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.
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.
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.
that was exactly one of my thoughts, once you sell to all potencial buyers, if upgrades are free then no one else its going to buy simply because there is no one else or just a few potential buyers, probably thats why zbrush its adding a suscription based sistema as well as the rest of big competitors.
More generally there is a good explanation here, of how the world works in the last 20-30 years and why, a paradigm shift is needed.
The Rise of the Machines – Why Automation is Different this Time (internet era)
UX is more important than open source or close source. Clear idea ?
The other say, If giving more user control is meaning more chaos, more unsafe, more risks ,more complex, no focus what user should do .
Does Windows, Mac OS, IOS and many more close source software limit your demand ?
Does have no great tools, no great company base on close source software ?
Absolutely not.
Does all of Android, Wordpress , any other open source software is greater than close source ?
Absolutely not.
What’s the meaningful of open source? For someone is give power, rights to complete control .
But how many people have ability and time to create it . You ? Maybe you have, But not enough.
As you said, I don’t have no idea. Well, I ask you that What great things have you done? What thing have you changed?
Don’t show your bad products.
This is going off topic, isn’t it ?
Man, don’t mistake the use of other software you’re used to, for a blender bad design.
Blender has its own solid philosophy and coherent own soul of use, and is the result of over 20 years of construction and evolution of it, and it is very effective, otherwise we would not be here to discuss it, and there would not be such a community.
So much so that you are not faced with an app made by beginners or used by beginners.
Keep in mind that this blender 2.8 is its fourth revolution. And it aims to make it even clearer and more effective, and there are hundreds and hundreds of pro users discussing how it can be improved every day.
The gaps are in you that you have a very superficial knowledge of it, not in blender design.
indeed, yours are among the most banal and common complaints made by lazy beginners who come from other platforms.
damn, your compatriots have made a whole fantastic movie entirely by investing millions with just Blender, and you’re complaining?
just click on my profile.
And what do these companies have all in common? Half of them isn’t even open source, other half are commercial multi-million corporations. I think you confused about what open source is. It’s not a magic word and it means source code should be available somewhere for this particular product. Android was a success not because it open source but because it owned and backed up by google. Google is one of the richest corporations in the world they own most of the media services people use in today’s internet - google play, youtube, google search engine, google maps, gmail etc. Google is leader in the advertising world of internet. And google ads is their main source of income.
UE4 was popular long before it became open source. And UE4 open source is completely different to blender, they just made UE4 source code availability, nothing else. It’s still a commerical engine with a commerical license. They were able to open their epic store because of the recent success of fortnite. I bet fortnite gave them more money in 1 year than UE4 engine in 20 years.
AMD ? What? how this company even get here? AMD is hardware manufacturing company. If they made source code available to some of their products it doesn’t mean anything. Their main income is hardware. And AMD is a commercial company.
Unity engine doesn’t have full source code available and it is still commercial product.
I don’t know much about other companies you’ve listed.
You’re comparing apples to oranges.
Open source software still can be commercial. What matters most is the license and not open source availability.
You forgot that famous open source softwares what I said. The Blender is not in famous’s list, right now. ! Well , 21 years, just 10 developers. What they’re doing in 25 years ! Why can not change the world in 25 years? What’s the root reason ? Those questions are what I’m looking for.
Putting aside whether or not blender is a “famous” example of open source software, as that depends entirely on which circles you’re in, Why does fame matter?
What? I just said i’ve never heard of other softwares you’ve listed. And what do you mean famous? Do you really think people care about android OS being famous or not when they buy their smartphones? I think 70%+ of consumers don’t even know what android is, they just need a smartphone.
Did you read what i wrote in the last post? I think not. If you will donate more money to blender development fund, they will hire more developers. Can’t you understand the difference between free and commerical? Can’t you see connection between money and number of employees?
Did you know that 3D-Coat is basically developed by just one man?
It’s not about the number of devs, it’s about the skills. 