jumpliner.blogg.se

1. #MACFUSION REDDIT HOW TO#
2. #MACFUSION REDDIT SOFTWARE#
3. #MACFUSION REDDIT CODE#
4. #MACFUSION REDDIT FREE#

Select the existing Autodesk Fusion 360 entry from the list and click Uninstall.Go to the Start Menu > Control Panel > Uninstall Programs.

#MACFUSION REDDIT HOW TO#

Manual Clean Install for Windows: For instructions on accessing hidden files and folders, see How to turn on hidden files and folders on Windows If you are uninstalling, use the Uninstall Fusion 360 (FSU command). If you are reinstalling: use the Repair Fusion 360 (FSU command) Manual clean uninstall process is high effort and only necessary in extreme cases.

#MACFUSION REDDIT SOFTWARE#

To me this just seems like an inevitability for software that gets this big and the more ideal options fall through.WARNING: The Fusion 360 Service Utility (FSU) provides a safer, lower effort alternative to the below manual process.

#MACFUSION REDDIT FREE#

If that doesn't work it doesn't give you a lot of options except to make companies pay and keep it free for end users that or abandon the project but at this point you care a lot about the project and you cant just walk away. If that doesn't work you go seeking sponsorships from your corporate users, which he did. Getting sponsored by a company would be ideal, like when Apple bought CUPS and hired the developer and kept the software open, but short of that you ask for donations, which he did. If you don't get enough people to help you then you have to put more time into it, but time is money.

#MACFUSION REDDIT CODE#

Well it's open source so you ask for other devs on Github to contribute, but many don't, it's difficult to get familiar with a large code base when you aren't being paid to and getting publicly involved with a project this large can be intimidating. Fast forward 6 years and you have devoted hours and hours of your life to this code base, you care about it, but you can no longer spend the time required for free, it's eating into your livelihood and free time, so what do you do? Then that code got really popular and people started asking for feature requests and patches, and the bigger it gets the more these requests come in. The author didn't start FUSE as a planned revenue stream, he started it like we all start writing FOSS, there was a need and he wrote some code.

I think this misses the point and overlooks the evolution of the project. If our economy was structured to encourage cooperation and reuse of each other’s work I think OSS would be a lot more sustainable and pleasant to do. To me, this shows a flaw in assuming that more profit potential -> better products. OSS just isn’t well suited as profitable products, but still is tremendously successful despite this. It provides huge benefits, and it would be able to provide even more if it was incentivized for people to work on OSS projects, which our economic system does not (see contracts forbidding side projects, developers having to maintain projects in spare time since they need a job to pay rent/not starve). Who would just give away free stuff with no strings attached? OSS exists outside of our transactional economy. This is hard to even think about within the context of how our economy is structured implicitly, we all expect projects to want to give utility at the cost of some kind of payment (whether a purchase or donation). We all understand and benefit from OSS it works like a sort of gift economy, where people in a community give products away without expecting compensation. To me this shows a major disconnect between our capitalist economy and OSS.

You need either a passion, or a sponsor, or an alternate strategy, if you want to make a profit. I love Open Source, I wouldn't be an IT guy and developer without it. You need an ecosystem to establish these profit goals. There are OSS models of compensation (mostly based around support), but those require an established consumer base and an institutional need to pay for support (aka, being red hat certified). I always see OSS companies fold with a big pikachu face when they realize that the world won't support the company out of good will. You cannot, should not, rely on donations as a revenue stream. People will always use free software without compensation if it's the path of least resistance. The companies that can make money out of OSS are the exception, not the rule. It expects people to do projects out of a passion, and it expects to attract developers out of a similar vein to contribute. OSS is what makes the world run, and it has a fantastic community, and that community works on the currency of reciprocation. Honestly, if you are thinking about doing an open source project, don't ever expect it to be viable from a monetary standpoint.