Gofundme for RoonLabs?


If people and Roon responded positively and the OP started a Gofundme with his own financial contributions would it still be a veiled insult? The pessimistic or cynical view is only a possible insult because these features have been discussed, are desired and people are waiting for them. Otherwise why would you even think it an attempt to insult. I didn’t see it as an insult at all. I saw it as a customer making a suggestion and attempting to help.


Would he make similar suggestions to other software companies that don’t have all the features he thinks they should have?

How is a Gofundme account for Roon even workable. It isn’t and I think the poster knows that.


I can’t answer for him. I would suspect if he cared enough he would.
I don’t know why Gofundme for Roon isn’t viable. If someone wanted to make a donation, public or private would Roon not accept it?


I would think not.

The OP is trolling Roon and now he’s trolling you.

If it were otherwise let him say so.

Of course he doesn’t care enough. That goes to my point. If he were serious in his OP, then he would be still engaged, not MIA as he has been. He made his little dig and got out.


He posted 2 hours ago. I don’t care enough to argue with you about his intentions. I just shared my take on the post. I’m fine with disagreeing on it.


I think @Slim_Fishguttz made a major point when stating that the way it was proposed it just wouldn’t work: the initiative to crowdfund some feature could only come from Roon Labs themselves. Because this is how crowdfunding works. One or a team asks the crowd. If the crowd asks, a different label should get attached to the activity…

(Charles Snider) #28

Foremost, to Slim, if you read all my posts in this thread, I don’t know why you’d think I’m trolling or insulting the developers, other than that’s what you want to think. Which of course you are happy to do.

Second, anyone can start a Gofundme, for just about any reason. I have no idea why you think a GoFundme couldn’t happen, again, other than that’s what you want to think. Whether Roon would accept the money is of course another thing.

And please remember, I enjoy Roon enough that I purchased a lifetime membership. Just like you, perhaps.


Maybe I should have been more specific: crowdfunding for products or product features. Of course anybody nowadays can start anything - but tell me about a crowdfunding campaign not done at least in cooperation with the product owner which actually led to a product delivery.

Roon Labs is a company - not a family who had lost their house due to a tragedy. Reaching out to a company intending to help works differently, I think.


Ok, let me put it another way.

The suggestion that crowdfunding would help with Roon development or support is insulting to Roon management, whether it was intentional or not. You are implying that Roon can’t allocate its own resources efficiently to develop its product and I say that’s none of your or any subscriber’s business.

Answer this question, truthfully -


Dude – lighten up.

I for one have notable doubts about Roon’s decisions wrt allocating resources; I think some other lifetime subscribers do as well, especially those that signed on in the ‘early days.’

Regardless, the concept that Roon’s decisions are “none of my business” is laughable. So is the thought of giving any more money to Roon (not that they’d take it)…but at least that was amusing.


I didn’t say Roon’s decisions were none of subscriber’s business. I said the allocation of Roon resources were none of subscriber’s business.

If one wants to criticize Roon’s priorities in developing the software that’s one thing, but to try to (thru crowd funding, of all places) bribe Roon into changing decisions about management is beyond the pale.

(Charles Snider) #33

It would. In fact, going ‘open source’ could be the best thing for Roon to ensure its longevity. Imagine a consortium of audio hardware manufacturers and crowdfunding users whose purpose is to develop Roon; It’s kinda common in the software world, e.g. Linux for example.


What nonsense. Roon is a business with proprietary code. Linux is an OS develop by Linus Torvald and never was a commercial product.

(Charles Snider) #35

Oh, okay, not a business…

IBM chasing Amazon into cloud with $33 billion Red Hat deal


Yes, Red Hat, which is a fork of the original open source Linux, is a business and I can guarantee it is not open source.


How do you know they’d be insulted? That’s your opinion unless they directly told you.
Every company has challenges with efficiently allocating resources. It’s a never ending challenge as every company has limited resources and works hard to make money, especially a young company.

It’s absolutely a customer’s business in which direction a company allocates its resources, especially when the customer pays a lifetime subscription fee up front. A customer paying a scheduled fee can walk away without much financial impact. If it wasn’t Roon’s customer’s “business” this forum wouldn’t exist and they wouldn’t solicit feature ideas from their customers.


Well, I’d say your guarantee isn’t worth much.


It’d run a very serious risk of being antithetical to what makes Roon work. Roon isn’t about design-by-committee, or everything-but-the-kitchen-sink implementation. Yes, I think that it’s about time for remote streaming, but at the same time, I don’t want a bunch of manufacturers who, even for the best-ressourced of them, have proven time and time again they could barely design a UI if their lives depended on it, messing with Roon: much like macs, what makes Roon nice to use is the benevolent fascism of the Roon team.


Couldn’t read your link without buying a subscription.

Judging by the headline, it looks like people are worried that with the IBM acquisition Red Hat will no longer be open source.

If that’s true then my comment was ahead of it’s time. The point still holds.

Still, you’re right. Red Hat, which charges for it’s products, is open source. How that works out I couldn’t guess, but I should have check before making such a sweeping statement.


The piece should be accessible (it is from here, and I don’t subscribe to them) - sorry if it isn’t. Gist of the argument is some users seem concerned that the buyout will change Red Hat’s corporate culture, not that there’s any real concerns about IBM’s open source credentials.

Here’s a good (if old) breakdown of how Red Hat’s business model works.