Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 51

Thread: A good day for LaserBoy!

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX, USA
    Posts
    1,977

    Default

    I agree with you completely and have suggested the same eons ago. I even started a thread awhile back called "To the laser software companies" or something like that asking that they come up with a show format that makes sense. However, it went no where and I got a lot of opposition to the suggestion.

    There is only one way to change things and that is to come up with your own better format it and openly share it with other members of the laser show community completely independently of ILDA. If it is a good format then others will adopt it and it will become an industry standard on its own.

    So, if you think you have the answer then put it down on paper and implement it and pass it around. I'd certainly be willing to support something like that in my Spaghetti software. You might get some interest from OldGrumpy with the Mamba software, too. He seems open to things. But, I think perhaps the first order of business would be to trade in some of that salt for some sugar. You're not going to get any help if you come across as a know-it-all.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK and US
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Dear James
    I think you may have missed the point of my post, the Ilda format is made available as open source, and NO you do not need to call Patrick M to debit your credit card for $200. The Format originally was supposed to be a collaborative effort between the commercial laser companies to develop a format that non-laser companies, IE artists or people developing their own software could use, the format was meant to be stable and reliable like the old Amiga paint program.

    The original concept was supposed to enable people like you to have a stable format that you could use, the original goal was that the commercial laser companies could then allow non owners of their equipment to create new graphics for their systems.

    The first point I was trying to make as stated in my last post was that releasing an unfinished format creates problems, if you were writing an application for Microsoft and someone gave you the file format for a new version of word that was not finished, it may seem cool that you have created an application that appears to work and create files that may sometimes work, but what happens later on when the true format is finalized and adopted, some of your generated files may not work, or worse you have to spend further time re-writing your application.

    The second point is that people whom are asked to develop or help with the development of a system or sub system do not have the right to publish or release what is essentially confidential information.

    Let me throw in the following example:

    Contractor A:
    Has been asked to help with the development of a new file protocol for the transmission of data for ground troupes back to base command.

    Contractor B:
    Has an interest in supplying product to the authority that has placed the order with contractor A.

    Contractors A & B have contact privately or otherwise.

    Contractor A: gives unfinished information on the file format to Contractor B:
    then Contractor B uses that information. Contractor B: appears to have a system that works ahead of the competitors so Contractor B: wins the contract.

    Contractor B: (Makes Lots of Money)
    Next Ground troupes are issued with contractors B: equipment, they go into battle and need reinforcements, Contractors B: equipment cannot communicate back to base because Contractor A: had already given the beta file format not the finished format to Contractor B:

    Contractor B: either did not want to change the file format because it was to costly or they were not informed.

    However the outcome is the same, innocent people suffer because the body whom is meant to be applying the standard were not allowed to complete their job prior to information being released.

    I am not saying information should be withheld, what I am saying is that the information should be the correct information.

    All the best
    Clive
    Laser Electronics Ltd.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX, USA
    Posts
    1,977

    Default

    Clive, I disagree with you. I work with semiconductor standards all the time and some of them are in flux at any given time. But, by allowing developers to have the standards before they are officially released it gives them a head start. Not only that but it is useful in uncovering problems with the standards ahead of time so that when the official version is released it actually works and is useful. Real world examples of this were the MoDem protocols such as v34 as well as the current 802.11n wireless protocol. There are countless other examples as well.

    As long as the interim or development specifications are labeled as such there shouldn't be any problem because developers should be smart enough to keep a watch out for the official published versions and update there software to be compliant at that time. This is the normal operating scenario for many software engineers.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK and US
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Dear CarmanGary
    I think you missed the point I was trying to make, if you work in the implementation of semiconductors for product applications, then you will know that the application notes and samples are not for general release, but for development purposes.

    There have been a lot of products released that use application specific development coding rather than coding developed for the product, let me give you one example here in the UK, BT offered a free printer with their broadband package, this printer uses a chip set developed by FTDI, works fine if you have no other product that uses the generic usb driver from FTDI, but if you have any other product that uses the development driver (and there are lots of them) then it will not work.

    The above is one example, I think the development of a new format would be good provided everyone who takes part in the development agrees not to implement the format until finalized, if one person breaks the rule then in the end format of the header file we should exclude the reading of any file that is missing partial file format information and add checksum information within.

    As most people whom post here know, the Ilda format has been interpreted by different people in different ways, if the documentation had been more concise and clear then the addition and implementation of added features would have been easier.

    All the best
    Clive
    Laser Electronics Ltd

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Akron, Ohio USA
    Posts
    1,754

    Default

    Yeah!

    Someone actually aggress with me!

    Weeeeeeeeeeeee!

    One more thing... It was an astonishing awakening for me when I added 24 bit color to LaserBoy. It made so many other things possible; most notable importing 24 bit information back into the code and having a place to store it, ie: waves from LaserBoy or ADAT recordings. It doesn't matter if those waves came from paletted frames. It is still pure 24 bit RGB. That is also when I was able to come up with all of the palette transforms that LaserBoy does. If I had not had some clue as to how to start with this idea, it probably would never have happened.

    Maybe my perfectly tailored shirt with the beautifully hand stitched pocket doesn't look so un "hip" anymore.

    James.
    Last edited by James Lehman; 05-11-2008 at 21:36.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK and US
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Dear James
    Hopefully the group will understand where I am coming from with the comments I have made.
    If you had a concise interpretation for the Ilda format that was documented well and clear you could have saved a lot of time in trying to read a format that had not been concluded rather than trying to implement coding that was given indiscriminately.
    All the best
    Clive
    Laser Electronics Ltd

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Akron, Ohio USA
    Posts
    1,754

    Thumbs up

    I respectfully disagree with you completely.

    All the best to you as well.

    James.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX, USA
    Posts
    1,977

    Default

    On the other hand, the interim specification allowed him to continue his work and implement a 24bit color scheme that was not limited to 256 colors per map. Now, all he has to do, if he chooses, is to tweak his code and it will be compatible with the latest format 3.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK and US
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Dear James
    I respect the open discussion, we have had.
    Thanks
    Clive
    Laser Electronics Ltd

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Akron, Ohio USA
    Posts
    1,754

    Default

    "tweak his code and it will be compatible with the latest format 3"

    No way.

    James.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •