Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Dark GDK / Vis C++2005/.Net/ 2003 support continued?

Author
Message
Troll Fiddler
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2005
Location: Mayo, Ireland
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 21:20 Edited at: 7th Jun 2005 21:21
Hi,

Just looking at sys requirements, anything labelled 2003 smacks of very old hat in the M$ world. You know how they like you to pay for new software every couple of years. I checked around the M$ site and found this post which is intriguing
[href]http://msdn.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.aspx?dg=microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vc&tid=33af9cb1-25f3-4dc2-85a7-aa7e3e5bbbd5
[/href]

Basically it seems to be saying that as usual M$ are trying to force people onto their latest toy. What that means to me is that anything labelled "2003" may soon go the way of "we're not supporting that any more".

The next para may be tedious but it's a necessary question for my purchase decision.

Are there plans to update the SDK to C++ 2005? I know there aren't for c# as I've seen that on another post here. But to have no forward momentum in terms of underlying supported languages seems a bad plan.
C# being the M$ baby of the future seems the best option for long term value, but C++ 2005 would at least be something.


Thanks,

T.
OSX Using Happy Dude
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 21:24
Quote: ""2003" may soon go the way of "we're not supporting that any more""

It wasn't supported to start with - no updates, nothing...

I hope the SDK will be updated to 2005 - I'll almost certainly be getting it when its out, and thus 2003 will be assigned to the Uninstalled Bin...

Raven
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 22:33
Quote: "Basically it seems to be saying that as usual M$ are trying to force people onto their latest toy. What that means to me is that anything labelled "2003" may soon go the way of "we're not supporting that any more"."


The reason is simple. 2003 will be the standard for the next 5 years, 2005 is an improvement but it's only a minor one to support .NET 2.0 correctly.

2002 is bugged, and only supports .NET 1.0.

As Microsoft want to ensure that .NET 1.1 is the standard used throughout Longhorn and with the new .NET programs comming on the market; it is no wonder that's the one system they REALLY want to push ppl to use.

I don't see what the issue is anyways.
Codewarrior force you to upgrade each release.. and they're not even close to as cheap as Microsoft.

Troll Fiddler
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2005
Location: Mayo, Ireland
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 23:45
Quote: "I don't see what the issue is anyways.
Codewarrior force you to upgrade each release.. and they're not even close to as cheap as Microsoft"


Not sure if you were talking to me or bouncy brick there Raven. But from my point of view it's not so much the cost of upgrading, but the path the DGSDK is taking. In other words, are there plans and rough schedules for coping with language upgrades. Or will we have to wait until TGC can't fix bugs because C++ 2003 is no longer supported, then wait another year or two in bug heaven until TGC come out with a 2005 version? I'm not saying this is the case or even suggesting it, I'd just like to know if there are plans in the pipeline.

I've probably already decided to buy the SDK, but I'd like the warm fuzzies to go along with it Either that or wait for the DEV C++ version.

T.
Mike Johnson
TGC Developer
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 00:34
We will continue to support Microsoft Visual C++ 6 and Microsoft Visual C++ .NET 2003 and also look into the possibility of supporting the 2005 version when the final version is released. There are also plans to continue work on supporting Dev C++.
shiny
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jan 2004
Location: Santa Monica
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 02:58
oOo. Yeah. I'm really hopeing 2005 will be supported. I'm a little obsessive when It comes to upgrading (pfft. I'm running windows 64 bit allready) and I'll be getting it and scrapping 2003 a little after it comes out. If dark SDK doesn't support 2005 then I'm likely to scrap it too untill it does.

OSX Using Happy Dude
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 03:39
Quote: "(pfft. I'm running windows 64 bit allready)"

I would be too if my laptop hadn't been swiped

Would be nice if support for 2005 starts almost as soon it comes out

Sephnroth
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 03:49
i dont understand you upgrade fiends

*pats his vs6* there there, i still lub joo

[07:16:59-pm] « Sephnroth » you were dreaming about lee...
[07:17:13-pm] « Mouse » stfu
[07:17:22-pm] « Mouse » he was hanging himself lol
Dr_Z
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jan 2005
Location: Behind the code
Posted: 1st Jul 2005 12:16
I'm reading these forums to make up my mind on buying DGSDK or maybe not, and I find this...

Ladies and gentlemen, a little piece of advice: don't upgrade unless its ·absolutely· neccesary.

I won't be talking about those poor guys who were developing on win2000 when XNA kicked'em off. But think about this: Last year I was using an old (ancient?) Cray X-MP2 which gave us ONE error after TWELVE years. It was "upgraded" (grin) to a SGI-signed big box... After two weeks of "fighting-against-da-bugs" (it was like Starship Troopers, doh!), we got the boss to bring us our old Cray back.

Same goes to installing every DXSDK update, not to mention the problems you'll encounter on "fresh installs" of these DXSDKs (missing DLLs, to mention one).

As long as I "choose" to use DX, I'll try to use as much ANSI C/++ as I can, AND I won't be "upgrading" to VC++2005 just to find I must rewrite half of my code because of M$ "beta-versions-labelled-as-ready".

Which takes me to the point I doubt whether to buy DGSDK or not...
How much of it DOES really work? Will we get pointers to objects anytime soon? How can users give a hand to its TWO programmers? Does transparency work (objects and PNG's alphe channel)?

Perhaps I should have posted some of this to a new thread...

BTW, don't tell my boss I told you about the Cray

"Never give up! Never surreeendeeer!"
OSX Using Happy Dude
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 1st Jul 2005 16:56
Transparency has always worked with PNG

Quote: "How much of it DOES really work?"

All of it, aside from a few missing functions.

Quote: "Will we get pointers to objects anytime soon?"

No idea - they are partially in at the moment, I think.

Dr_Z
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jan 2005
Location: Behind the code
Posted: 1st Jul 2005 20:35
Quote: "All of it, aside from a few missing functions."


Sure about it? What about collision detection? What about shaders? I've read in these very forums there are (or have been) problems with both these subjects.

To use sphere collisions if I was unable to use DGSDK's inbuilt functions, I'd stick to the "old way" of checking distances between objects, and that would be all. But, you know, when people buy "the whole thing", that's just what the expect to receive...

Anyhow, I'm going to the Order Page now... taking a deep breath.

"Never give up! Never surreeendeeer!"
OSX Using Happy Dude
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 1st Jul 2005 21:15
Quote: "What about collision detection?"

What about it ? It works...


Quote: "What about shaders?"

Some shaders are a problem.

Dr_Z
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jan 2005
Location: Behind the code
Posted: 1st Jul 2005 21:29
@Bouncy Brick

Ok, I think I'll get to see it by myself... later. I'll have to swap money, for there is only Sterling payment using Visa Electron.

See, I bought DBC from a reseller here in Spain yeeears ago; then, DBPro, and I got (at last) some sort of an internet connection. Now, DGSDK will come home, so I'm some sort of a believer, ain't me?

I hope (in fact I ·need·) to increase my fps rate, so perhaps using D3DXVector3 and the like will be the answer...

Of course, thanks for the info. I'll work on my own network stuff until shaders are up, or push'em into DX right away...

"Never give up! Never surreeendeeer!"
Rob K
Retired Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Sep 2002
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posted: 2nd Jul 2005 03:03 Edited at: 2nd Jul 2005 03:03
Quote: "Basically it seems to be saying that as usual M$ are trying to force people onto their latest toy. What that means to me is that anything labelled "2003" may soon go the way of "we're not supporting that any more"."


As much as it infuriates Microsoft, a huge number of firms are still using MS VC++ 6 (Originally released in 1998). Apparently Half-Life 2 was created using VC++ 6 (Comment to that effect in an interview with Gabe Newell)


BlueGUI Windows Plugin
Cellbloc Studios
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: 2nd Jul 2005 03:40
I guess my comment would be also with using Visual C++ 6.0 I use it and have no intention on upgrading at all. It is nice to work with something that when there is a problem you KNOW what the problem is, whereas when you upgrade, you spend a HUGE amount of time trying to figure out if it is you or the compiler....

-This...is my boomstick!
Briere
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Feb 2005
Location: Amherst New York, United States
Posted: 3rd Jul 2005 00:38
linux here i come!

Formerly The Fixxer
http://www.xiemsoft.cjb.net
OSX Using Happy Dude
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
SoulMan
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Nov 2002
Location: In a house somewhere on the planet earth
Posted: 9th Jul 2005 03:08
By the way, I am using Visual Studio .Net 2002 and it is working just fine. Even on a base install, no patches or anything, the system compiles and runs the programs that I have seen out there. Ok, so only one so far.
SoulMan

This is as backwards as is This

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2023-02-02 13:54:27
Your offset time is: 2023-02-02 13:54:27