[REBOL] Re: Multimedia REBOL... yes or no?
From: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 10-Jul-2003 22:13
>But, if you want to know the big "blocking point" when it comes to MM
>and 3D in REBOL, here is the question you need to answer for me:
>
> Can it be made machine independent?
>
>There are two possible answers:
>
>YES: great! Let's do it.
>
>NO: then, should we still do it for just a couple platforms, and say
>"sorry" to the rest?
>
>I would like to see MM and 3D in REBOL. But, is it time for a split
>from one of the main themes of REBOL? Will the result help or hurt
>REBOL?
>
>Tell me your thoughts.
>
OK, I am sorry that my ideas will be more general than you will probably
like :-)
Carl - I remember one of your interviews after you were asked by GW to
lead AmigaOS development. You said one nice thing - something like - In
the first place there is technical innovation, which makes your product
popular. Then you forget about why your product became popular, and you
start only repackaging the product. You were talking about Amiga and
what should be done in respective years in regards to OS and hw. To be
honest, your own words remind me of rebol situation too. We simply have
to ask ourselves - what major technical advancement was made to Rebol in
last two years? (unless sitting on your hd). As far as we can see -
there were mainly only cosmetic changes. I know some ppl will object,
that Rebol itself is a technical advancement :-) But how long we will be
able to stay alive with such arguments?
I know very well that sometimes it is difficult to stay in business. But
let's state the obvious - from the outside pov rebol
development/advancement is pure stagnation. Technical limits still
persist. Isolation from external environment still persist - no free
shell, no free library. There is no point in keeping them out of
non-commercial usage at least - rebol syntax and philosophy is in our
brains/hearts - it can't become perl, basic, c anymore imo. Ppl would
applaud you if that situation would change. I even don't think it would
have any finnancil impact on RT - I think quite opposite -
blocking/isolating rebol in certain areas of usage kills many potential
projects. I saw some ppl refusing to use rebol because of that.
Now to be more concrete - if you decide to go MM way - who's there at RT
to actually code it? I think that if RT's man-power is limited, you
should go and ask those community skilled folks to help you. I can bet
they would do it for free (e.g. under NDA), just to help rebol proceed.
There should be coordinators in certain areas, which would help you to
gather info/requests/questions etc. and filter it for you. While it can
be true that open-VID project failed, it was not mostly of my bad
coordination, but because there was no-one left to coordinate. There
were certain decision points, but you were not available to answer. So
my opinion is, that maybe you could use some skilled folks here to help you?
As for the cross-platform compatibility - I already stated it in
previous email, but now I will make it even more clear - what platforms
are you talking about ;-) There is Windows and Linux version, MacOSx
View non-existant, maybe one or two other platforms, - but are those
really compatible and all have the same versions of View available? As
from my perspective - I would prefer rebol being more
componentised/modularised (at least internally) to be able to use on
PDAs. My personal priority list is - Windows, Linux, MacOSx, PDA oses
(WinCE, XPEmbedded?, Symbian, QNX), AmigaOS/MorphOS ... then nothing
really important .... and then maybe others ...
Now shortly technological aspects - 3D is not multimedia - smooth
scrolling, movement, sound sync, effects, transitions is, .... media
format replay is ... then there is 3D :-) And what is more - I think
that all significant platforms support certains apis (OpenGL, Messa),
use hw where possible, if not, emulate thru sw ... but - I will stop
here, as I am not skilled in OS internals but I really think it should
be possible - how do others do it? ...
-pekr-
