OK, I’m not supposed to feed the trolls, and this is kind of how this feels, but I’ll answer honestly anyway because I think that, despite the final statement that it’s all true and you know it I see significant deviations from demonstrable facts.
Why does anybody think it needs advertising ?
Nothing needs advertising. But it can be appropriate, especially when there is a lack of recognition of a generally beneficial solution.
They have a small market that gets smaller by the day, or do people here really think that Renoise in its current form will ever compete with an end to end linear DAW
A little history in my case: I came to Renoise after comparing it, on price and functional features, with a number of DAWs. This includes free ones and expensive ones. Tracker style and linear. Even hardware systems. So in my case, it did compete with linear DAWs - and won. I even paid for a licence, and I’m happy that I did so. So it can, and it does, and succeeds. The question of the size of the market is far from clear as well, because I am the very archetype of people who are supposed to cry and flinch at trackers; I started in classical music, learned to read music, didn’t even touch a tracker for most of my life, don’t have a degree in computer science, and yet when I saw the opportunity to get something I wanted, I made the leap. I had touched trackers before, but only with difficulty. So the market being small isn’t fate - it’s a matter of market education and exposure.
This is a specialist market and when anybody asks anywhere “Whats the best tracker” then the word Renoise is it, it is nothing more, it is never going to compete with Cubase or Logic or Reaper or any other linear DAW
Actually I had no idea that anyone considered Renoise to be the best tracker in the world, and that wouldn’t have been a selling point for me. I’m not even sure that’s true - it might be, I just don’t know. It’s certainly a very good tracker. However, I repeat that for me it competed with big name linear DAWS - and won.
If you want Renoise to have more users it needs to have a linear sequencer and piano roll, something most of the tracker geeks will scream NOOOOOO at very loud, so basically the developers of Renoise are now f**ked, they have to diversify if they want to do this as a business
I actually explained in another post the primary virtue of a piano roll, which has more to do with the kind of information visually exposed than anything else. It could be bolted on - it’s actually quite possible in HCI terms - but it’s not necessary for its function, or its accessibility. As for “tracker geeks” (your term; I’m not sure who these people are) screaming about it, I suspect that they’d want the tracker interface to stay, not forbid any alternative interfaces from being made available. Add alternatives, and they’d probably just ignore them if they didn’t like them and didn’t need them. I strongly doubt it’s ideological. (Well, maybe it is for you - I wouldn’t want to presume.)
(No i am not guessing, tracking is not only a limited market but also a limited mindset, some people wont use trackers that you have to pay for and so on, it is such a limited market)
Some people won’t use commercial software, period. That doesn’t prevent Oracle from making a killing. You’re painting it as an ideological and inherently walled target market, when in actual fact that is nowhere near what I’m seeing.
Put a linear sequencer and piano roll in Renoise and overnight you get a huge buzz and new users, until that happens it will be a few new users here and there, slow releases (No way the devs can afford to do otherwise) and a slowly diminishing user experience
This is sheer fantasy. First off, it’s not clear that a linear sequencer can be meaningfully added without a complete rewrite of the internals. So even if it would end world hunger, it mightn’t be a realistic prospect whatsoever. Suggesting what might happen if it were maybe executed is utterly irrelevant - and there’s every reason to believe that implementing these changes would do nothing to let Renoise be a better Cubase than Cubase. Why should Renoise play in Cubase’s playground? That would be market suicide. And why on earth would the user experience diminish? The software I have will run for as long as I can install a debian linux machine - so probably as long as I live, and a lot longer. It’s only been improving. (And yes, I tried some earlier versions too, and I think it has been an improvement overall, even discounting bug fixes.)
(Lets be honest, the forum is nearly dead, and the IRC they are discussing eating berries and hard waters mystical powers haha)
And on the forum I see living discussions, competitions and requests for assistance with useful answers, while on IRC I collaborate with people. Right now. Like, today. So feel free to prophecy doom for the community, but I’m not seeing it.
You can all bitch and moan at my post now, but it is all true and you know it 
No, I’m sorry. You got a number of things wrong. See above for specifics. Try again on the 1st of April.
