Textfyre - March Update
ChicagoDave
Textfyre, Inc. is incorporated as of March 8th, 2007.
Contracts have been sent out to people doing Textfyre work right now.
I've partnered with DePaul University to help with competitor
analysis, market research, and other aspects of the business plan. My
business plan will be an assignment for a handful of business students
(undergrad) in the quarter starting at the end of the month.
The name of the first series and first three games is set, but I'm
having the lawyers verify everything. When we reach the final testing
stages of the first game and have the art work completed, I will make
announcement at that time with more details.
That's it for now.
David C.
Marc Pryde
even a small success in this area will bring you many more
opportunities. My only opinion is that the www.textfyre.com website
has been static for too long.
Wishing you the best,
Marc
Cassy Palop
> has been static for too long.
As it seems the url doesn't work now. I remind the website motto was
something like: "Coming to a mind near you...".
ChicagoDave
The website's location is a dubious one at the moment, since the
machine it's hosted on is turned off at night (US CDT). I'm still
wrangling over whether to self-host or purchase hosting. And too, the
design is still in the early stages.
One step at a time.
David C.
David Whyld
say?
ChicagoDave
> Has a date been set for the first games or is it still too early to
> say?
I have a target date. Things are progressing towards that date. There
are still several critical tasks that need to be completed before I'll
publicize that date. But things are progressing on all of the critical
tasks.
I'm sorry to be so elusive, but I really don't want to prematurely
announce a date that may slide.
David C.
Richard Bos
> On Mar 14, 8:27 am, "David Whyld" <dwh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Has a date been set for the first games or is it still too early to
> > say?
>
> I have a target date.
Next Sunday but one?
*g, d, rlb*
Richard
ChicagoDave
> Hello all,
>
> Textfyre, Inc. is incorporated as of March 8th, 2007.
>
> Contracts have been sent out to people doing Textfyre work right now.
I forgot to mention one very important thing in the development of
Textfyre.
I have found, purely by luck, a developer that is interested in
implementing a proprietary Glulx/Glk implementation that is cross-
platform and he's also offered to implement the OS X version of the
UI. The resulting libraries will be usable in Windows, OS X, and
Linux, although no Linux UI is in the works at this time.
The Windows UI will now be done using the latest tools, which is .NET
3.0 or Windows Presentation Foundation and XAML.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa663326.aspx
The OS X UI will be done using Cocoa and the standard development
tools on the Mac.
A web interface, done in WPF/E (WPF/Everywhere), may also be
implemented. If you've never seen it, it's pretty sharp. There is an
implementation for Win/IE and OS X/FireFox. The samples are amazing.
Kind of like Flash but my take is that it's more seemless and the
graphics capabilities are an order of magnitude better.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/asp.net/bb187358.aspx
David
signw...@lem.signwriter.name
> I have found, purely by luck, a developer that is interested in
> implementing a proprietary Glulx/Glk implementation that is cross-
> platform and he's also offered to implement the OS X version of the
> UI. The resulting libraries will be usable in Windows, OS X, and
> Linux, although no Linux UI is in the works at this time.
When you say "no Linux UI" - since, uh, Glk *is* a UI, I assume you
mean that in principle the Glulx implementation would be portable to
Linux? I'm not seeing anything here that actually suggests this will
be available to Linux users.
That's not a criticism - desktop Linux users not being renowned for
the money we spend on software, specifically including us in your
plans for a relatively small-scale business venture is probably not
economic.
It does leave me wondering why you mention it, thought. I don't want
to think it's a cheap marketing ploy. "In principle, we support
Linux!"
Have I misread something?
James Cunningham
Well, yes, Glk is a UI, but it's not the UI he's talking about; his
envisioned program encompasses quite a lot more than that. (From what I
understand.) See his previous posts.
Best,
James
ChicagoDave
> It does leave me wondering why you mention it, thought. I don't want
> to think it's a cheap marketing ploy. "In principle, we support
> Linux!"
It's not out of the question that a Linux UI will become available.
Since the underlying VM implementation will be cross-platform, it's
entirely possible that a Linux UI will become available.
The way I see it, if I already have the UI implemented on two
platforms, the information to develop a Linux UI will be a matter of
coding it. The hard work will have already been done (iterative
design, testing, put through production paces, updates from customer
support issues, etc).
Initially the DVD cases will say Win/Mac, bit it would be nice to
label it Win/Mac/Linux.
David C.
signw...@lem.signwriter.name
> It's not out of the question that a Linux UI will become available.
> Since the underlying VM implementation will be cross-platform, it's
> entirely possible that a Linux UI will become available.
Nice to hear; apologies if I sounded overly sceptical.
> The way I see it, if I already have the UI implemented on two
> platforms, the information to develop a Linux UI will be a matter of
> coding it. The hard work will have already been done (iterative
> design, testing, put through production paces, updates from customer
> support issues, etc).
If implementing a spec (however well designed or thoroughly tested)
was that easy, we'd already have decent Glulx/Glk implementations
everywhere, no? :) But thank you for clarifying that for me.