PDA

View Full Version : Hey, open the source code for 1.7...


Endafy
19th December 2012, 02:43 PM
This may have been asked a few times before, but I am going to ask it again anyway in a complete thought according to the guidelines.

1) It would be useful to the majority of users if I could look at the code and finish it for everyone involved. It removes the "control" from 1 developer to thousands, and I can make a much easier simpler UI, and port it to other platforms.

2) It would remove the difficulties from you, I understand how hard it is to code something. I do it for a living. It would be worth it for everyone involved.

3) I am sorry there is no reason to draw a picture of this, but I think #3 is a moot point anyway.

4) To be specific and non obvious, is that original open source developers get way more respect and admiration than closed source ones. You end up looking like a jerk who is only in it for the money. We understand people need to eat and are more willing to donate to open source projects more often than closed source ones. Furthermore, we are more willing to donate twice or 3x the amount to open source ones than closed source ones we may over look because we can't have the freedom to make it better. We can't look at it and say thank you for your contribution. We sit and ponder what would drive you to keep this all a secret.

5) I did research on this, and it seems to be very negatively received but I think this would be a great idea. It would garner reputation and quite a lot of respect from the community by and large.

6) I have thought about this for a long time now, far longer than a day. I have wanted to fix it forever now.

7) My idea is complete, GPLv3 would cover all of your bases and keep it alive and well, with your original code in tact forever. You would be set in a proverbial stone.

8) Of course you don't have to, this is of course, your baby. You own the patents to the code, and it is entirely up to you. I would love to be able to work on it, and further complete it. I would love to port it to every platform I can think of. I would love to go above and beyond, but this again is your project and open source n64 emulators exist, just they aren't quite as good because they didn't dump the n64 bios and decode it like you did.

Final thoughts:
The gamecube and wii emulators are open source, the work was done to dump and decode the bioses and they are the greatest emulators on the planet. Dolphin is by far the quickest, most feature complete, system-like emulator to date. It works with every wii and gc game without an issue short of unsupported hardware.

dazey238
19th December 2012, 03:08 PM
Obviously it's a question for zilmar which yes has been asked several times.

Just out of interest though - do you have any experience of programming emulators? Specifically, for the N64?

I know you mentioned the existing open source N64 emulators out there, but 1964 1.2 for example is actually really good, and it has a Google Code page with a number of issues to be resolved.

Even Project64 1.6 is open source at the moment (albeit questionably).

Don't mean to be rude, I guess I just wonder why you and other people seem so focussed on the release of the PJ64 1.7 source when there are other N64 emulation projects out there which are pretty advanced and in need of skilled developers.

squall_leonhart
20th December 2012, 01:56 PM
1) It would be useful to the majority of users if I could look at the code and finish it for everyone involved. It removes the "control" from 1 developer to thousands, and I can make a much easier simpler UI, and port it to other platforms.No it wouldn't.
Zilmar's code is written in a format he finds easy to read, which makes it painful for the rest of us.
The UI Is simple but powerful, we wouldn't want it any other way.

2) It would remove the difficulties from you, I understand how hard it is to code something. I do it for a living. It would be worth it for everyone involved.Why would this be a valid reason?, You clearly don't know Zilmar or the backstory of Project64 at all if you think this would sway him.

3) I am sorry there is no reason to draw a picture of this, but I think #3 is a moot point anyway.[insert random coolface gif]

4) To be specific and non obvious, is that original open source developers get way more respect and admiration than closed source ones. You end up looking like a jerk who is only in it for the money. We understand people need to eat and are more willing to donate to open source projects more often than closed source ones. Furthermore, we are more willing to donate twice or 3x the amount to open source ones than closed source ones we may over look because we can't have the freedom to make it better. We can't look at it and say thank you for your contribution. We sit and ponder what would drive you to keep this all a secret.Not the case at all. A lot of open source developers get laughed at and rediculed because of ridiculous development decisions - Refer to Mupen64minus.

5) I did research on this, and it seems to be very negatively received but I think this would be a great idea. It would garner reputation and quite a lot of respect from the community by and large.Project64 already has reputation of still being the best emulator to use, because it isn't gimped like mupen64minus, supports internal gamefixes via the rdb (unlike mupen64minus) and supports all known Common spec plugins (unlike mupen64minus and the latest 1964)

6) I have thought about this for a long time now, far longer than a day. I have wanted to fix it forever now.Go find some porn to watch

7) My idea is complete, GPLv3 would cover all of your bases and keep it alive and well, with your original code in tact forever. You would be set in a proverbial stone.GPL is an ongoing joke. Nobody wants to commit their code to a project that could be ripped off and sold by some random ass who manages to port it to a phone.

8) Of course you don't have to, this is of course, your baby. You own the patents to the code, and it is entirely up to you. I would love to be able to work on it, and further complete it. I would love to port it to every platform I can think of. I would love to go above and beyond, but this again is your project and open source n64 emulators exist, just they aren't quite as good because they didn't dump the n64 bios and decode it like you did. what bios? the n64 has a boot rom that is already emulated.

The gamecube and wii emulators are open source, the work was done to dump and decode the bioses and they are the greatest emulators on the planet. Dolphin is by far the quickest, most feature complete, system-like emulator to date. It works with every wii and gc game without an issue short of unsupported hardware. The developers of dolphin are a bunch of kids barely out of high school, The team has little communication between developers (apart from 1 or 2 wannabe's who think themselves better then the rest) and uses a lame design idealogy that if you are too lazy to fix it yourself, revert it and drop it from the project.

HatCat
21st December 2012, 12:56 AM
I would love to go above and beyond, but this again is your project and open source n64 emulators exist, just they aren't quite as good because they didn't dump the n64 bios and decode it like you did.

the n64 bios has the same problems as the GBC and SNES where dumping the bios is concerned. it would require heavy hardware modifications to pull it off.

http://www.emutalk.net/threads/39962-Project64-is-not-perfect?p=373275&viewfull=1#post373275

[edit] also no Project64 doesn't support all the common plugin specs, zilmar still refuses to support his own Controller #1.1 :D mupen however does

Endafy
21st December 2012, 03:32 AM
@squall_leonhart
Wow are you trolling me or do you really believe the rhetoric that you spouted. I don't want this to turn into an argument, but for the sake of going with what you said, I can take the source code I acquired quite easily through some seedier channels and simply do as you say without it being GPL already. The code is quite simple to find I assure you.

I have read his code it is very simple to read. It isn't well organized but I can read code so this is a non issue.

I don't watch porn and find it disgusting.

Dolphin plays almost every gamecube and wii game in existence, and took far less time getting there, and is far more stable than Project 64 was going back to say, the EOL for n64, and in fact I remember PJ64 being very crashy all the way through until the Wii's final release.

Your view of GPL is very flawed my friend, and I use the term loosely because I wouldn't be friends with someone who actually believed some of the childish things you have spouted off at me. You are not Zillmer, you didn't code it, I don't see your name anywhere in the files, so you have no voice to speak as you do, so sit down and shut up before you embarrass yourself. You have no code of yours in this project, so you sound like a trollish child.

I for one have coded and provided a LOT of open source code, I have been directly affiliated with the VooDoo *nix sound streamer and VooDoo kernel available for BSD, it has been ported to Android, Linux, and is being used in OSX upstream. Apple actually noted how good VooDoo sound system and is going to begin using it in future OS releases. You have no idea the honor. Being thick headed is no excuse for concern.

I mean if you had pointed any valid arguments, even tired old ones against open source I would respect you, but honestly everything you said is just a bunch of rhetoric trash. In fact everything you stated is wrong on all accounts, it would have been better if you didn't talk to me at all.

@lolXD
Thank you for pointing that out to me, that is one thing I was unaware of. I would love to add to this amazing project. I could bring it out of the dark ages of direct x 8 and update the graphics to OpenGL, I would break the ugly ties of MSVCP and recompile everything in GCC to make it more compatible with newer OSes, including Windows 8, I would code it to be 64 bit compatible. I would remove the XML hell that it looks like he has tangled into this mess and update it to JSON which is far more robust, and doesn't leave glue marks all over the damn place lol. Hell I don't understand why he didn't use YAML, why XML yuck. It is like he coded this entire project to be Windows compatible only without the hope of cross platform at all.

Could I accomplish most of this with plugins, well sure, hell I could take the parts I need and rip them out, and do all this with the code I have and nothing in the world would stop me. You try to sue me? Well I know some Nintendo heads who would LOVE to get their hands on your code. The point is I am simply saying, why not protect the variables with a license that is strict enough to protect it, GPLv3. The entire idea of an emulator breaks copyright laws left and right. I would be protected by the FSF, but you wouldn't should something arise and the laws sway ever so slightly against this sort of thing.

Lots of reasons to go GPL no reasons really not to other than a few trolls like squall who seem to actually believe the FSF wouldn't back something like this. Look all I am saying is let the community have a crack at it. Some open source projects do suck because morons write bad code. But there is a lot of great open source code. The very software running this website and forum is open source and GPL. Android is open source. Firefox is open source. Chromium (basically the ongoing beta version of google chrome) is open source. Libre Office, Gnome, KDE (which 99% of modern UIs copy), the entirety of Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Fedora all GPL. My very own VooDoo is GPL. Ogg Vorbis, Flac, VLC media player, FLV, your flat screen television, your cable box, your DVR, the kernel to OSX and iOS, python, ruby, google earth, picassa, Java (although java sucks), the list goes on and on of great GPL and Open Source projects. The US stock market for christs sake is GPL (they went GPL far before it crashed like years before) Almost every other country on earth and government office. Why not you too?

Or continue to live in the dark ages and when Linux DOES in fact take over the desktop, you will be left in the cold. Remember they said IBM was once too big to fall and where are they now? Barely making ends meet. Catering to markets nobody cares about.

squall_leonhart
21st December 2012, 04:03 AM
http://www.emutalk.net/threads/39962-Project64-is-not-perfect?p=373275&viewfull=1#post373275

[edit] also no Project64 doesn't support all the common plugin specs, zilmar still refuses to support his own Controller #1.1 :D mupen however does

/me facepalms

i knew that, it just totally slipped my mind

squall_leonhart
21st December 2012, 04:23 AM
@squall_leonhart
Wow are you trolling me or do you really believe the rhetoric that you spouted. I don't want this to turn into an argument, but for the sake of going with what you said,

Yes, I troll deluded GPL Tards fairly often

I can take the source code I acquired quite easily through some seedier channels and simply do as you say without it being GPL already. The code is quite simple to find I assure you.You could, Then Zilmar could sue you into the ground for going against the custom license that protects the source from such thievery.

And you needed a seedy channel to obtain it? The 1.6 source code has been available on google code for months now, Its just had very little done with it because in comparison to the current code, it is archaic.

I have read his code it is very simple to read. It isn't well organized but I can read code so this is a non issue.Sure you can.

I don't watch porn and find it disgusting.I knew you had to be a woman. Your barely there logic seethed of it.

Dolphin plays almost every gamecube and wii game in existence, and took far less time getting there, and is far more stable than Project 64 was going back to say, the EOL for n64, and in fact I remember PJ64 being very crashy all the way through until the Wii's final release.No it doesn't. Keep believing that it does though, coz its fun to watch you fail.

Your view of GPL is very flawed my friendMy view of GPL is realistic. Yours is delusional.


And I use the term loosely because I wouldn't be friends with someone who actually believed some of the childish things you have spouted off at me.I don't befriend self entitled twits like yourself who come to a projects forum and make a half baked attempt at fishing the source code from its developer.


You are not Zillmer, you didn't code it.I don't see your name anywhere in the files, so you have no voice to speak as you do, so sit down and shut up before you embarrass yourself. You have no code of yours in this project, so you sound like a trollish child.So a persons name has to be in/on a product for them to have contributed to it, eh?. There are alot of projects like this where people contribute heavily and prefer their name not be placed in credits or documentation.

I for one have coded and provided a LOT of open source code, I have been directly affiliated with the VooDoo *nix sound streamer and VooDoo kernel available for BSD, it has been ported to Android, Linux, and is being used in OSX upstream. Apple actually noted how good VooDoo sound system and is going to begin using it in future OS releases. You have no idea the honor. Being thick headed is no excuse for concern.That's nice. It doesn't make Linux any less shit on the desktop and hasn't won it any share in the gaming platforms.

I mean if you had pointed any valid arguments, even tired old ones against open source I would respect you, but honestly everything you said is just a bunch of rhetoric trash. In fact everything you stated is wrong on all accounts, it would have been better if you didn't talk to me at all.Who said i was against open source? Thats your interpretation. What i'm against is GPL and licenses like it that don't protect prior contributors to the project. Any developer with prior code deserves to be compensated should a form of their work be released for profit on an "app" store.

@lolXD
Thank you for pointing that out to me, that is one thing I was unaware of. I would love to add to this amazing project. I could bring it out of the dark ages of direct x 8 and update the graphics to OpenGLYou could be doing that now you lazy clot. Glide64 has been begging for a native OpenGL port for some time. Not to mention you won't even have access to the Gfx plugin source since that belongs to Jabo, and he ain't letting go of it for nobody.


I would break the ugly ties of MSVCP and recompile everything in GCC to make it more compatible with newer OSes, including Windows 8ROTFLMAO. Just gtfo and write your own emulator then. Thats what you'll be effectively doing...... oh wait, you don't have a clue how to emulate the n64, so you just ignorantly assume having the code will make that a cake walk.



I would code it to be 64 bit compatible.No you wouldn't. You'd shit all over the code and leave a half arsed mess after giving up because you're too naive. Seriously, go back to linux and your praising apple and smoke some weed.


The point is I am simply saying, why not protect the variables with a license that is strict enough to protect it, GPLv3. The entire idea of an emulator breaks copyright laws left and right. I would be protected by the FSF, but you wouldn't should something arise and the laws sway ever so slightly against this sort of thing.GPLv3 is not protection.

This is protection.

/*
* Project 64 - A Nintendo 64 emulator.
*
* (c) Copyright 2001 zilmar (zilmar@emulation64.com) and
* Jabo (jabo@emulation64.com).
*
* pj64 homepage: www.pj64.net (http://www.pj64.net)
*
* Permission to use, copy, modify and distribute Project64 in both binary and
* source form, for non-commercial purposes, is hereby granted without fee,
* providing that this license information and copyright notice appear with
* all copies and any derived work.
*
* This software is provided 'as-is', without any express or implied
* warranty. In no event shall the authors be held liable for any damages
* arising from the use of this software.
*
* Project64 is freeware for PERSONAL USE only. Commercial users should
* seek permission of the copyright holders first. Commercial use includes
* charging money for Project64 or software derived from Project64.
*
* The copyright holders request that bug fixes and improvements to the code
* should be forwarded to them so if they want them.
*
*/

Your precious retarded GPL does NOT protect shit. You're a deluded linux tard that needs to get out of the basement and take a look at the app store and get a good hard look at all the hard work WE emulator developers have put into our projects, only to have snotty little shits adapt the code to sell and profit off our backs.

Get on my ignore list with all the other deluded tampax chewers.

[edit] also no Project64 doesn't support all the common plugin specs, zilmar still refuses to support his own Controller #1.1 :D mupen however does There isn't even a plugin that utilises the 1.1 spec to prove mupen supports it. However since all mupen actually supports is some half baked SDL shit that doesn't even work on gamepads with more than 6 axis........

Endafy
21st December 2012, 05:51 AM
So full of hate there mr squall. I feel bad that you have to live under that. I really do. Seems you offer nothing to any thread started by anyone. I did a search for your name and all you spout off is trash and hate at people. So I will be asking for this thread to be closed since you are so close minded. I feel bad for people like you I really do.

zilmar
21st December 2012, 08:17 AM
This may have been asked a few times before, but I am going to ask it again anyway in a complete thought according to the guidelines.

1) It would be useful to the majority of users if I could look at the code and finish it for everyone involved. It removes the "control" from 1 developer to thousands, and I can make a much easier simpler UI, and port it to other platforms.

I once thought like that, I thought I would release the source of pj64 and someone else could just take over it. That is why pj64 1.4 source was released.

When you have projects that a lot of people want to code and extend, shared foundation (browser, kernel, os, cms). Then Open source works well for people to come together to work together to code it.

Being open source does not mean someone will pick it up. There are a lot of dead open source projects. A project needs good dedicated codes and people driving/leading the development. This is needed open/closed for the project to work. Being open can help try to attract talent, but it does not guarantee it.


2) It would remove the difficulties from you, I understand how hard it is to code something. I do it for a living. It would be worth it for everyone involved.


After opening 1.4 source (granted there was not decent source control like git repository then, so not easy for people to submit changes). I really doubt it would make much difference. Maybe some small changes in the side, but I doubt there is any benefit to me.

3) I am sorry there is no reason to draw a picture of this, but I think #3 is a moot point anyway.

No Idea what your talking about here.

4) To be specific and non obvious, is that original open source developers get way more respect and admiration than closed source ones. You end up looking like a jerk who is only in it for the money. We understand people need to eat and are more willing to donate to open source projects more often than closed source ones. Furthermore, we are more willing to donate twice or 3x the amount to open source ones than closed source ones we may over look because we can't have the freedom to make it better. We can't look at it and say thank you for your contribution. We sit and ponder what would drive you to keep this all a secret.

Maybe to some, but the majority does not care that much cause 99.99% of the people can not code so it does not make a difference to them if it is closed or open source as long as it works for them.

5) I did research on this, and it seems to be very negatively received but I think this would be a great idea. It would garner reputation and quite a lot of respect from the community by and large.

6) I have thought about this for a long time now, far longer than a day. I have wanted to fix it forever now.

7) My idea is complete, GPLv3 would cover all of your bases and keep it alive and well, with your original code in tact forever. You would be set in a proverbial stone.

- no comment

8) Of course you don't have to, this is of course, your baby. You own the patents to the code, and it is entirely up to you. I would love to be able to work on it, and further complete it. I would love to port it to every platform I can think of. I would love to go above and beyond, but this again is your project and open source n64 emulators exist, just they aren't quite as good because they didn't dump the n64 bios and decode it like you did.

there is no n64 bios.

not sure about porting to non x86 systems, maybe it could be done. Tho that mac is now x86 maybe it is possible.

Jabo is the only one who has access to his graphics, audio and input plugin so I have no say in that.


Final thoughts:
The gamecube and wii emulators are open source, the work was done to dump and decode the bioses and they are the greatest emulators on the planet. Dolphin is by far the quickest, most feature complete, system-like emulator to date. It works with every wii and gc game without an issue short of unsupported hardware.

It is not a matter of if it is open or not, but the skill level of the people involved. As said before there is a lot of other open source n64 emulators, if it was just a matter of being open source then they should have long ago dominated the scene. Especially with me not necessarily focusing on pj64.

squall_leonhart
21st December 2012, 08:33 AM
and fwiw

not even mame has the pokesnap camera triggered events, or body harvests geometric clipping, or Rogue squadrons long draw distance working. >.>, so large collections of developers don't mean a project will boom.

mudlord_
21st December 2012, 09:03 AM
ROTFLMAO. Just gtfo and write your own emulator then. Thats what you'll be effectively doing...... oh wait, you don't have a clue how to emulate the n64, so you just ignorantly assume having the code will make that a cake walk.

Considering the current state of 1.6 source, yes thats what the USF people did. They rewrote r4300i and RSP code into C++ classes for multiinstance/thread safety, which is basically writing a whole new emulator.

And opening the source to 1.7 would do nothing.

HatCat
22nd December 2012, 12:11 AM
Being mathematically invested as an engineer, my philosophical side defaults to open-source as a carefree imagination of mine, but then again I'm not really that carefree always. :) Up until now I can say anything I have worked on has always been open-source, but I wouldn't put it past me to work on a plugin that I'm afraid that somebody is going to fuck up if I do open. :D

Could just be my paranoid side I guess.

I hate to argue over software politics though.
I'm a defaults person. I just wanna do the damn shit! :D

Hero
22nd December 2012, 04:11 AM
I don't watch porn and find it disgusting.
........

Liar.

HatCat
22nd December 2012, 08:24 PM
LOL, and then his reply to that was,

"I knew you had to be a woman."

Shame this thread went from tl;dr to peaceful and boring though.
NEED FORUM BLOOD AND GUTS.


After opening 1.4 source (granted there was not decent source control like git repository then, so not easy for people to submit changes). I really doubt it would make much difference. Maybe some small changes in the side, but I doubt there is any benefit to me.

Then again, you forget the MAME RSP included some information you left in the 1.4 RSP source, while fixing other bugs that still exist in the 1.7 RSP.

But yes, it wouldn't have any benefit to you because you don't want help on that part. :D

Obviously your points are all basically true but there is no logical argument against open-source exactly, just that it doesn't necessarily make a difference. However it cannot negatively affect work *directly*, did you think there was some logical reason against open-sourcing that LaC chose? Most people keep things like that closed-source out of the understandable fear of that information serving poor use in the wrong hands.

Open- vs. closed- , It's a tad bit like a battle of good versus evil: They both warrant the survival of the other, so there is no logical reason for consistently trying to prefer only one. Lots of open-source work came from the fact that LaC didn't open-source. Lots of good results from evil, evil will also thrive off good...


anyway I only wrote this shit cause I was bored lmao

mudlord_
23rd December 2012, 01:26 AM
Also, its entirely the dev's perogative to foss or not.

doesnt matter, at the end of the day, the end user gets a product. its just one method which makes the end user feel more entitled to things. :rolleyes:

HatCat
23rd December 2012, 07:55 PM
You know, I may have a fondness to it myself, but,

The thing I can't stand,

is people who aren't even involved with programming, making religious obsessions over how every `important` project developer should make that project open-source, I know a lot of "friends" I've talked with that just constantly advise people, me included, that ideas like that are just philosophically the best.

And I have no opinion on whether to agree or disagree, but it's more intuitive than whether it's right or wrong to do so. It ain't their business so they should just STFU :D :D :D

It's a bit like those naive obsessions over, making every program 64-bit, have 64 CPU cores, have 64 GB RAM. The childishness just annoys me XD (me looking in the mirror I guess lmao)

mudlord_
23rd December 2012, 09:52 PM
exactly.
10char

weinerschnitzel
13th January 2013, 05:03 AM
I once thought like that, I thought I would release the source of pj64 and someone else could just take over it. That is why pj64 1.4 source was released.

When you have projects that a lot of people want to code and extend, shared foundation (browser, kernel, os, cms). Then Open source works well for people to come together to work together to code it.

Being open source does not mean someone will pick it up. There are a lot of dead open source projects. A project needs good dedicated codes and people driving/leading the development. This is needed open/closed for the project to work. Being open can help try to attract talent, but it does not guarantee it.



After opening 1.4 source (granted there was not decent source control like git repository then, so not easy for people to submit changes). I really doubt it would make much difference. Maybe some small changes in the side, but I doubt there is any benefit to me.



No Idea what your talking about here.



Maybe to some, but the majority does not care that much cause 99.99% of the people can not code so it does not make a difference to them if it is closed or open source as long as it works for them.



- no comment



there is no n64 bios.

not sure about porting to non x86 systems, maybe it could be done. Tho that mac is now x86 maybe it is possible.

Jabo is the only one who has access to his graphics, audio and input plugin so I have no say in that.



It is not a matter of if it is open or not, but the skill level of the people involved. As said before there is a lot of other open source n64 emulators, if it was just a matter of being open source then they should have long ago dominated the scene. Especially with me not necessarily focusing on pj64.


Thank you for a legitimate response. It really isn't nice to be hounded by people other than you when a question like this is brought up in a serious manner.

Yeah, it pretty much comes down to people wanting to use the code you wrote moreso than they can/want to improve emulation. You have something beautiful here, and very useful. Only it's more useful to us if it's open source than it is for you.

I think it should be considered that potential developers won't want to pick up an open source project if a later and better version is still in closed development. The window for 1.4 to become a healthy open source emulator has been closed for some time now. As long as you are working on a closed version that will most likely be better in every way, why should I work on the older version?

Platform expansion would give alot of work for other people to maintain, and easily so in an open source environment. It would also greatly expand your user base.

Jabo told me he wouldn't do it because the people nagging made him jaded. That really sucks. People in the Xbox scene made a name for themselves in the FAQ here. That sucks as well. I personally would not donate to be able to test something that I like, when my use is in porting it. I am, however, the kind of person that would make a worthwhile donation if I was able to use that code. I don't believe your motivation/recognition for the project would dissolve going open source.

HatCat
13th January 2013, 10:06 PM
As long as you are working on a closed version that will most likely be better in every way, why should I work on the older version?

Several GameFAQ entries recommending to use Project64 1.4 instead.

Even though Project64 1.6 source code was released personally I have had only a quick look at like one or two files really briefly. I don't remember much of it but personally I find the 1.4 basic demo plugins by zilmar has taught me the most into getting started.

It's probably not that hard to build your emu off of somebody else's / recompile their source and expand upon it; I just haven't considered it because I don't really feel much of a point into it if I couldn't learn to design my own from scratch.

rpetet
16th January 2013, 07:59 PM
Sounds like the developers realized what they had in the emulator realm and decided on a way to survive in this recession by holding their program hostage to a "suggested" donation. :mad: The current version is up to 2.0 and above, but does anyone know this except the "people in the know" ? Although unrelated , when Piriform.com releases new versions of ccleaner it doesn't force people to "donate" or 'pay' for the new version, they just release it and get donations from people like me who appreciate their hard work. And no they do not set a price limit.;)


wow, is this thread over! :lol: forgot to look at the date!

shadow69th
25th January 2013, 06:55 AM
Dolphin Gamecube/Wii Emulator is Open Source and they are in the 3.5 Stable version now.
I think now is the best game console emulator by far.
They make new versions almost 5 or more times A DAY.

Thats the benefist of a open source Emulator Project. Compare the development of Project64 vs Dolphin, the differences are clear, open source is better. They make progress! His emulator progress! And Project64? not much...

EVOLVE!

zilmar
25th January 2013, 07:25 AM
apple vs oranges ...

compare to mupen64 or 1964 they are open source n64 emulators

magmarock64
25th January 2013, 04:05 PM
Actually while I'm, impressed at some of the things Dolphin can do it's far from the best. I think PCSX2 does a better job at emulation then Dolphin and my #1 emulator is Kega Fusion. What a reliable trouble free emulator that is. Not once have I ever had an issue using it.

mudlord_
25th January 2013, 09:48 PM
what zilmar said
>_>

HatCat
27th January 2013, 09:26 PM
Dolphin Gamecube/Wii Emulator is Open Source and they are in the 3.5 Stable version now.
I think now is the best game console emulator by far.
They make new versions almost 5 or more times A DAY.

Thats the benefist of a open source Emulator Project. Compare the development of Project64 vs Dolphin, the differences are clear, open source is better. They make progress! His emulator progress! And Project64? not much...

EVOLVE!apple vs oranges ...

Not only that, but Cat vs Internet. :(

XD :D

Every one of these threads trying to proselytize between closed- and open-source like two different religions, is a case of Cat versus Internet. :)

The cat is the critter staring out the window at other emulators yelling, "EVOLVE!" :eek:

And the Internet...well, assuming it has a chance to evolve, Fat Cat knocks it down with its fat belly first. WWF FTW!!!!

(sorry lol, just bored)

squall_leonhart
28th January 2013, 04:08 AM
LOLCATS vs LAWLDOGS

HatCat
28th January 2013, 07:18 PM
squall vs. Internet:

*takes squall's 48px 64px animated GIF avatar*

*changes the canvas size to 3600x2400, with the actual squall blade animation bottom-right-aligned*

*puts a mobile PC with Internet next to squall*

*watches as squall's blade pierces the device/modem linked to teh interwebs and creates a collosal explosion taking up the entire canvas space on the monitor*

et500
1st February 2013, 01:25 AM
Dolphin is very unstable atm, most AAA Games freeze or crash sooner or later and most games have HLE audio issues. PCSX2 is not much better, too many games crash too often. However, I'm currently impressed by the stability-wise nearly perfect ZSNES and Snes9x Emulators and also by the heavy improvements made on epsxe (playing my 10 year old FF9 for the very first time right now).

I wish N64 emulation would be in such a stable state, but all emulators out there leave a lot room for improvement.

I do not care if an emulator is open source or not, as long as there is an active developer team and a supporting community behind. Open source software often gets stolen or sold for money by people who did not contribute a single line of code. However, the benefit of open source would be that the different projects and approaches can attract new talent and learn from each other.

squall_leonhart
1st February 2013, 07:18 AM
ZSNES?

you mad?

PCSX2 is way more stable then zsnes

dsx_
1st February 2013, 09:17 AM
PCSX2 is way more stable then zsnes

lol are you okay

mudlord_
1st February 2013, 11:48 AM
no, foss wont help pj64.

if you looked at what zilmar done so far with working on RSP accuracy, he is doing VERY well on his own.

weinerschnitzel
1st February 2013, 04:06 PM
Open source software often gets stolen or sold for money by people who did not contribute a single line of code.

That's why we have licenses. Depending on the license, the developer can take action against commercial rips of the emulator. This isn't a very valid argument to remain closed when it is already freeware.

Mupen64 and 1964 shouldn't be relevant either. Their source code DOES get put to use by third parties. Mupen64 has seen alot more attention than 1964, and it doesn't support the idea that open source N64 emulators get left in the dust. Take a look at Mupen64GC and Mupen64-360.

To be fair, I didn't think PJ64 1.6 was going to take off that far after it was discovered and put on GitHub. There were some enhancements from documented findings, like RTC access and X-Scale's CIC-NUS-6105 algorithm, but there hasn't been activity for some time now.

If these are things that the developer(s) can take care of on their own, that DOES bring into the question of necessity for going open source to the developers. Considering an open source approach shouldn't be limited to what can be contributed directly to the mainline and how timely. There are many any other benefits to other people that start the potential quid pro que exchange.

Zilmar, are there any reasons you DO NOT want the source code to be open? All I have heard was that you don't think it would help you. That may be, but I don't see how being closed provides more of a benefit. If it won't help you, why don't you want it to help other people interested?

TheLegend
2nd February 2013, 12:13 AM
Zilmar, are there any reasons you DO NOT want the source code to be open? All I have heard was that you don't think it would help you. That may be, but I don't see how being closed provides more of a benefit. If it won't help you, why don't you want it to help other people interested?
And why did he set up donation site?

HatCat
2nd February 2013, 02:30 AM
http://www.catster.com/files/post_images/da51d89e672cf46740567b3fb46c6118.jpg

I'm too fat to read through this thread.

Like zilmar said, "cat vs internet" (closes thread) :D

Also, that thing about, taking somebody's source code for open-source and contributing nothing to it, but selling it or the program for money using somebody else's source.

Well, hell.
I wouldn't be too offended by that.
Shows me my work is worth being made money off of, even if I'm not the one getting it. :D
That's my screwed up way of thinking about it anyway. I'm not a capitalist.

Love is the solution to problems like that. We can make laws or software policies attempting to catch people at it, but it doesn't always work + haters gonna hate.

No matter how open-source I made something like a N64 plugin, I suppose nobody but me will touch it in the next 5,000 years, but after 5,001 years I'm sure someone will fixate it to use SSSSSSSSE9001 Super Saiyan edition and take advantage that it was open-source to begin with.

mudlord_
2nd February 2013, 03:25 AM
No matter how open-source I made something like a N64 plugin, I suppose nobody but me will touch it in the next 5,000 years, but after 5,001 years I'm sure someone will fixate it to use SSSSSSSSE9001 Super Saiyan edition and take advantage that it was open-source to begin with.

that is so true. hardly anything i made is touched, lol. then people want stuff fossed. It doesnt make sense.

HatCat
2nd February 2013, 05:17 AM
I hear shit like that on this forum a lot, from people who don't even know like what HTML? And off Mdkcheatz personally too. :D
It's like, let me know when you're ready to contribute, numbnuts.

When he learned that I was experimenting with SRAM/FLASHRAM editors, N64 mempak defragmenters, or RCP emulation goals, his immediate assertion was "Make that shit open-source!"

Even though at the time it was already open-source, it gave me this feeling that I should make do the opposite and close-source it out of spite against him for inattentively demanding it XD.

I do know a few high-level language programmers who are empathetic over open-sourcing everything, but systems stuff, eh, in those group chats I never see talk over closed- and open-source as like two separate religions or something.