Oldschool demos getting vendor locked?
category: general [glöplog]
Quote:
Because IMO a large percentage of people using Mac's are consumers and have them for a conspicuous consumption based reasons.
Nail, hammer - hammer, nail.
Quote:
welcome to pouet! soon with more ponies!
Where the fuck is Knoeki when you need him?
Quote:
Mac is winning big these years.
Did they reach 10% now?
It's entertaining how some Linux geeks are dismissing anything that is proprietary and a closed system, yet they adore Macs soooo much :P
or don't realise, it doesn't really matter to most people, and isn't an advantage commercially.
I also work for a software firm (well we did both, i've gone from writing software and drivers supporting hardware to writing just software) we write software used in large-seat company/corporation wide scenarios, barely any consumers at all. we get a bit, but not a huge amount of interest for os x and linux enquiries do happen, but literally every other year. the reason we even have a mac version on the ris mainly because the decision makers at organisations often have mac books and want that box ticked when buying, even though the product is for the windows using masses under them.
Already pointed out the number of windows installations out there is 3 times that of everyone else put together (*desktops that is). when you factor in the xbox 360 having been a decent platform, but possibly having slipped with the xbox one (i recall the early 360 days, don't write em off yet) based upon xna (which isn't directx, but is related, and importantly will also run games on windows allowing a doubt hit), they aren't out of the game just yet.
But I agree theres possibly something there with GL in the future, and this proliferation of GL capable platforms is what has piqued my interest. However they're running GL ES and compared to desktop GL the performance is lagging. The exact same reason is why the mac isn't a viable platform, the gpu's aren't powerful enough for console or pc class gaming, and that also means they aren't powerful enough for top end demos.
Also, people aren't writing direct to GL on these 'new' arm/gl platforms. i've just been reading the latest, recently published version (3rd edition) of computer graphics princples & practice and even that points to the fact that game developers are now often using either in house engines, or buying in from another game companies, or from people who just make and support engines like Unity.
The long and short of it is, things ain't really gonna change, including with a fragmented before release "steam machine" in the mix. (Look at how the Ouya has gone.. )
The only 'not out yet' platform i'm even remotely curious about right now is the ubuntu tablet
Quote:
So, this post will be completely off topic, but I think the original topic is done anyway.
Quote:opengl for various reasons isn't, and i doubt will be taken seriously especially for games outside "certain" mobile/tablet platforms.
You don't think OpenGL will be taken serious? I'm pretty sure it will and already is. Windows is no longer the dominating platform it was five years ago. Mac is winning big these years. When I was in "high school" 70% of my classmates where using Mac, the only significant group not on Mac where the gamers (for obvious reasons). At my current job (software firm) it's the same – about 70% are Mac users. Obviously that doesn't prove anything in itself, but I think it's pretty safe to say that Apple is winning market share. Combining that with the fact that the market for mobile games is huge and that the web is also becoming a viable platform for 3D stuff you'd be pretty crazy not to take OpenGL serious since DirectX is not available on any of these platforms.
Valve for instance, which is a significant player on the market, and is aggressively pushing both OpenGL and Linux (they apparently really fancy both even though Linux IMO is still a pretty crappy platform for gaming/3D (driver issues, transition to Wayland). Heck, even Microsoft is taking OpenGL serious by supporting WebGL even though they for quite sometime refused to do so. DirectX is Windows only and can only survive as the leading 3D technology in a world where Windows is the only relevant platform and that world is no longer.
I also work for a software firm (well we did both, i've gone from writing software and drivers supporting hardware to writing just software) we write software used in large-seat company/corporation wide scenarios, barely any consumers at all. we get a bit, but not a huge amount of interest for os x and linux enquiries do happen, but literally every other year. the reason we even have a mac version on the ris mainly because the decision makers at organisations often have mac books and want that box ticked when buying, even though the product is for the windows using masses under them.
Already pointed out the number of windows installations out there is 3 times that of everyone else put together (*desktops that is). when you factor in the xbox 360 having been a decent platform, but possibly having slipped with the xbox one (i recall the early 360 days, don't write em off yet) based upon xna (which isn't directx, but is related, and importantly will also run games on windows allowing a doubt hit), they aren't out of the game just yet.
But I agree theres possibly something there with GL in the future, and this proliferation of GL capable platforms is what has piqued my interest. However they're running GL ES and compared to desktop GL the performance is lagging. The exact same reason is why the mac isn't a viable platform, the gpu's aren't powerful enough for console or pc class gaming, and that also means they aren't powerful enough for top end demos.
Also, people aren't writing direct to GL on these 'new' arm/gl platforms. i've just been reading the latest, recently published version (3rd edition) of computer graphics princples & practice and even that points to the fact that game developers are now often using either in house engines, or buying in from another game companies, or from people who just make and support engines like Unity.
The long and short of it is, things ain't really gonna change, including with a fragmented before release "steam machine" in the mix. (Look at how the Ouya has gone.. )
The only 'not out yet' platform i'm even remotely curious about right now is the ubuntu tablet
Quote:
It's entertaining how some Linux geeks are dismissing anything that is proprietary and a closed system, yet they adore Macs soooo much :P
What blows me away is how blind a lot of mac fanbois and gurlz are to their hypocrisy. I asked my sister-in-law what it was about her imac she loved so much? Considering she's a gamer and lives on welfare I was surprised she could afford one let alone give up her wasd....
"It looks good."
Quote:
Linux isn't one, and all the people I know who use Mac's mostly have Parallels or VMWare Fusion running.
My wife and I had our wills redone recently. The solicitor came to us and had the equivalent of a small home office in his briefcase, including a macbook. Which he promptly booted straight into windows 7 on using vmware. When I asked why he looked at me as tho I was deranged and said - "Have you ever tried to use Pages?"
Guess they adore it for the user experience and not for its proprietariness.
In answer to Optimus tho - I think most linux users at least know how to do a little bit of c-line stuff so have an idea of the pedigree of the OS. Can't remember ever being asked for advice about command line stuff from a mac user.... maybe they're all maestros at it?
they copy and paste it from stackoverflow
^ ouch! X]
Quote:
"Have you ever tried to use Pages?"
plz, is this thread about word processors now?
To the OP. I thought you were either (a) a troll, (b) a jerk, or (c) in need of mental counseling. But it appears that you just have this idea that demos are some kind of implementations of platform-independent software ideas for which demo makers should choose the most long-lasting platform. Right? Some demos can be like that, but that's not the main thing. Sure, my group (especially Marq) is in the habit of publishing source codes and porting demos to as many platforms as possible, and it can be fun in itself. Releasing sources is a good way of preserving them as well. But to me, the really cool thing about a demo is not to the software itself, it's what the software does compared to other software on that platform. "Look at the cool stuff they made with this machine". And that's the thing. Why does someone make a demo for platform X - it's because platform X means something to them, and it's fun to do stuff for platform X. Using platform X gives good vibes. They have a sense of what can and has been done on platform X, so you know how good something is relatively.
Modern mainstream PCs are so rediculously powerful, and with practically no size limits as it is today, it's not a very interesting platform. With size limits, it makes sense.
Modern mainstream PCs are so rediculously powerful, and with practically no size limits as it is today, it's not a very interesting platform. With size limits, it makes sense.
Quote:
I thought you were either (a) a troll, (b) a jerk, or (c) in need of mental counseling.
...wow.
Quote:
Guess they adore it for the user experience and not for its proprietariness.
And according to the OP, using proprietary stuff is evil.....
Yeah yeah I know, its stupid but thats how I thought. Terribly sorry about that. Internet forums.
Quote:
Windows is no longer the dominating platform it was five years ago.
He's got a point there... I believe they went from 90% marketshare to only 85% in the past few years...
Quote:
Did they reach 10% now?
No. But that's completely irrelevant to my point. They're winning market share. That's the point.
Quote:
It's entertaining how some Linux geeks are dismissing anything that is proprietary and a closed system, yet they adore Macs soooo much :P
I have no clue what Linux geeks you're talking about but I've met very that are Mac fans. And I'm definitely not one of them so I don't know why you're bringing it up.
Quote:
And according to the OP, using proprietary stuff is evil.....
Err, what? I think that you are prejudicing me. I never used the word evil and that is not my opinion. People can use whatever software they want. I just personally prefer to use free software if possible and I care about free software. But I for instance use the closed NVidia driver because the FOSS one sucks big time.
Quote:
To the OP. I thought you were either (a) a troll, (b) a jerk, or (c) in need of mental counseling.
I'm glad that you moved away from those opinions about me ^^. No offence taken :)
Quote:
But it appears that you just have this idea that demos are some kind of implementations of platform-independent software ideas for which demo makers should choose the most long-lasting platform. Right?
Not quite. As I wrote in my original post: "I totally get the appeal of these restricting platforms, and the possibilities when targeting fixed hardware." I meant that. I for instance understand that the when optimizing against a fixed hardware platform the possibilities for micro optimizations and pushing it to its absolute limits are wider. And I can relate to the appeal of that! But if I were doing such things it would also be a concern in the back of my mind that the platform I was working on was that excotic. I would have mixed feeling so to speak.
Quote:
Some demos can be like that, but that's not the main thing. Sure, my group (especially Marq) is in the habit of publishing source codes and porting demos to as many platforms as possible, and it can be fun in itself. Releasing sources is a good way of preserving them as well. But to me, the really cool thing about a demo is not to the software itself, it's what the software does compared to other software on that platform. "Look at the cool stuff they made with this machine". And that's the thing. Why does someone make a demo for platform X - it's because platform X means something to them, and it's fun to do stuff for platform X. Using platform X gives good vibes. They have a sense of what can and has been done on platform X, so you know how good something is relatively.
I'm glad you say some demos can be like that. Then I think we understand each other. Maybe it's a generation thing. The oldest platform I've used was i PC with Windows 98. If I were born in the days of the retro platforms my emotions towards these platforms would've been much more emotional. But as of now I think I'll have more fun with exploring new programming languages, means of portability and the possibilities of modern hardware (like parallelization on hardware with several cores).
Quote:
Modern mainstream PCs are so rediculously powerful, and with practically no size limits as it is today, it's not a very interesting platform. With size limits, it makes sense.
Doesn't that just raise the barrier?
Quote:
But as of now I think I'll have more fun with exploring new programming languages, means of portability and the possibilities of modern hardware (like parallelization on hardware with several cores).
Once you start looking into things like parallelization/optimization, you'll find that restricting yourself to a specific hardware target is the only way.
Eg, efficient parallel code for a CPU is very different from parallel code for a GPU. And then we are not even getting into architecture-specifics... Optimizing for AMD GPUs is very different from nVidia GPUs etc.
It's basically the same as retro-platforms in that sense: you can only develop efficient code if you have a well-defined target.
Quote:
Doesn't that just raise the barrier?
In theory. In practice it's just become too much of a chore to make a high-end graphics engine and effects. In the old days, games were also written by just 1 or 2 coders, very similar to demos. These days, there are tons of coders working on a game engine at a time. It's just become too big a project to write a demo that can compete with state-of-the-art graphics technology. Not something just 1 or 2 guys can do for fun in a few months time.
A telling sign is that most demos are still written with D3D9... Most coders simply haven't even been able to keep up with new API developments. Writing a D3D10+ engine from scratch takes quite some time.
Quote:
He's got a point there... I believe they went from 90% marketshare to only 85% in the past few years...
You're being sarcastic right? You are however ignoring the strongest and most important point of my argument so I'm not impressed by your sarcasm. Windows is still dominating the PC market that's for sure, but the PC market as whole is losing importance to new device types on which Microsoft has failed big to become a dominant player. If you count the time spend on PCs, smartphones and tablet as one then Microsofts "time-share" has dropped significantly over the last years.
Quote:
You're being sarcastic right? You are however ignoring the strongest and most important point of my argument so I'm not impressed by your sarcasm. Windows is still dominating the PC market that's for sure, but the PC market as whole is losing importance to new device types on which Microsoft has failed big to become a dominant player. If you count the time spend on PCs, smartphones and tablet as one then Microsofts "time-share" has dropped significantly over the last years.
How exactly is that relevant to the demoscene? We obviously don't care how obscure or dead a given platform is.
Quote:
How exactly is that relevant to the demoscene? We obviously don't care how obscure or dead a given platform is.
It's not. But look at the context, you were responding on my argument for why OpenGL should be taken seriously (which I specifically noticed was off topic).
Quote:
It's not. But look at the context, you were responding on my argument for why OpenGL should be taken seriously (which I specifically noticed was off topic).
I was just ridiculing the "Ohnoes Windows r dying!"-statement in your argument. I mean, please...
Quote:
Doesn't that just raise the barrier?
It multiplies possibilities with also multiiplying complexity of background operations necessary for their achievement, the ratio between those is about the same... if some goal can be achieved with less powerful and complex platform, then maybe it probably should because then the result will depend on programming more and on platform's behind the scenes quirks less; and for older platforms, they are sometimes more or less known... sorry if wrong
At Datastorm a pal of mine was asking why ppl bother to try and make tiny Protracker chip .mods sound like c64 Sid style tunes... My reply was that it is a huge amount of fun to use software & h/w in ways that they clearly were not designed for. I seriously doubt that Obarski planned for the use of 32byte shifted looped waveforms cascading down channels in order to facilitate a bit of a PWM style effect when he made his tracker format :D Why wouldn't you just use a single PWM squarewave sample? Size optimization, challenge and control of sound all come into it...
The other side to oldskool demo making from a sound POV is that these old chips still sound GREAT. Even the way the Paula chip decodes audio is interesting and unique, the SID, AY, 2a03 or Yamaha chips are really interesting from a synth perspective - plus obtaining the computers/consoles that use them can be really cheap...
Going back quite a few years I and fellow groupmates used to enjoy poking around inside current consoles and achieving the 'first' demo on them purely for the challenge - we spent ages just trying to get the Neo Geo Pocket to make a beep for example... Or hammering the dear old PS2 til we could get it to play a module... Why..? Because we could :P
I recently unpacked a brand new mac and got it running to a satisfactory level in about 30mins :P I can't remember ever having this experience with a PC or any other machine actually, even getting it out the >box< was easy :P
Making / watching demos on older platforms is not meant to be easy - that's the whole point. It's the challenge coupled with love for interesting wonderful historic h/w that adds to the fun of it all ;)
^
Sorry for the wall of text - that's my 2p as a musician anyway <3 *grin*
The other side to oldskool demo making from a sound POV is that these old chips still sound GREAT. Even the way the Paula chip decodes audio is interesting and unique, the SID, AY, 2a03 or Yamaha chips are really interesting from a synth perspective - plus obtaining the computers/consoles that use them can be really cheap...
Going back quite a few years I and fellow groupmates used to enjoy poking around inside current consoles and achieving the 'first' demo on them purely for the challenge - we spent ages just trying to get the Neo Geo Pocket to make a beep for example... Or hammering the dear old PS2 til we could get it to play a module... Why..? Because we could :P
I recently unpacked a brand new mac and got it running to a satisfactory level in about 30mins :P I can't remember ever having this experience with a PC or any other machine actually, even getting it out the >box< was easy :P
Making / watching demos on older platforms is not meant to be easy - that's the whole point. It's the challenge coupled with love for interesting wonderful historic h/w that adds to the fun of it all ;)
^
Sorry for the wall of text - that's my 2p as a musician anyway <3 *grin*
Quote:
Quote:It's not. But look at the context, you were responding on my argument for why OpenGL should be taken seriously (which I specifically noticed was off topic).
I was just ridiculing the "Ohnoes Windows r dying!"-statement in your argument. I mean, please...
It's not that windows is dying, but that it's no longer dominant. It's dominance that's dying fast, not the platform. If you take windows share of the desktop and notebook market then yes it's still pretty high, but if you take PC back to its roots of "personal computer", you find people using phones, tablets and other things as their personal computer, and windows is probably somewhere around 50% share, perhaps less by now.
Personally I see it like this. There's a scale of 'what you use it for', with pure consumption (playing games, watching videos, reading websites) on one end, serious technical stuff (coding, 3d animation etc.) on the other. What platform works for you depends on where you're at on that scale.
Why is that relevant? Demos sit at *both* ends of that scale. Watching them is pure consumption. Making them requires a desktop or notebook with a powerful OS to run your tools. Making demos on a PC that run on phones / tablets actually makes a lot of sense.
But of course all of that is irrelevant, because fuck it, do whatever makes you happy, on whatever platform makes you happy. If anyone says otherwise, fuck them :)
