Re: win32 port

hi, here are some of my opinions on this, do with them what you will ;)

Stefan Westerfeld wrote:


After hearing for the third time from some musician: "oh well, if BEAST
would run under windows, I could look at it, but since it doesn't, I
can't", today I decided to check out how much work porting might be.

Against the port:
* the current approach of porting BEAST (cygwin) will require running
  an X server, which is extremely unintuitive for Windows users

have you looked at the approach that Gaim uses, using the gtk port for windows?

* if we were to offer BEAST on Windows, we could reduce the attraction
  Linux has for musicians, and thus the attraction to switch to a
  completely free system

i dont think thats too big of a concern. much moreso is that a musician doesnt want to abondon the platform that has all his current songs trapped on. so if Beast ran on windows, many people (like me) would be much more willing to look into it knowing that my songs will be portable. that way i can cooperate with other musicians by sending them the beast-win32 installer and my song files (like i can do now with PD)

* a port will probably be not as solid as the native version (as it
  will be largely untested), which could leave a bad impression of
  BEAST behind

probably initially, but there is no intrinsic reason this is so. PD and Gaim are both perfectly stable in their windows ports.



live experimental electronic music   --
independent u.s. drum'n'bass         --

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]