I did not particularly like this article but it did bring up Cinelerra first in its discussion. It is an opinion piece but I am not sure there were any conclusions about whether or not money helps the sustainability. It sure looks like once there is no money, like Natron no longer being actively supported, a product is less likely to survive. However, in the case of Cinelerra, it has survived for quite a few years even if no money simply because it had a good starting foundation and changes are being made because it is still useful.
And that is just "my opinion on this piece!"
I noticed that Cinelerra is hardly mentioned in "top 3 video editors for linux"-like articles, and it is definitively not the software usually mentioned for ""What professional video editor can I use on Linux"? (that's usually kdenlive...which I never tried because of KDE dependencies but I read it crash a lot).
It feels like that cinelera has an aura of 'old and buggy software' which, maybe because of the several versions available, still remains today despite the maaany changes. People probably tried an old version which crashed or didn't support format X or Y and gave up, not recommending it to others.
Hopefully the forum will contribute to make people realise the qualities of CinGG.
I agree with Phyllis about the very good foundations of the software...you see newer softwares which are way less functional or stable than Cin!
Some complain about the GUI, personally I love it, and complaining about interface is a popular hobby in the FLOSS community...(who doesn't remember "eh blender interface sucks!" or "Gimp can't compete with photoshop because it has no single window interface...").
