Simple: no users == no software.
If I have the fastest computer in the world, but there is no software for it, it is useless. I don't have the time or resources to write all my software myself.
So unless enough people use the same system, your system is pretty much useless.
Another important factor: more users == lower prices.
Mass-produced software and hardware is so much cheaper than custom-made stuff.

So it's no illusion at all. Or what did you mean, bitrake?
Posted on 2004-05-19 09:31:47 by Scali
What are your goals besides selling software to the masses? I advise getting into marketing - they sell lots of software to the masses.

Posted on 2004-05-19 09:37:06 by bitRAKE
I was more thinking about BUYING software than SELLING it. ...
The point being that if there ARE no masses, there's no software to sell to them.
... goals are to write fast CAD/graphics routines for commercial software.
I don't need 64 bit or Opterons for that. Just lots of floating point grunt. P4 HTT is the only one that delivers.

Posted on 2004-05-19 09:38:47 by Scali
Well, you have stated .Net is the future in your eyes, so why do you need to be concerned with the CPU being used? You have also stated your preference in CPUs, so what is to argue unless you have doubts about the choices you have made?

Posted on 2004-05-19 09:47:07 by bitRAKE
.NET can obviously only be the future if people develop .NET versions of their applications. x86-64 means they can just continue to develop their x86 versions.
Posted on 2004-05-19 09:49:52 by Scali
So, you would like .Net to be adopted faster? ...
Posted on 2004-05-19 09:53:46 by bitRAKE
You do NOT understand it. It's not about MY work. It's about OTHER PEOPLE's work!
I need to be able to work with 3dsmax for example.
I don't have the time or resources to write a 3dsmax clone for my platform myself. So my only options are a native port by Discreet (or some other company, as long as it is available), or a .NET version that will run on my platform. .NET being the nicest choice ofcourse, because .NET will work on my platform, and also on many others, so they only need to port it once.
What does any of that have to do with my work being appreciated when .NET is adopted? What do you mean with that statement anyway?
Posted on 2004-05-19 09:56:32 by Scali
So, if you need 3dsmax for your work then you will buy what ever system that software runs on - you cannot control what they do (unless you work for them?). I am not understanding your logic. You wish to buy a plateform and ensure #dsmax is wrote for it? I would try to get a job on their development team.
Posted on 2004-05-19 10:02:10 by bitRAKE
It's very simple: I want to be able to have the freedom to choose the platform, rather than 3dsmax making that choice for me.
And technically 3dsmax is not making the choice either, but its choice is a result of other software being developed for a platform, which makes that platform the largest possible market for 3dsmax.
So, yes, I wish to buy a platform and ensure 3dsmax is available. .NET is a good solution, don't you think?
It also works backwards... If a few billion people buy Itaniums, then 3dsmax might be developed for it. But I don't have the power to make a few billion people buy Itaniums, nor do I have the power to force Discreet to develop 3dsmax for Itanium or .NET just because I want it.
So I am dependent on what the market does.

Getting a job on their development team is obviously not an option. First of all they are not hiring, secondly, I do not wish to develop 3dsmax for a living, I wish to develop my software, and 3dsmax is one tool that I (well mostly my artists) use. By the way, 3dsmax is just one example, there are many other applications that I use. Do I need to work on all development teams at the same time, or what?

Posted on 2004-05-19 10:06:53 by Scali
another_old_member, it sounds like you fear your work will not be utilized by the people you wish to program for. I find it best to talk with those people and see what they would like.

Tom Hudson began Cyber Studio with a few other guys working closely together to create an incredible piece of software. Not only was user feedback important, but the developers were very artistic as well. His development moved to the PC once the Atari market declined.
Posted on 2004-05-19 10:29:12 by bitRAKE
another_old_member, it sounds like you fear your work will not be utilized by the people you wish to program for. I find it best to talk with those people and see what they would like.

...Reread my last post, it is not about who I program for. It's who programs for me. And that is Discreet, with 3dsmax, Microsoft with Windows, etc. I cannot work if I choose a platform that they do not support....
Posted on 2004-05-19 10:48:43 by Scali
Who is programming for you?
Posted on 2004-05-19 10:49:50 by bitRAKE
I listed them, hello?
Posted on 2004-05-19 10:51:10 by Scali
Posted on 2004-05-19 10:53:40 by Scronty
Well, if they writing software for you I would strongly suggest telling them what you would like.
Posted on 2004-05-19 10:58:40 by bitRAKE
Afternoon, All.

Could we get back on topic, please.

If not, then start a new thread so this one can close.

Posted on 2004-05-19 11:01:24 by Scronty
Okay, so they write software for me, and millions of others. I can tell them what I want, but so can the millions of other customers (as usual, the masses don't know what's good for them. ...).
Posted on 2004-05-19 11:07:12 by Scali
another_old_member, I'm trying to understand the basis of what you are saying. It does not really seem logical to base your decision on such abiguities and you seem rightly uncertain.
Posted on 2004-05-19 11:12:32 by bitRAKE
...What I'm saying is simply the way the world works. ...
I am not uncertain at all, and I have no idea what you are trying to say with that. ...
Posted on 2004-05-19 11:39:13 by Scali
You say you want to ensure your future by buying into the most popular system supported by the tools you use, but we cannot know what the most popular future system supported by the tools you use will be.
Posted on 2004-05-19 11:42:58 by bitRAKE