Given the direction Vista is taking, an open O/S may be the way to go. Otherwise I can foresee a dark future where Cyberboard gameboxes will become DRM'd ...
(Besides people just saying Vista is crap and no one wants it.) --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thus spake Dale: > > Hi, > > > > >You'll need to pick a GUI toolkit which works on all of the platforms > > >which you want to target. I'd recommend using QT for this; I wrote a rather > > >large piece of software (a game engine, in fact) using QT, and it was > > >minimally painful getting it to work on both Windows and Linux. Translating > > >all of the MFC stuff into whatever toolkit you decide to use is *not* going > > >to be fun. > > > > Yep.. I'm exploring that right now. I've got my eye on one that appears to > > map from MFC somewhat but I have more homework to do. I want to remove all > > attachment to commercial software. > > One thing about attracting coders (especially Linux coders) is that using > a popular GUI toolkit will help. If it's not GTK or QT (or maybe WxWindows?) > you're not going to find too many people who want to help and already are > familiar with it, which could be a major impediment. > > For reference, here's a MFC migration guide for QT: > > http://www.trolltech.com/products/qt/learnmore/migration/mfc > http://doc.trolltech.com/solutions/qtwinmigrate/index.html > > It's possible to use both MFC and QT simultaneously, so you can do the > migration incrementally rather than in one go and hope that it works. > > > >Does this mean that the CB file formats will also be open? Something I've > > >wanted to do for quite some time is write a program which converts CB > > >gameboxes into (minimal) VASSAL modules and vice versa. > > > > It'll be opened up when the source is opened up. > > Great. From my point of view, it's the artwork that's hard, not the coding. > Being able to take the artwork and automatically put it into the format you > want would be fabulous. > > -- > J. >
