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
        61
        ·
        1 month 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
          ·
          1 month 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.

          • 5redie8@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month 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?

          • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            ·
            1 month 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
            20
            ·
            1 month 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?

      • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 month ago

        There is no reason to support all distros. They already have an appimage, they could have dropped support for everything but that.

      • Steamymoomilk@sh.itjust.worksOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        For the its less than 1% maybe. For the the reason of there is to many distributions for us to support. Thats utter BS, just support at least rhel or debian if not just MAKE A FLATPAK.

        for context i got lightburn running on my t440p with libreboot runing gentoo linux. I installed lightburn through there appimage and it works great! Im fine if they wanna drop outlandishly niece distros like triquel or hanna montana linux. But why linux as a whole!

  • communism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    Crazy to me how developers would rather abandon a project (e.g. the Linux version of their software) than open source it so that the community can continue it. If you’re abandoning it then it’s not generating profit for you anymore anyway, so literally no reason not to open source it. Oh no, are you worried people will use that to build Windows versions for free instead of paying for a licence? Boo hoo.

  • rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    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.

    If y’all use Linux, then how the fuck do you not know about Flatpak, or even AppImage? Christ.

    • Sanguine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Read the thread they said they have provided appimage for years.

      Agree on the flatpak part tho, that would have solved this issue.

      • rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        58
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        So then why do they think that they must support every distribution? You would think they would jump on the chance to switch to Flatpak. The reasoning is ultimately pretty poor, so hopefully this isn’t a shitty cover for some other decision like layoffs.

        • Sanguine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 month ago

          No idea, not the Dev and dont even know what product this is lol… Go read the thread 🤙

        • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          They mention retooling to another library. I’m guessing they’re doing a UI rewrite and the chosen library isn’t Linux compatible. Since saying that will obviously bring valid criticisms of “why not choose a better library?”, they choose to blame something else. And the reason they chose that library is likely because of office politics rather than technical.

    • AndrewZabar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      As an extremely experienced hardware guy but only a hobby enthusiast developer, could someone explain how AppImage and Flatpak differ?

      • rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        From my very basic understanding (I have only been using Linux since December), AppImages are single-file executables (kind of like a portable application) whereas Flatpaks are somewhat “distro-agnostic” packages that are sandboxed by default. They’re sort of different ways of trying to solve the cross-distribution compatibility issue.

        I like Flatpak better on desktop just because it’s sandboxed and creates a menu entry automatically. It’s generally easier to update a Flatpak too, but a dev could implement an auto-updater in an AppImage release if they wanted to. IMO, when a Flatpak isn’t available, AppImages are fine, and you can extract the files from them with the --appimage-extract argument if you want to see what’s in there or edit a config.

    • 7eter@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      I was thinking about switching fron LaserGRBL to Lightburn becausethey had native Linux support… Guess I’ll keep LaserGRBL + Wine following the guide in this comment

  • Mactan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    same old excuse. all they need to do is shit out a deb and the distros can all figure out their garbage from there

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Just open source v1.7 and let the community make their “openLight” version. They said they’re moving to custom libraries anyway, and people would be able to keep buying their products, so doesn’t seem like they stand to lose much by going the open source/abandonware route.

  • rem26_art@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 month ago

    Man i was literally looking into laser cutters like 2 days ago and saw that Lightburn supported Linux. Guess that was short lived.

    • JustARegularNerd@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I think this is a bad take, a take that assumes one is superior for using Linux over proprietary alternatives

        • netvor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          free & open source model is superior to proprietary, especially for users, and for long term. (funding the dev part is a crazy hard problem, to be fair, but that’s true for anything that should benefit users, including roads and health care)

          but the point was that the “people still dumb” take assumes that Linux users are superior, which is a bunch of childish BS of course (wasn’t probably even meant seriously)

  • GreyBeard@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    As a LightBurn user and license holder, this is annoying, but I could see this being a good thing in the long run. Right now, there is very little opensource alternative to LightBurn. As of today, there is a much stronger incentive to make it happen. I’m hopeful this spurs on a modern tool in the open source community that works as an alternative. What LightBurn might have done is save them selves some support overhead and created competition. We’ll see how that works out for them.

    • Mx Phibb@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Indeed, this would be nice to see. For me, the problem is really that LightBurn is over kill, for a cheap basic machine, you really don’t need half of what it offers. Heck, I’d love to see an Android software for lasers, and am surprised that hasn’t happened yet.

  • utopiah@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Doesn’t really matter if it’s not open source anyway. I prefer something open source without Linux support (that can thus have community builds) than something proprietary with Linux support.

    • g5pw@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      There’s LaserWeb but apparently it doesn’t support closed source (Chinese) firmware so you’d need to change your laser’s controller…

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Might be worth doing some file analysis. The big CO2 laser at my Makerspace has a “proprietary” format that is really just PostScript. Working around that stuff should be doable.

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah they never were great at Linux support anyway. About 6 years ago I had to teach them that LTS distros like Ubuntu stay on old versions of packages. At the time they built their Linux-x64.deb against Ubuntu 18.04 when Ubuntu 14.04 and 16.0x and thus everything from Mint 17 and on were still under LTS and so a lot of installs out there would see a dependency error.

    This is definitely where Flatpak or even Appimage is the real solution.

    Well it seems to be time to make a FOSS laser engraver app. Never did really like LaserWeb.