I’m going to cancel my webhosting soon. Spider3D is of hardly any interest to many people so I’m pulling the plug.
You can see a detailed message at www.spider3d.com
I thought you might want to know…
Sorry to see it go. 
Maybe you can throw it up on sourceforge or someting?
Why dont you move everything over to tripod. That’s where my page (crappy) is located and tripod is pretty good for a free web page hosting place. I don’t know how much space you need but I think tripod gives a pretty good amount if I remember correctly.
-SirKnight
I’m all disoriented about this whole thing. I’m really torn between keeping Spider3D a closed library and just releasing it open source. I know people would LOVE to see the source code…but I feel like someone would take all my hard work and claim it as theirs. License or no license complications can occur.
Can any of you dispense some good advice on the subject? Why do some people even release their source code? Why do game developers keep their closed…along with many other developers?
What if I were to expose only portions of Spider3D. For example all the source code that reads and saves 3d files…and possible the utility functions that I wrote that do specific optimization tasks.
I don’t mind paying for the webspace. I use it for more than just Spider3D. I’m just bummed out that it’s a ghost town over there. It has been since I opened it, so I thought why bother? I hate pimping because it’s spam, so I don’t want to go everywhere and say “hey, check it out, s3d is cool, try it out” just to get people to come over there. I was hoping someone who’s used it would do that for me 
. To me it looks bad when the developer pimps his own stuff, but when stranger does it it’s a good thing because if he says it’s good, then it must be.
Why do some people even release their source code? Why do game developers keep their closed…along with many other developers?
It’s not the game developers that decides whether or not to release the source code of a game engine, but rather the company. There are however some companies that release source code, sometimes a couple of years after the release of a game. Id Software, for example, which has released the source code to as good as all their older titles up to and including Quake 2. Also, the Nebula Device engine of Radon Labs (www.radonlabs.de) is freely available on sourceforge.
I’ve also recently released all the source to the engine I’m currently working on at http://xengine.sourceforge.net. There’s not much there yet and no bundled releases as of yet, but I’ve already had some positive feedback from people (such as bug reports, somebody is using my Cg runtime, others my ARBvp, NVvp <-> DX cross-compilers). I decided to release everything, since there might be somebody else who finds it useful.
But then again, I’m working on that engine mostly for fun (well, also for my diploma thesis ;-), so I guess I wouldn’t release it if I’d try to make money out of it.
Anyway, I wouldn’t mind you releasing the source to your project, even if only parts of it, because I like the idea of open source. And let’s be realistic, even if somebody has the perfect open source engine (which doesn’t exist yet anyway; most open source engines cannot compete with commercial stuff or are already too old like the Quake2 engine), that somebody is still miles away from having a full-fledged game.
[This message has been edited by Asgard (edited 10-30-2002).]
Spider3D v3 is really close to commercial quality and performance. I was planning to make money if the lib was used commercially…otherwise it was free.
Maybe Spider3D v2 should be released completely open source? Hmmmmm…
The simplest way to protect your work when you’ve released it is probably to GPL it or something similar, and also burn the source to a CD, and send it via recorded mail to yourself (but don’t open it when it arrives), that’ll verify dates if you have beef with somebody stealing your stuff.
-Mezz
Originally posted by WhatEver:
Spider3D v3 is really close to commercial quality and performance. I was planning to make money if the lib was used commercially…otherwise it was free.
Well, then you’ll unfortunately have to go around and advertise it, even if you don’t like that. Otherwise you won’t have a chance to make much money out of it. And you’ll probably need to have lots of commercial-grade demos, tutorials, good documentation and offer support (possibly at additional cost). Otherwise you won’t stand a chance on the market, as there are other high-quality commercial engines out there (Unreal, Quake3, even the relatively cheap Torque just to name a few).
Asgard, that’s one of my problems. I don’t have the time to do all that stuff and that’s why I’m torn.
Keep’m coming. I’m going to give myself until this weekend to decide if I will open source Spider3D.
My goal USED to be getting a job with a game company, but my goals have changed so Spider3D is strictly a hobby and not a foot into the door of a game company. My goals changed when I found out I get to inherent my Dads company . It’s all wood and aluminum manufacturing. I enjoy that sort of thing…especially since we’re getting a CNC machine 
.
Good luck with your SDK too btw. It looks more promising than mine .
[This message has been edited by WhatEver (edited 10-30-2002).]
Originally posted by WhatEver:
I hate pimping because it’s spam, so I don’t want to go everywhere and say “hey, check it out, s3d is cool, try it out” just to get people to come over there. I was hoping someone who’s used it would do that for me
I must admit that I am one of those pimps But here we are getting philosophical (?) - why did you write the software in the first place. It’s probably one or more of the following:
- You missed a piece of software, so you decided to do it yourself?
- You wanted to learn more about something (OpenGL?), or just improve your skills?
- You wanted to help the OpenGL community (in this case) by giving it a tool that can be useful?
- You wanted to show of your skills?
- You wanted to make money?
Now, if you only went for 4) and/or 5), and then you spam all boards, you’re “pimping”. But if you have written a piece of software that you know would help a lot of people, it is more or less your duty to inform them that your tool exists, isn’t it?
Why do some people even release their source code?
Now, talking from a free software point of view…
For me, it means several things to release the source code:
- You have implemented something that is difficult to pull off, or can be very handy to have - if you share it with others they do not have to reinvent the wheel
- Users of your tool get yet another source of documentation
- Users of your tool are free to improve it
- Users of your tool are able to port it to other systems than the one it was designed for
- If nothing else, you are forced to be tidy about your work - write the code so that someone else can read it (which is usually a great help when you come back to your code a few months after writing it)
The only con I can think of is that you have to share your “secrets”. But really, are they worth so much? They can make your work shine (the “wow” effect), but personally I am usually much more impressed if I get to read the code (I remember being much more impressed by Doom when I read its source).
Will people steal your work? If it’s a fairly complex piece of software, you will hardly see “lamers” rip your code. And anyhow, it is probably simpler to go to the nVidia developer site and grab some docs from there than to extract useful pieces from a large piece of software.
Ok, so I released the source code for GLFW (well, it was always open source). The more I work with it, the more confident I am that if someone actually reads the source code, they will be discouraged from trying to implement the stuff themselves, and just settle for using GLFW.
For instance, I have >130 lines of code just to enable/disable “system keys” under Windows (ALT+TAB etc), >350 lines of code just for getting and setting a high precision timer, >100 lines of code just to work around a “bug” in the SetForegroundWindow function, etc. etc.
Now, coders are free to go ahead and rip it, but I think most people are happy just to use GLFW just as it is.
Oh, another advantage of an open source is all the patches and additions that users send me, saving me alot of work.
I did it for reasons 2, 3, 4 and the benefit of 5…but since I don’t have the time or energy to do 5 I’m listening to anyones advice.
What’s GLFW?
There’s currently 26 cpp files for Spider3D. I should break it up into more because a few of them are to large IMO.
I’m leaning toward open source.
You know what I’m afraid of? People adding code that uses C++ syntax that I haven’t learned yet. STL is one of those things :/. I feel that if I don’t know it then many people who look into the code won’t understand it. I think I would have to make a rule like no third party libs if you want to submit code to me. If they want to add libs to S3d and keep it to themselves than I wouldn’t care.
[This message has been edited by WhatEver (edited 10-30-2002).]
Hehe, I checked your profile and saw what GLFW is. I’ve had you linked to my site for a long time now. Your webpage is VERY usefull. I put it their mainly for people who needed that sort of help so that’s why I didn’t remember the name GLFW .
[This message has been edited by WhatEver (edited 10-30-2002).]
Originally posted by WhatEver:
[b]I’m all disoriented about this whole thing. I’m really torn between keeping Spider3D a closed library and just releasing it open source. I know people would LOVE to see the source code…but I feel like someone would take all my hard work and claim it as theirs. License or no license complications can occur.
Can any of you dispense some good advice on the subject? Why do some people even release their source code? Why do game developers keep their closed…along with many other developers?
What if I were to expose only portions of Spider3D. For example all the source code that reads and saves 3d files…and possible the utility functions that I wrote that do specific optimization tasks.[/b]
I once were a little restrictive about releasing my source code, I was also a little afraid someone would “steal” my code. But then I thought, does it matter? I’m not making any money out of it anyway. So I decided to start to release the source along with my demos and have done ever since. I’ve never regretted that. In fact, it has both boosted the interest in my site and demos, and it has also helped me debugging my code, especially for other cards than my own. Also, having the code open source will force you more or less into writing clean and obvious code, which really is good for you too. I suppose there are some people who have just more or less ripped parts of my code for their work, but that doesn’t matter, in fact I encourage people to use my code as a base for their own if they want to learn a certain technique. In the end, it feels so much better knowing that you have contributed with something and helped other people.
So, I vote for making it Open source. Maybe I can learn something from you too.
Originally posted by Mezz:
[b]The simplest way to protect your work when you’ve released it is probably to GPL it or something similar, and also burn the source to a CD, and send it via recorded mail to yourself (but don’t open it when it arrives), that’ll verify dates if you have beef with somebody stealing your stuff.
-Mezz[/b]
Poor man’s copyright, as this is known, is irrefutable proof of date of authorship, and nothing more. You will not, under this scheme, be able to sue for monetary damages if infringement occurs. You have to cough up the US$30 and “properly” register your copyright for that.
WhatEver: GPL your code (like I said lo those many months ago on this board when you first brought it up). GPL code is owned by you (you have the copyright), and nobody can “steal” it, since the GPL means anyone who makes copies/changes to your stuff also has to GPL the code, thus ensuring it will live in the open forever.
Cheers.
I remember that conversation rts . It was over a year ago when I released the first version of S3D.
I looked at the GPL site a few times and I couldn’t make heads or tails of it.
Where do I go to officialy copyright my material rts?
Originally posted by WhatEver:
I looked at the GPL site a few times and I couldn’t make heads or tails of it.
“the GPL site” ?
Where do I go to officialy copyright my material rts?
US: http://www.copyright.gov/faq.html.
Canada: http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/help/faq_cp-e.html.
Other countries: On your own.
Disclaimer: This is not legal advice … I am not a lawyer … always seek professional legal advice in such matters (although as you can see by reading the two FAQs, registering a copyright isn’t particularly difficult to do on one’s own). Floss regularly. Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.
[This message has been edited by rts (edited 10-30-2002).]
i used to have a site (stopped about 18months ago cause the free site wanted cash) had about 40-50demos with source i think.
the problem is every mother and her dogs got a site theres TOO much stuff out there, information overload, i havent got time to even look at a tenth of these sites regulary
how about www.illicitdev.net as your free webspace provider? it was in the news in diff. sites a while back…
Hey, maybe you should think about applying your OpenGL stuff on your father’s business.