|
6 years ago ::
Nov 19, 2007 - 9:08PM
#41
|
|
|
There isn't anything like Wine. There are programs which will let you dual-boot or run Windows in parallel with Mac OS X on Intel-based Macs, but they require you to purchase a copy of Windows.
Not quite true. There is Darwine. It sucks.
I got it to run MS Paint and Minesweeper, but none of the real software I tried would launch.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Nov 21, 2007 - 9:49PM
#42
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2003
|
Yeah, but run the math on what the statistic for individuals means for groups containing 1 DM and 5 players, the average group according to WotC's numbers. If 92.5% of people use Windows, then only 62.6% of 6 person groups contain only Windows users. That's a little less decisive.
(Here's a post where I run the numbers.)
Those numbers of kind of squishy considering that it is based on the assumption that a Mac user isn't also a PC user.
Personally I'm against them making it compatable with Macs. Making iDDI would probably be like making a second program. If the cost of a subscription were the same for PC and Mac users then that would mean that PC users like myself were subsidizing the Mac compatability. Frankly, anyone who can afford a Mac shouldn't be trying to reach into my pocket.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Nov 21, 2007 - 10:47PM
#43
|
|
|
Personally I'm against them making it compatable with Macs. Making iDDI would probably be like making a second program. If the cost of a subscription were the same for PC and Mac users then that would mean that PC users like myself were subsidizing the Mac compatability. Frankly, anyone who can afford a Mac shouldn't be trying to reach into my pocket.
That is self-centered almost to the point of trolling. You've got yours, so screw everyone else?
The cost of development of a parallel app would be pennies out of your subscription and the benefit would be a wider range of people that could play with you -- but because they have a Mac, they're just spoiled rich kids who don't deserve any better? Because you don't personally play with a Mac user, to hell with all the groups that do? Yeesh, what a miser.
And frankly you need to look at the prices of low-end Macs a little more. Sometimes they're one of the more affordable choices available -- especially in the notebook market. Not everyone who uses one can afford to blow a few hundred bucks on a copy of Windows and Parallels just to run DI apps. Try being a college student living on student loans sometime.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Nov 22, 2007 - 8:42AM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2003
|
That is self-centered almost to the point of trolling. You've got yours, so screw everyone else?
The cost of development of a parallel app would be pennies out of your subscription and the benefit would be a wider range of people that could play with you -- but because they have a Mac, they're just spoiled rich kids who don't deserve any better? Because you don't personally play with a Mac user, to hell with all the groups that do? Yeesh, what a miser.
And frankly you need to look at the prices of low-end Macs a little more. Sometimes they're one of the more affordable choices available -- especially in the notebook market. Not everyone who uses one can afford to blow a few hundred bucks on a copy of Windows and Parallels just to run DI apps. Try being a college student living on student loans sometime.
Yeah, I'm the one being self centered. Not the people throwing a fit because their boutique system isn't being catered to.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Nov 22, 2007 - 8:50AM
#45
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm the one being self centered. Not the people throwing a fit because their boutique system isn't being catered to.
Okay, now you're officially trolling. /ignore
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Nov 22, 2007 - 11:45AM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2003
|
Okay, now you're officially trolling. /ignore
Cool, guess I get the last word then.
BTW:
Apple Notebook: $1099 http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/W … i9r/3.?p=0
PC Notebook (with 1 GB more Ram): $499 http://www.dell.com/content/products/pr … l=en&s=dhs
PCs are the affordable choice. Apple's are the boutique choice. What is the controversy?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Nov 22, 2007 - 2:34PM
#47
|
|
|
PCs are the affordable choice. Apple's are the boutique choice. What is the controversy?
*sighs* Years of butting head with platform trolls should make me too wise to rise to the bait, but I guess not.
The controversy is three-fold:
[list=1]
Your use of the word "boutique" is inflammatory and serves no purpose except to rile. Thus, trolling.
Your example of bargain-bin PCs are not representative of the whole market. Mac notebook prices are mid-range when compared to the models available in most retail stores. Does the existence of the Corolla make Camry buyers "boutique" car shoppers?
No Mac user is saying that Windows users should be excluded. You're the one being selfish by stating that you don't want to support letting anyone but people like you get to use the product. The onus of who is being self-centered lies on the person who is willing to place the greater burden on the other party.
Besides, you're flat out wrong if you think that developing the virtual gaming table for both platforms requires a separate code base. There are plenty of cross-platform libraries they could use (and could've used from the beginning) that would allow them to use a single code base that would require minimal effort to deploy and test and multiple platforms. There is little reason not to do so except laziness or the "screw 'em" attitude you display.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Nov 22, 2007 - 4:20PM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2003
|
*sighs* Years of butting head with platform trolls should make me too wise to rise to the bait, but I guess not.
The controversy is three-fold:
[list=1]
Your use of the word "boutique" is inflammatory and serves no purpose except to rile. Thus, trolling.
Your example of bargain-bin PCs are not representative of the whole market. Mac notebook prices are mid-range when compared to the models available in most retail stores. Does the existence of the Corolla make Camry buyers "boutique" car shoppers?
No Mac user is saying that Windows users should be excluded. You're the one being selfish by stating that you don't want to support letting anyone but people like you get to use the product. The onus of who is being self-centered lies on the person who is willing to place the greater burden on the other party.
Besides, you're flat out wrong if you think that developing the virtual gaming table for both platforms requires a separate code base. There are plenty of cross-platform libraries they could use (and could've used from the beginning) that would allow them to use a single code base that would require minimal effort to deploy and test and multiple platforms. There is little reason not to do so except laziness or the "screw 'em" attitude you display.
1. What is so inflammatory about boutique? Or at least more inflamatory than "selfish", "self centered", "lazy" or "troll"?
2. http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp … e=category. Call Dell or Best Buy bargin bin if you want, I am comparing laptops with similar memory to apple laptops. It is a fair considering that your premise is that the cost of an Apple laptop is on par with PC laptops. Apples are the high end of the market and a fraction of the market uses them, that is what makes them boutique.
3. You accused me of being Self Centered. A label that applies to those Mac users that can't fathom why DDI isn't going to run on their O/S/. They are the ones who expect the majority to pick up the cost (burden) of developing a Mac version.
Of course if Mac users are willing to pick up the true cost of developing the Mac version I have no beef. If development is as cheap as you claim then it isn't a risk for Mac users to agree to a different subscription price right?
As for the development costs, you are the one who is wrong about the cost. If it were easy more software developers would program for both Windows and Macs. Unless you really believe that they all would rather spite Steve Jobs than take easy money.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Nov 22, 2007 - 4:44PM
#49
|
Date Joined:
Aug 15, 2007
|
3. You accused me of being Self Centered. A label that applies to those Mac users that can't fathom why DDI isn't going to run on their O/S/. They are the ones who expect the majority to pick up the cost (burden) of developing a Mac version.
Of course if Mac users are willing to pick up the true cost of developing the Mac version I have no beef. If development is as cheap as you claim then it isn't a risk for Mac users to agree to a different subscription price right?
As opposed to the current path where Mac users are paying for development of a PC only program if they want Dragon and Dungeon? How are they being selfish by wanting to run the programs on their machines? Why should they pay for the DDI for Windows version in addition to the cost of converting it? Where does a program charge the user an extra fee for porting the game?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Nov 22, 2007 - 5:16PM
#50
|
|
|
Cross platform is not a problem, in fact it could even be done quicker in some respects. You lose DirectX and you lose some Mac features. This could be dome later in system patches to improve display/features for individual user.
I have a PC and only know of one person right now that owns a Mac that I would consider playing with online.
WotC went with PC in part we have been told they already owned an application that facilitates Windows based programing. They saved some money on start up. WotC is going after a target market that already use cross platform interface.
Further WotC model expects every user that wants one of the three main components of DI to pay for all three even if the user only wants one or two.
Why should a PC user be asked to pay for an ezine or a game table they will not read/use?
Plans are always subject to change.
|
|
|
