but nobody packages that for Linux as far as I can tell.

And I wasn't able to find anything else when I was looking last year.

[-] kitnaht@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

Honestly, Lightburn is hella developed. Even stagnated at its current state, it's still leagues beyond anything else. It'll continue to be a worthwhile purchase for a long time.

[-] vapeloki@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

This does not help with Ruida Controllers and fiber Lasers. Both things I have at my company and we don't have any Windows System.

That is such a shame. And since we need to talk over usb, wine will not work either 😞

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] art@lemmy.world 29 points 3 months ago

With proprietary software, there's always a chance they'll pull the rug out from under you.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 27 points 3 months ago

Yeah they never were great at Linux support anyway. About 6 years ago I had to teach them that LTS distros like Ubuntu stay on old versions of packages. At the time they built their Linux-x64.deb against Ubuntu 18.04 when Ubuntu 14.04 and 16.0x and thus everything from Mint 17 and on were still under LTS and so a lot of installs out there would see a dependency error.

This is definitely where Flatpak or even Appimage is the real solution.

Well it seems to be time to make a FOSS laser engraver app. Never did really like LaserWeb.

[-] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 24 points 3 months ago

What FOSS alternatives exist? This is exactly the reason not to rely on closed-source for hardware support.

[-] g5pw@feddit.it 7 points 3 months ago

There’s LaserWeb but apparently it doesn’t support closed source (Chinese) firmware so you’d need to change your laser’s controller…

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Muffi@programming.dev 23 points 3 months ago

LightBurn should hire better developers then

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nucleative@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago

It sounds like they're going to rewrite a bunch of code and decided to not invest the capital into Linux.

That's a strange problem to have these days since libraries like this are often designed to run on all platforms, but what do I know.

But if it's true that fewer than 1% of users are on Linux and it's costing them more than other platforms, it makes no financial sense to keep it going.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] utopiah@lemmy.ml 22 points 3 months ago

Doesn't really matter if it's not open source anyway. I prefer something open source without Linux support (that can thus have community builds) than something proprietary with Linux support.

[-] rem26_art@fedia.io 19 points 3 months ago

Man i was literally looking into laser cutters like 2 days ago and saw that Lightburn supported Linux. Guess that was short lived.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 19 points 3 months ago

Reverse engineers have entered the chat

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 16 points 3 months ago

Guess you don't want any Swiss government contracts

[-] mukt@lemmy.ml 12 points 3 months ago

Is it time to write a new open source software?

[-] 5redie8@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 months ago

I'm kinda surprised one doesn't already exist tbh

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] EddyBot@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 3 months ago

thats a big hit for non-commercial laser cutting enthusiasts
Between Visicut and Lightburn, the later was miles away even with its quirks and testing all sorts of stuff with boxes.py was a lot of fun

bummer

[-] secret300@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 3 months ago

So all the people still dumb enough to use windows and mac are making companies leave linux

[-] JustARegularNerd@aussie.zone 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I think this is a bad take, a take that assumes one is superior for using Linux over proprietary alternatives

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago

Honestly they should just make it work in wine.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2024
342 points (99.1% liked)

Linux

47970 readers
1478 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS