I agree - Moving in the right direction now! more user friendly for new users.
But why Add-on have no po file and no Add-on online management like App store(Google Apple), Unity Asset Store(Unity3d) , Plugins store (Wordpress) ?
2 Likes
You know, it’s still beta, so a shortcut that is not working is prooooobably a bug, and was not made intentionally. 
Because it takes a lot of effort and money to manage it, and there is BlenderMarket out there so… why spend B.I. money on a market or an addon repo when it can be spent on development?
Cheers!
Because a store generates money
1 Like
That’s right, but wanting to have a store business is a personal choice that maybe no one wants to do in the B.Institute or the B.A.Studio.
But there are others that actually want, like CG Cookie with Blender Market 
1 Like
Yeah, that’s true
But Blender Institute have a store right now.
1 Like
Yes, that is true, but they sell just their stuff, is not the same to manage your own stuff than having to manage a lot of sellers with benefit percentages and file serving at a bigger scale, etc…
It doesn’t make any sense and goes against blender principles. Blender Foundation doesn’t sell software, they sell blender cloud subscriptions to access their production files and learning materials and trainings to teach how to use blender itself. A lot of people were upset when paid addons gained popularity in the blender community, why? Because if there is an addon for something and a lot of people use it, this reduces users demand from developers to implement this natively in blender. And if this addon is paid it creates paywall.
Not to mention idea to have market to SELL ADDONS to IT’S OWN software the market belongs to is broken fundamentally. Even for commercial software. If you sell your software and you’re creating market to sell addons for YOUR OWN software, why bother to add functionality from community addons to your software when you can get bonus cash for selling addons and sell the software at the same time?
1 Like
Blender foundation has store for training, materials how to use blender, books, clothes. It’s completely different thing (i.e they don’t sell functionality of blender itself in any possible way.)
If they see well in selling the material of their movies I do not see that it is wrong that other users want to sell the material of their scripts, models, brushes, tutorials or software.
It is an argument of the GPL community without weight in the real world, it is wrong to sell only what some decide… When denying that you can sell payment plugins dor blender are not getting that there is no paywall, you are getting that there is simply a wall that no one can jump and so there is a moralwall.
I think you completely missing the point. The whole idea and mentality behind blender development that blender itself (as the software, not trainings) should be accessible for everyone. Now imagine some tool in blender is really bad and someone created paid addon to replace it. It becomes popular, but accessable to the people who can afford it and people who can’t still need this functionality. So when they try to bring attention and get support on something like right click select for developers to implement it natively. It won’t get as much attention because people who bought addon don’t care anymore (they have this functionality). They will just tell them to go and buy this addon insted. And this creates paywall and not a moralwall.
I have nothing against addon developers. And most of the time they create addons for themselves. (because they missing something in vanilla blender for example) and then just sell it as a bonus.
But suggesting for blender foundation to create their own market to sell addons for blender is nonsense. I explained why in the post above, to me it seems like a pretty easy concept to understand.
Maybe the ideal solution would be a blender.community portal dedicated to free addons, instead of having a blenderartists thread. But who would take care of doing it?
edit: looking at rightclickselect and blender.today, so the Dillo web platform, it also looks perfect for browsing and showcasing addons.
To me it also seems quite easy to understand that there are already stores of plugins, materials, textures, … and blender has not imploded nor the developers stopped having their moral convictions. The only difference is that today the blender foundation sees practically no money from that.
What you are defending is that blender should not improve because it may seem immoral, and that all users should suffer the same lack of functionality, whether they need it or not, just so that some can feel good when looking in the mirror. Because no, the fact of preventing or making it difficult for developers to sell the addons does not make the blender foundation develop these features. We are at 2019 and blender still has no real solutions for hair and so many other things that users needed 10 years ago.
And reasoning is meaningless, Unity, Unreal,… there are hundreds of applications that have taken this model to work and have not stopped implementing their own solutions. On the contrary, they have been able to implement improvements that users need before thanks to the income they need to pay developers (who today still want money to work and do not eat pages of ethical manuals).
The thought you have is a thought you don’t see in the real world. You say that if blender had a development store less some things, if blender had a development store more than currently thanks to the inflow of money. And all the users would have more features, those who can pay for plugins and those who cannot.
I don’t see any inconvenience in blender fundation having its official store of third party addons approved by them. They could earn extra money and give external developers the opportunity to make themselves known and earn some money.
No one is against models, textures, tutorials etc from the community but internet is already full of similar stores. Blendermarket and cgcookie always supported and donated to the blender foundation and development so it’s kind of already “semi-official-only blender market”. Do you suggest to create market that will compete with them now? And i think Blender license does not compatible with closed source addons (so the paid ones) or something like this. Community content like assets, models, textures, tutorials probably could appear in the blender store one day. But i doubt it since blendermarket already exist.
Blender Fundation does not have any business, only donations and “Development fund” that are basically donations, to keep the code legally safe in one place.
The “blender business” are managed in the Blender Animation Studio (A.K.A. : Blender Institute) a different legal entity.
He/she choose the wrong business model, its not the community fault.
He/she has right to be angry with him/her self not with the community and even less has any right to call them/us immoral or pirates just because didn’t like the rules in the game that choose to play.
The rules do not change after his/her addons where online, the blender license was always there, he/she didn’t read it as it should be done in any busissnes or commercial product.
In the same comment from Ton that you linked, he explain how something with copy right needs to be sold, that its not a dark corner, this is known since blender 2.4 probably even before it.
Well, when i opened this page https://www.blender.org/about/
it says “The organization
Blender Foundation is a Dutch public-benefit corporation, established to support and facilitate the projects on blender.org.”
So i typed “Blender Foundation” without too much thinking.
But i think what is what doesn’t really matter in this discussion. I mean, i was just trying to explain why we probably won’t ever see blender official store selling community addons how Alberto guy suggested they should do to increase funding like unity/unreal stores etc.
About machin3, even if he was wrong according to the blender license, when i said “he had all the rights to be angry” i meant it’s understandable why he was angry. I guess i chose the wrong words (english is not my native language).
Sorry. I make a misunderstanding.
I agree that blender is moving in the right direction now, more user friendly for new users.
No, I make a wrong understanding. Blender is really small that can’t be leader for standard in CG software, but in open source 3D software , it has no competitors. Notices that “in open source 3D software”. People don’t care what is open source or close source. People care about user interface, user experience , human–computer interaction and user interaction. No competitors !!! It’s self-comfort.
As the same open source software , such as Wordpress, Ghost, Docker, Ubuntu, Unity , UE4, AMD, Android (Google), Discourse(BBS), Firefox, etc They’are all very successful, at least not poor. right ? Look at Blender, 25 years , just 10 developers. Small, Poor, not standard, tiny market share. Any common man could ask question , Why? What’s trouble with blender development?
Well, When I have watched Ton interviews in blender guru . I have understand why.
Ton is like Steve Wozniak. They’re just love to invent, create , totally a Greek ,a engineer. The result product what it is looks like. Bad user interface, Bad user experience , Bad user interaction . It’s so complicated use it. Ugly user interface. have no taste. Why ? Because They create tools for themselves, he don’t care about business and user ex. like left click or right click, many more shortcuts to be remembered.
Right now , Why blender decide to supply an option for left click or right click , for good UI ?
I think it’s a compromise. The right click and many more shortcuts method can not be a standard in CG software. People don’t buy it . right ? The other say, If blender refuse give user what they want, blender will be deaded. Blender is not like Apple that could be a leader(design-driven）, like Close button, maximize button at the top left , and Taskbar at the top screen. People accepted all of it and love it . but right click in blender , people refused. That’s big diff .
Yes , The blender 2.8 is more user friendly . Yes, you can change key map in blender to follow your habit. but don’t forget one point. Most of blender users is moving from other 3D software. When they use blender , hey what’s going on create a cube , how to move , rotate, scale a cube. No way , I can’t hold it . We have to change key map like the same Maya, 3Dmax. The other say ,blender is not adjust to personal habit , is other 3D software keymap. This is blender what can do.
Lucky , Ton have starting realised user experience problem . But it’s not enough at all.
Beside blender development , I have concerned that who can inherit the position of the Ton as CEO? If Ton leaved, who can lead blender to right direction.
1 Like
I think you don’t have clear ideas …
Do you have any idea of the traffic generates blender and above all the community that revolves around it? …
I refer to the traffic of smartest people, not common users of “web browsing” … …
Do you have any idea how many people want to participate, also to say to create a small icon for this collective social engineering …
There are those who experience, those who approach to learn to codify.
Schools, universities, research centers, small and large studios of the most varied categories …
There are even those who plot to conquer the world piece by piece… 
You really have no idea …
You see only a small piece of the puzzle of the whole map.
1 Like
I am of the opinion that it is not a matter of piracy, I think the community is this. and even if there are potentially lots of blender users, only a few are pro from being assiduous part of the comunity and who frequent the various blender brands to buy addons … therefore, once a certain threshold is reached, the trade in these addons comes to an end.
it is not piracy, there are no more buyers.
they are still specialist addons … they make life easier and are powerful, but not essential.
1 Like