4 ms·

This is also why all programs should be distributed with source code. If not, you are at the mercy of the platform not to break what you have bought.

reggintoggaf 7y ago
Not workable. But the source should be placed in escrow that releases it once the program is no longer supported.
- Mikhail_Edoshin 7y ago
  Are there any actual escrows that do that?
  - reggintoggaf 7y ago
    Nope, and it wont happen unleds mandated by law.
xhruso00 7y ago
Having app that heavily relies on 32-bit Carbon Api open sourced is useless. You can't replace those Api call with newer because they simply don't exist or have no alternative. It's not going to help much
- shakna 7y ago
  Having access to the source makes it much easier for the community to do what they already do - create an open source re-implementation of the engine.
ratww 7y ago
For games, I think it's feasible to make at least the code that interfaces with the OS into a separate, re-linkable, open-source library. Translations between the APIs (Carbon to Cocoa, OpenGL to DirectX) might be very hard, but at least upgrades would be possible.
- icebraining 7y ago
  Wine shows you don't need the source of the programs to do that API translation.
dangus 7y ago
That ultimatum is idealistic at best. Not only that, the recourse of inspecting and modifying the code isn’t realistic to most people. Many open source projects die just because literally nobody with the skills required to maintain them are interested. Then you get to certain types of programs where open source provides no benefit: specifically, games. Games are largely just artistic content. Making games open source essentially means that all the content is going to be taken without compensating the artists. Open source works for other programs because they depend on interoperability. But games are just content, like a movie or book. The source is the product. For other programs, support and continual development are the product.
- shakna 7y ago
  id [0] seems to get by fine by open sourcing their game engines. And doing so has lead to a number of ports that wouldn't exist otherwise. The artists are still compensated fine. Because they separate the engine from the assets. If you want to play the original game, fine, but own it. But now the community gets to port the game easier to a new platform. Which is one of the reasons that it's easy to port DOOM to every platform out there. [0] https://github.com/id-Software https://github.com/id-Software
  - dangus 7y ago
    They open source the product long after it has any revenue potential.

reggintoggaf 7y ago

Not workable. But the source should be placed in escrow that releases it once the program is no longer supported.

Mikhail_Edoshin 7y ago
Are there any actual escrows that do that?
- reggintoggaf 7y ago
  Nope, and it wont happen unleds mandated by law.

xhruso00 7y ago

Having app that heavily relies on 32-bit Carbon Api open sourced is useless. You can't replace those Api call with newer because they simply don't exist or have no alternative. It's not going to help much

shakna 7y ago
Having access to the source makes it much easier for the community to do what they already do - create an open source re-implementation of the engine.

ratww 7y ago

For games, I think it's feasible to make at least the code that interfaces with the OS into a separate, re-linkable, open-source library. Translations between the APIs (Carbon to Cocoa, OpenGL to DirectX) might be very hard, but at least upgrades would be possible.

icebraining 7y ago
Wine shows you don't need the source of the programs to do that API translation.

dangus 7y ago

That ultimatum is idealistic at best. Not only that, the recourse of inspecting and modifying the code isn’t realistic to most people. Many open source projects die just because literally nobody with the skills required to maintain them are interested. Then you get to certain types of programs where open source provides no benefit: specifically, games. Games are largely just artistic content. Making games open source essentially means that all the content is going to be taken without compensating the artists. Open source works for other programs because they depend on interoperability. But games are just content, like a movie or book. The source is the product. For other programs, support and continual development are the product.

shakna 7y ago
id [0] seems to get by fine by open sourcing their game engines. And doing so has lead to a number of ports that wouldn't exist otherwise. The artists are still compensated fine. Because they separate the engine from the assets. If you want to play the original game, fine, but own it. But now the community gets to port the game easier to a new platform. Which is one of the reasons that it's easy to port DOOM to every platform out there. [0] https://github.com/id-Software https://github.com/id-Software
- dangus 7y ago
  They open source the product long after it has any revenue potential.