.NET, porting, and Mono.

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
DM recently announced that the Game Table was being developed (mainly) in C#. This bodes ill for people on other platforms (please, let's keep this topic away from a flamewar as some other ones have degenerated too). The .NET framework does not work well on non-Windows platforms, particularly because the framework does not function under WINE.

I would highly recommend that Wizards pursue Mono (www.mono-project.com) as a possible means of porting the Game Table - applications for Mono will work on all major platforms, and some not-so-major ones, without any recompilation. The catch is that the libraries are restricted - Mono has not yet had the time to implement many of the Microsoft proprietary libraries. Forging a relationship with Novell may be the best way to get the Game Table to work on all platforms, which would be a massive boon to the D&D community.
Not going to happen, at least soon.
The contact was one platform and despite the claim all trained programmers can program equally in any language it is not true.

In all considered, that we have seen of DDI, the Game table needs to work soon under current contract and there is not time to recode cross platform for promised release date of Game Table (or was that a plan release date?)
Plans are always subject to change.
That's a planned release date, there has been no confirmation that I'm aware of.
"Man is made God's plaything, and that is the best part of him. Therefore every man and woman should live life accordingly, and play the noblest games... Life must be lived as play, playing certain games, making sacrifices, singing and dancing..." Plato, The Laws.
Personally, I'd rather a version for Windows that comes out early than a cross-platform version that comes out 6 months later. But I still think that the more things that D&Di works on, the better (and if they use Mono, they have the added benefit of being able to claim that it works on BSD and Solaris :P)
I'm glad they are developing in .NET. This will streamline the time-to-market, keep costs down, and deliver a quality user experience for 90%+ of your users.

I'm always amazed by the (albeit ultra-rare) decision some company makes to develop and support applications for other platforms. The additional investment in development skillset alone won't even come close to being offset by the additional revenue those minor markets might bring in.

I am glad these other platforms exist, but as one of the 90%+, I really don't want to have to pay the additional price to support the tiny minority. These other platforms are great for the educational and open source software markets, but should not be the focus of most licensed products.
Before anyone makes another post:

Please do not post about the market share of Macs vs. Windows. I will hunt you down and sneak into your room (rolling a couple of d20s to make sure I succeed, of course) and kill you. You have been warned.
These other platforms are great for the educational and open source software markets, but should not be the focus of most licensed products.

Hey, Wizards, I think there's something wrong with your forum software. This poor guy's post got delayed by about ten years.
I've used mono before, it isn't the most fun thing in the world, and well no the most user friendly installs either, that being said porting too it isn't as bad as say having to rewrite all the code. But i've never used it with Direct X (it's my understanding that all installable componants will be using direct x)

In the end maybe they could just try make sure their program runs in WINE? realistically though i don't know anyone who isn't running windows. I know alot of people with macs, but a couple are dual booting and all of them also have PCs. (sorry if that counts as talking about market share coppro)

I know some people running linux primarily, same thing though. May be inconviniant for some but i'm thinking it being windows only will keep costs down for all.
I've used mono before, it isn't the most fun thing in the world, and well no the most user friendly installs either, that being said porting too it isn't as bad as say having to rewrite all the code. But i've never used it with Direct X (it's my understanding that all installable componants will be using direct x)

As I understand it, the .NET Framework just has a DirectX wrapper. Mono has apparently got a beta version working (probably via WINELib).

In the end maybe they could just try make sure their program runs in WINE? realistically though i don't know anyone who isn't running windows. I know alot of people with macs, but a couple are dual booting and all of them also have PCs. (sorry if that counts as talking about market share coppro)

No, I mean the flamewars that have taken place in some other threads, where people argue about the validity of various studies and whatnot. As long as people don't keep arguing about it, I'm fine.

I know some people running linux primarily, same thing though. May be inconviniant for some but i'm thinking it being windows only will keep costs down for all.

I use Linux, and I agree. That's what drives my opinion. I will boot into Windows if I find it to be worth the effort. But it would be an inconvenience. I would like to see a Linux version, but I'd rather see a program period. Windows compatibility is not a showstopper for me.