Could be a wrong translation, but I always thought that a sponsor is someone with more financial background supporting non- or little profit organizations or projects.
If you are an online newspaper providing news for free, then this needs financial support, but not if free or low profit plugins improves a commercial product. Its the otherway around, active developer doing stuff for free should be supported, and if its just a free license…
Just for comparison. Wages in the USA, especially with an academic background are very high. You also have very low taxes. Even in Germany a license cost for a private person, even with “above the average” income, is a big deal. Of course for a company making profit this is different. But the reality is that most plugin developers do work privately and for free. And many sit in countries with even less income. Spain, Italy, China etc. . Of course its up to them to charge money for their doing, but the reality is, that this is actually quite an effort, legally and programatically, to make a piece of software commercial.
I wonder how many Rhino license were sold because of Grasshopper (which used to be free) and its addin functionality. If I support a plugin system in my software, I do expect such online platform to interchange as being part of the charge. Otherwise it makes no sense to promote this as a key feature.
That was a strange way of replying to learning how the two words are perceived in Sweden. I said, “at least in Sweden”.
If you use words, intended to reach the receiver efficiently, and you have to look up the words in this or that blog, from another country or nerd marketer person, then you did not communicate very efficiently.
Again, in Sweden the word “sponsored” means that someone else contributes to your [whatever]. Does it matter how it’s perceived in Sweden? Perhaps not.
But interestingly, Wikipedia, both the English and Swedish version, has the same notion of sponsor. Short version: “benefactor”. (implying “you’re not your own benefactor” so to speak, ey?)
Does it matter? Perhaps it matters after all. Does it hurt someone? Not at all. Not me anyway. Just sayin’
It used to be called “featured” for the longest time and worked in the way you thought. McNeel would change it every once in awhile and Pufferfish was there for quite sometime, then it switched to sponsored and I thought what the hell I love McNeel so I’ll pay some fee to keep it there and support McNeel in any way further I can (although it was still up there even when it switched to sponsored from the beginning before deciding to pay, thanks @carlosperez !).
With sponsored, I always thought McNeel was helping them out somehow. The day they decide to make food4rhino a marketplace instead of a repository, they are going to regret not having done it sooner, not only because of fees, not only because GH needs a system with thousands of accessible definitions that rewards the author, but also because they realize how much talent they have let slip through their fingers by not offering them a growth model with them.
This is totally okay. I really believe advertising is fully okay. What I don’t understand is that you need to call it “Sponsoring”, which implies the good will and leaves it unclear on who is the sponsor. This “we improve the world” mindset is questionable especially from companies like Google or Facebook. Its about earning money, and plenty of it. Its kind of fooling people if you don’t name it like this, which wouldn’t be bad at all.
But all this reinterpretation of language is nothing more as marketing trick.
Really I don’t care, I just want to point out that maybe all the free-of-charge developers may need real sponsoring…
Actually I didn’t know this. I’m on Facebook only, but I just use it as platform to keep contact to people I haven’t seen for ages. Spending 15 minutes a month. And of course I know that Facebook is using my data to sell. Its okay for me, because I get something in return. It wouldn’t change for me, if they would call advertisment as advertisment, just like it is. Anyways…
If you pay for advertising, you are a sponsor and that entity is being sponsored. If you are paid to advertise, you are being sponsored and that entity is a sponsor. It’s not a matter of the word, but of misallocating the action.
As with Rolf, I’m also Scandinavian, and sponsoring is NOT paying for advertisement space, but rather letting someone have free advertisement space. So I was sure this meant that McNeel was sponsoring the PLUGINS to get more spotlight. And I thought it was a great idea, kind of an “Editors choice”.
Sponsoring is always related to helping someone who can not do what they do with out financial help from others. (At least that’s how it is here, and thus confusing as an international word IF it is differently in other countries)
I am for full transparency and think that McNeel should call this “Paid placement”. Done deal, easy to understand and also shows that the plugin means business. “Sponsored” just raises a lot of questions like what are they sponsoring? McNeel who is in need of help? Is it keeping the zoo up and running? Will McNeel close it down if it can’t generate revenue on it’s own? Etc.
So just labeling it “Advertisement” or “Paid position” would give a clear indication about what this is IMO, and I don’t think anybody would lift an eyebrow on to why McNeel earns some extra money on this. By all means, with out funding, no development, and we are all for development