Interestingly enough the recent claims that Radiant is free for any use may actually be accurate. Originally disregarding this as yet another wild claim (of which there have be many over the years, regarding both Radiant and Hammer), I was rather surprised to see that it had more substance than I originally thought.
I'll reserve judgment though, as some things about the license still bother me. More than anything it may be that it's so similar to the previous licensing and all official comments refer to the license change, but avoid saying free for all or commercial use. :/
The information that came out of the GG community thread was fairly helpful in putting a perspective on the license - it'll be cool if those guys are right. It's a shame that the conversation took a downturn, I was curious to hear what others had to say on the matter. As always I'm amazed at how quickly some people turn to sarcasm - how can one person's opinion really bruise an ego that bad?
Anyway off on a tangent now, all in all it was an interesting discussion and I appreciate those who contributed helpful information - I'll definitely keep an eye on this in the future.
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Friday, February 24, 2006
The Obligatory Bi-monthly "Is Radiant Free" Thread Started-up Again Today
Yes, it's started again - the obligatory bi-monthly "Is Radiant Free" thread kicked-off today. Once again the GPL license is being used as a blanket of protection against what seems to be a commercial tool.
"But it's GLP'ed!"
To the surprise of many GPL is not a license for providing free software - it's a license designed to keep the software's source code open and available (hence open source).
While I don't claim to be a legal expert, version 2 of the GPL license clearly states that the license does not extend to usage of the software or to files generated by the software:
What does this mean? Is the Radiant commercial license still in full effect and referring only to the usage of Radiant, and the GPL license to the code - ei: only the source is free, not usage of the product?
This type of licensing seems to be common nowadays as more and more open source companies are trying to build businesses out of their products (understandably). A good example of this is MySQL, though it uses a dual licensing scheme - and it's not free. ;) So what's the deal?
-John
"But it's GLP'ed!"
To the surprise of many GPL is not a license for providing free software - it's a license designed to keep the software's source code open and available (hence open source).
While I don't claim to be a legal expert, version 2 of the GPL license clearly states that the license does not extend to usage of the software or to files generated by the software:
"Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program)."
What does this mean? Is the Radiant commercial license still in full effect and referring only to the usage of Radiant, and the GPL license to the code - ei: only the source is free, not usage of the product?
This type of licensing seems to be common nowadays as more and more open source companies are trying to build businesses out of their products (understandably). A good example of this is MySQL, though it uses a dual licensing scheme - and it's not free. ;) So what's the deal?
-John
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Torque Lighting Kit 1.4 silent release - Oh so awesome :)
It's been a month since the Torque Lighting Kit's 1.4 silent release, and it's definitely time to start letting the rest of the GarageGames community in on the release. The response to TLK 1.4 was overwhelming; once again TLK takes Torque to a whole new level!Whats in the latest TLK?
More than even I could imagine. Among the usual tweaks and enhancements TLK received a massive upgrade, including:
- Interior detail mapping
- Multiple dynamic DTS shadows
- Mountable lights
- Faster relights
- All new documentation and modeling guides
- Already built TLK executables - no compiling necessary!
TLK owners: for more info on these and other features check out the TLK release notes (packaged in the TLK 1.4 release), or head over to the Torque Lighting Kit private forums!
Almost immediately we received a ton of positive feedback on the new documentation. Documentation takes a tremendous amount of time, and seeing that effort make such a positive impact, quite frankly, couldn't have made me any happier.
"I would like to give you a virtual pat on the back for TLK1.4. Very good work. The documentation/merge info/release notes are brilliant. I went over all documents and must say, that they are very easy to read and to understand. Even for a non-native speaker."
Soon after the TLK 1.4 release one particularly talented TLK user was already digging into detail mapping, which, as you can see from his screen shots, makes the texture detail very consistent at any distance:
Well another kick ass TLK release - I can't wait to see these features in the Torque community's hands and the awesome projects that are sure to follow. :)
-John Kabus
Blog: Bleeding Edge Indie
Synapse Gaming
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Compatibility with non-Torque game engines
I recently received a few inquiries into using Synapse Gaming's Lighting System (featured in the Torque Lighting Kit) in game engines other than Torque. Though the Torque Lighting Kit is not compatible with other engines, its core (the Synapse Gaming Lighting System) is.
As you can imagine we keep internal builds of all Synapse Gaming technology in several engines and on several platforms. And though the inquiries were about our Lighting System, the same goes for all of our technology from the latest shader tech, to in-game tools, to light-weight networking.
Generally the technology is available through our consulting services, however we're always looking for new areas to expand into using our existing engine tech.
-John Kabus
Saturday, January 21, 2006
How do you spell efficiency?
As Synapse Gaming grows, its business tools need to grow with it. The most recent incarnation of our tools include a home-brewed Customer Relation Management, Project Management, Issue Tracking, and Sale and Accounting system.
Dissatisfied with the business software currently available, either by lack of features, workflow, or price, I decided to invest a little R&D into researching the ideal workflow for our business. Surprisingly our workflow and needs, though seemingly complex, boiled down to a very compact and efficient system. In the time I set aside for research, I managed to design and develop the system - not bad. :)
Now don't get me wrong; I hate wasting time and money reinventing the wheel, but when faced with either counter-intuitive workflow that actually reduces efficiency or ridiculous prices (most worthwhile business software costs $20K+), the situation was all too clear.
In my approach I broke away from the rather annoying trend in business software of developing tools that are overly modularized into units that should, but rarely do, represent entities or departments in the company. These add unnecessary layers, screens, and functionality to the system in an effort to compensate for the fact the system was designed around the software modules and not the actual workflow of the people using it.
Instead our software is 100% workflow driven, and system navigation was kept to an absolute minimum. Understanding our workflow and needs going into the project meant that the back-end of the system was just as simple and efficient as the front-end, making future upgrades, backups, and replication (if the need arises) a snap.
Anyway there's something to be said about having business tools designed specifically for your company's structure and workflow, and considering the project took less time than most people would spend deciding on a 3rd party vendor, it was well worth it.
-John Kabus
Synapse Gaming
Dissatisfied with the business software currently available, either by lack of features, workflow, or price, I decided to invest a little R&D into researching the ideal workflow for our business. Surprisingly our workflow and needs, though seemingly complex, boiled down to a very compact and efficient system. In the time I set aside for research, I managed to design and develop the system - not bad. :)
Now don't get me wrong; I hate wasting time and money reinventing the wheel, but when faced with either counter-intuitive workflow that actually reduces efficiency or ridiculous prices (most worthwhile business software costs $20K+), the situation was all too clear.
In my approach I broke away from the rather annoying trend in business software of developing tools that are overly modularized into units that should, but rarely do, represent entities or departments in the company. These add unnecessary layers, screens, and functionality to the system in an effort to compensate for the fact the system was designed around the software modules and not the actual workflow of the people using it.
Instead our software is 100% workflow driven, and system navigation was kept to an absolute minimum. Understanding our workflow and needs going into the project meant that the back-end of the system was just as simple and efficient as the front-end, making future upgrades, backups, and replication (if the need arises) a snap.
Anyway there's something to be said about having business tools designed specifically for your company's structure and workflow, and considering the project took less time than most people would spend deciding on a 3rd party vendor, it was well worth it.
-John Kabus
Synapse Gaming
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)