Linux support to end after v1.7
forum.lightburnsoftware.com
We all do here too, honestly. As Adam mentioned, this is something we’ve been discussing for a long time - well over a year at this point - but a few things have changed that kind of forced our hand in a few ways. We build more installers for Linux than any other platform, and that appears to be getting worse, not better, because it feels like every new Linux user wants us to support their favored distro, and has opinions on how it should be packaged / delivered. We’re at the point where ...

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.

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

  • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
    0·
    2 months ago

    users expect support when things don’t work

    no shit, that’s why you refuse support for users with unsupported configurations.
    This is not a new concept.
    It’s standard for big companies to say they only support RHEL or Ubuntu, in every other case you’re on your own.

    Instead of axing their entire Linux support they could just do the reasonable thing, which is ignore issues that are out of scope.

    Or should they support users trying to run their software on Windows 95, just because it’s still technically Windows?