Irrlicht Engine

quark wrote:

Sean Doherty wrote: Generally, speaking I don't believe in Open Source; sure it would be great if we could all work on exactly what we want and we didn't have to worry about money. However, until we catch up with a Star Trek like society that is not the case. Therefore, I actually prefer products that are not free.

You are thinking in the wrong way. Open Source doesn't mean that something has to be free of charge, or that you have to do something for free.

Open Source is source code which is open to see it. You can look at it, change it, or propose something to be changed. It's all about your security and improvements.

True, there is nothing wrong with Open Source in the sense that you can see the code, even the commercial version of Torque comes with the code. My issue is with the Freeware Open Source concept. Basically, an Open Source license where you effectively no longer own the code (it is essentially given to the community).

I guess I just believe that it is important for developers to get paid for creating great products. If the licensing is done correctly it is a win-win for everyone.

@sean

Do you work for microsoft by any chance?

Sean Doherty wrote:

quark wrote:

Sean Doherty wrote: Generally, speaking I don't believe in Open Source; sure it would be great if we could all work on exactly what we want and we didn't have to worry about money. However, until we catch up with a Star Trek like society that is not the case. Therefore, I actually prefer products that are not free.

Hmm, this is a matter of choice. I volunteer all the time at the library, picking up trash on the road, and donate my time at a night school for teaching. Now, one could say I am taking money away (for I am sure there are people who would do it if they got paid). So to just rule out by defacto, if it is free, I don't believe it, extended to other aspects, means to rule out anything that is done with volunteers (so no libraries, hospitals, etc, as most of those also use volunteers).

Clearly, it is a matter of choice. And yes, if one wants to extend ones work, and the license choosen originally says, to do so, you must make it a community work, you have a choice again. To defacto rule any thing out (open source or closed source) seems rather arbitrary in nature.

@Open Sorceror,

No

@punt,

You don't understand? I see nothing wrong with volunteering ones time but I wouldn't advise anyone to run their business with volunteers. Basically, there is nothing wrong with free products. However, relying on these products to run your business can be dangerous in some cases.

Sean Doherty wrote:@Open Sorceror,

You don't understand? I see nothing wrong with volunteering ones time but I wouldn't advise anyone to run their business with volunteers. Basically, there is nothing wrong with free products. However, relying on these products to run your business can be dangerous in some cases.

I'm sorry, but I can't understand what are you talking about. Running business with volunteers? Who is running bussines with volunteers?

Most open source projects, under development by "volunteers", are projects where people are paid by big companies.

Can you tell me what is dangerous by using "free" products while running my bussiness? Why is wrong to use Mozilla instead of MSIE? Why is wrong to use OpenOffice instead of MS Office? Why is wrong to use Linux instead of Windows?

quark,

Your comments are outside the context of my remarks. I am referring to products that are critical to the development of your game or more specifically game development engines. Basically, any product where once you have a lot of time invested it would be difficult to change directions quickly.

As for the browser question:

If you were a company like Amazon.com I would definitely advise you to use as many browsers as possible. That said, if you were only going to test with one browser I would say it better be Internet Explorer since they have the majority of the market.

Bottom line, I just think people should get paid for their efforts. Generally, people who are not paid become unmotivated over time and the product suffers. Moreover, the expectation for support from a person or group that is providing a service or product for free not especially high.

Lastly, nothing I am saying was anything to do with Open Source. My comments are directed at free products. Whether they are Open Source or not does not really matter. And yes, I acknowledge that I used Open Source in some of the comments above.

Sean, you can't judge about other people motivation. Some people are doing things they like, and for them, satisfaction is in other people happiness

Of cours they should get paid for their effort. But, please leave decision to them. Unless we are talking about dirty capitalism where people are exploited.

Sorry, that was me. I should register once for all

I don't think any people in this thread would like to work for free. I am writing my game opensource and free; but that's a hobby, I have to do something else to be able to buy the food I want, get my house paid etc. So I don't think I would ever work on opensource things as a job if I was a programmer; as a hobby, yes, as a job nooou.

(Now thinking.... did I read this thread wrong? :S)

Well, one difference I've noticed with Ogre vs Irrlicht is that if your video card does not support shaders, It's much easier for Irrlicht to ignore the shaders than it is for Ogre. With Ogre your app is unusable...

That said, if you were only going to test with one browser I would say it better be Internet Explorer since they have the majority of the market.

Your not doing yourself any favours by bringing that up. Micro$oft tried (wrongly) to force Netscape out of the market. And they got beaten down for it. /rant
Whats the difference you might ask? (Open Sourcer, lol) EDIT: "Sorceror"

Im waiting for the next IE based internet worm that exploits Internet Explorer AND Outlook Express. (*sigh* again)
I like FireFox, and I help to develop it as well. (In my free time, for no pay. Because I use the internet which is a dangeous place. For your IE AND Mozilla in its various incarnations. But FireFox is just better, mkay? No pop-ups for a start) :p

Poor Sean. Id just change your username and forget about it. Ive posted in forums long enough to know arguing on-line is pointless.

The topic was, Irrlicht vs OGRE. Remember?

This was either the voice of reason or Ozzy going crazy again.
Uhm. Thanks for your time.

Ssbfalcon wrote:Well, one difference I've noticed with Ogre vs Irrlicht is that if your video card does not support shaders, It's much easier for Irrlicht to ignore the shaders than it is for Ogre. With Ogre your app is unusable...

I noticed on the OGRE web site that there is now a converter that will convert from most formats to the OGRE mesh format. That certainly makes it much easy to use OGRE than have to use one on the plugins. With the converter you wouldn't even have to own a 3d modeling program.

That is true, the .X converter that is around for Max is crappy at best, half the time you have to go through the DirectX mesh viewer to get the file to work correctly which is not fun. Although I don't think Irrlicht needs its own mesh format, maybe if there was a better .X converter from .MAX around then it wouldn't make much difference between the engines.