Post by: Chamrock on November 24, 2002, 05:50:00 AM
Post by: BenJeremy on November 24, 2002, 11:22:00 AM
| QUOTE (Chamrock @ Nov 24 2002, 08:50 AM) |
| Maybe I seem stupid, but why not go with the current MS XDK? It is true the apps cannout be officially be download from sites, but isnt it a pain in the ass to start from scratcg again? I am not a programmer, but I am worried that the apps built in the OpenXDK will run så damn slowly compared to MS XDK. I can still accept to download the apps from places like Xbins in the future. |
The reason is because legally, nobody can develop with the XDK without M$ say-so.
If M$ *wants* to, they could pursue anybody distributing software made with the XDK.
The OpenXDK would perform an end-run around the XDK agreement, allowing developers to use 'commonly' available tools without the XDK restrictions to develop software for the Xbox.
Yeah, it's a pain in the ass, but if they can manage to recreate the functionality of the XDK in an open format, the benefit will be freely available software.
On another note, suck an OpenXDK would also damage M$ effort to keep the Xbox closed from modchipping... as there would be a legitimate user base for modded systems. The Xbox-Linux project helps legitimize modchipping to a great degree, but an OpenXDK would go further in that effort.
Post by: mattboy2 on November 24, 2002, 08:49:00 PM
Post by: BenJeremy on November 24, 2002, 09:28:00 PM
| QUOTE (mattboy2 @ Nov 24 2002, 11:49 PM) |
| how could they know if a file was created with xdk instead of an open sdk? |
Probably by simply comparing the binary object sections against the existing XDK libraries.
If there were too many exact matches, it would be a dead give-away that the XDK libs were used.
To be really useful, the OpenXDK needs to recreate the DirectX functionality of the XDK. This is going to take a while, but I believe there are some similar efforts in the Linux world.
Post by: bagel5009 on November 24, 2002, 09:39:00 PM
Post by: monkeycrew on November 25, 2002, 09:41:00 AM
