Sim Server Press is great...  but wrong.

Gross over-simplification :slight_smile: intended just to help explain why I don’t believe it’s possible for SimServer to do any damage to a community or otherwise - again, just to be clear, I’m not implying it would!

FYI whilst I’m sure it’s true, it does often require a large mental shift for people to understand and accept that. I know that I would have found it very hard to believe until I started looking in depth at particular JSR’s and tracking them long-term.

This is part of my confusion: I’ve not yet said a bad word about it, from my perspective ???. To me, commenting upon the product strategy that led to a product being developed is completely unrelated to commenting on the efficacy or quality of the product itself. With hindsight, it occurs to me that perhaps you don’t draw the same strong line between them?

e.g. When I’ve worked in or with corporate dev teams, I’ve seen several cases of absolute crud project specs which should NEVER have been authorised… being implemented outstandingly well by a brilliant team! Often, of course, they sell very poorly compared to predictions, simply because the requirements were inappropriate - no reflection on the implementation team!

Equally, I’ve seen brilliant projects (e.g. Lotus Notes) ruined by a dev team who blundered about not quite knowing what they were doing (that’s what happens when the chief architect sells his shares and retires, I think ;)).

I’ve been pitching product to games developers for the last 2 years. When you come along and say you have “the holy grail”, and it does something that at least 3 other companies could have done if they wanted to several years previously - and incidentally which at least some of them have already done, functionally if not to anything like the same performance - then I find it hard to say something positive about that bold claim. Perhaps, in all seriousness, I should at least have saluted you for sticking your neck out :).

There are other things that you said which I found equally hard to swallow. Perhaps it’s fair that you hoped for a more supportive and excited reaction - especially given how much positive reaction you’d already had - and I should have been less blunt. Probably my frustration that on something like 7 occasions you (or Jeff, or someone else) said “sign an NDA and we’ll talk” but never actually sent me the NDA, and then came out with something we could - and would - have helped you with, made me more judgemental than I normally would be.

e.g. if I came along to these forums for the first time and said “Forget Java, I’ve written a cool new language. It’s C++ syntax, but…it uses a virtual machine to run on ANY platform! The performance is really really bad, but no-one cares about performance.” how would you react? How well could you let them down gently? PS: this is only an illustrative analogy - it probably doesn’t bear up too well, so don’t over-analyse it :).

EDIT: the next sentence is perhaps unfair: there may well be some major fora I’m ignorant of where you are indeed very active. I’d appreciate it if you could point them out to me.

In addition, no-one from the GTG participates in any of the key fora for MMOG development (I’ve seen fewer than 5 GTG posts across all the different media, and I am very widely involved) - even though I’ve given the URL’s for the key ones several times on this board. I may have been less than generous partly because I saw a group who don’t participate with the industry expert fora coming along with something old, claiming it was new, and claiming it solved the problem that everyone else had been struggling with (and so far not probably succeeeded in doing). When in fact everyone currently working in this area has moved on to solving other problems which are felt to be far more important.

If I came across as arrogant or feeling superior, it’s because I know what reactions your claims would get in particular circles, and they’re not complimentary (although they needn’t be unfriendly). Your claims sound naive and ignorant to me, and I protest them because - IF I’m right - and if no-one else does, how much time and money will you lose learning from your mistakes? I always allow that I could be wrong, but I’ve probably been made at making that allowance clear in recent weeks. Partly because we’re in crunch time at the moment, and we’re all a bit bad at keeping our tempers right now :(.

Most of all, I hope this softens some of what I’ve said before. I also hope this explains better the points I’m trying to make. If you still feel that I’m just completely wrong, or that my claims are without merit, then that’s fine. I can at least be sure I tried to persuade you otherwise, and we can compare notes in 5 years time :).

GIVE ME MODERATOR POWERS OVER THE WHOLE FORUM, MORTALS, AND I WILL BE LENIENT!

No really, I would like mod power over all the forums, if only to split off off-topic threads and move topics about a bit, then I can clean this thread up a bit and move it into 2 threads, f’rexample.

Cas :slight_smile:

Well a large (and very successful) part of my job for 2.5 years at TEN was selling a technology base to big name professional game developers.

I’ve got lots of experience in that area, and we have it well in hand in the GTG, but thanks for your concern.

(Oh Herk, just noticed your question. No, TimesTen is unrelated to TEN. They actually came out of a research project at HP, of all places.)

could I have a summary whyLWJGL API is not JCP compiliant ? (simple curiosity)

It could be, it’s just that we’ve never submitted it because we want to remain agile and responsive to developers’ needs. It could conceivably become an Endorsed Standard (is that the term?) like the Apache stuff.

Cas :slight_smile:

wait 0.9 when your API will be frozen ;D

[quote]could I have a summary whyLWJGL API is not JCP compiliant ? (simple curiosity)
[/quote]
AFAIK, nobody said it ISN’T JCP compiliant. It WASN’T at the time decision was made (2 years ago?).

My guess would be about raw int pointers which were used everywhere, going a bit against java hygiene.

well its not JCP ‘compliant’ because it has nothing to do with the JCP. Its never been thorugh the process (nor has JOGL, yet, the process is just starting.)

Its not standards compliant because it hasn’t tried to either become a stadnard (go through the JCP) or match an existing stadnard. Again today neither is JOGL, but assuming JOGL keeps in step with the OGL JSR now started and the JSR completes, some day it may be.

Now a different question is “could LWJGL make it through the JCP process?” The answer is that ita probably not likely because it defines not just an API but an entire new platform. What is in it is not as improtant in this case as what is missing.

There are already a set of base stripped down Java specifications (profiles ontop of CLDC and CDC). It would have a much better chance of suceeding in the stadnards procvess if it built ontop of one of those.

How important is standards compliance in this case though?

As I believe has been mentioned elsewhere, LWJGL’s success or failure will be based upon its merits. Personally I don’t see the standards process being important for a project like LWJGL, where it obviously is for something like JOGL.

Sorry to be contributing to the completely off-topic posts, but just wanted to add my 2c.

Beats me if its important :slight_smile:

Abotu the only value I can think of is that it might get proted for you to other platforms if it were a standard.

Someone asked about JCP and LWGL so Iw as just explainaing the realtionship. shrug

[quote]How important is standards compliance in this case though?

As I believe has been mentioned elsewhere, LWJGL’s success or failure will be based upon its merits. Personally I don’t see the standards process being important for a project like LWJGL, where it obviously is for something like JOGL.

Sorry to be contributing to the completely off-topic posts, but just wanted to add my 2c.
[/quote]
Not being compliant means that you cant use the Java brand for any promotion and cant call it “Java technology”. Other reasons, but that is a biggie.

-ChrisM

We don’t in the least bit care about branding and standards. We just want to see great games :slight_smile: and I reckon that we don’t need what the JCP offers to achieve our goals.

Cas :slight_smile:

[quote]We don’t in the least bit care about branding and standards.
[/quote]
Biting my tongue… :-X

-ChrisM :wink:

[quote]We don’t in the least bit care about branding and standards. We just want to see great games :slight_smile:
[/quote]
Standards are highly important actually. Many parts of the IT world suck so hard because of the lack of standards. I guess you know that…

Some other parts with “standards” suck a lot harder… Normally you can discuss with other people about solutions, but if they will lock into 400-billion-flies-cannot-be-wrong mode, you have lost before the start.

I’m not against the standards per-se, but I’m very cautious - management stuff tend to overuse them (XML for TCP/IP header is maybe an imaginary overkill, but you get an idea).

yes but in some kind of situtation standards aren’t good (/me points to fullscreen with Awt/Swing under Linux)
so sometimes it deserve a big kick in the mass for be efficient

Ask EA if they think technology standards are important. :slight_smile:

-ChrisM

To sort of pull this back on topic, standards are critical where either inter-operability or resource-sharing are required.

The Sim Server (though someone around Sun told me I can start calling it the Game Server again, which was its original name) attempts to define a standard operating envrionment that game server apps can execute in and rely on.

To me, this is as important as the other things it does (offloading fault tolerance, persistance, load balancing, etc from the game developer) because it enables a new model where data center costs can be shared across many apps.

As I see it thats a key to getting the cost of entry of MMOLGs down to where its not just a rich-man’s game.

When will the Sim Server be released and under what license? Sounds like a really interesting piece of technology that I could use for a project, but only if it is open source.
:wink:

This is a piece of Sun Advanced Development technology. I would not hold your breath for it to be open sourced.

What you might see is a “playground” set of servers that allowed you to upload and run open source content for it on free servers operated by us our partners.

You might also see a free SDK that let you run a single local server stack for development but not for deployment.

Those are “mights”, not promises. But if either or both interest you, you might want to make that interest known as statements of ineterest from the community help things like that to happen.