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.

  • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    4 months ago

    But they’re not - it’s the same old, tired excuse that was never true.

    “Too many different distros” was never really a good argument.
    Just support one and users will figure it out, like we always do.

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      This is a commercial product - users expect support when things don’t work. You can’t simply reply with “Hey, go figure it out” and point them at a lemmy community.

      In fact they address this further down:

      but a lot of Linux users will see “We support xxxx” and they’ll go off and try a different distro. It’ll mostly work, but then something doesn’t, and it takes a while for us to figure out why, and then we get a lot of arguments over why their chosen distro should work, and why we should be supporting it.

      • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        4 months ago

        There are plenty of solutions out there that are debian or RHEL only, it will work on other distributions but they aren’t supported. If you have a problem, the answer will be “Use Debian” or “Use RHEL”. And there is nothing wrong with that answer.

        I appreciate they are trying to support users who are veering away from the recs, but that’s on them. As is not just using flatpak - which I personally don’t like using, but absolutely use for work/commercial software.

      • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        4 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?

      • 5redie8@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        With my incredibly limited knowledge of the system, it feels like Flatpak would be a solution to this, right? Or are they too isolated to support a printing system?