You are not "We". You and a few others on this forum need to realize that.Quote:
Originally Posted by swamidog
You are not "We". You and a few others on this forum need to realize that.Quote:
Originally Posted by swamidog
ok... whatever ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by james
Genau.Quote:
Originally Posted by swamidog
.........
"Technically Still Banned"
Because of vitriolic arguments in the past about this same issue.
and spamming laserboy in all threads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by absolom7691
Most of this thread was about alternative file formats that could be open standards.Quote:
Originally Posted by swamidog
And a bunch of conflated nonsense.
.
yes.. please reduce your conflated nonsense. thank you!
Quote:
Originally Posted by james
Because you don't agree with what I say?Quote:
Originally Posted by absolom7691
Then you make it about me by not addressing the statement, but dismissing ME.
Why not have a conversation about the technical aspects of this stuff?
I remember probably a decade ago there was talk about the want of a descriptive vector format that did not contain any point to point information, but rather a description of things like points, lines and curves. Plus it could have animation effects and timing stuff in description as well. I think Gary was a fan of this idea.
.
Because the technical aspects don't matter if no one uses the format, if most software doesn't work with the format, and if no laserists are constrained or stifled by what they're already using. Like I said before, I used wav just long enough to find out that I didn't need to. ild already did what I needed it to. I have surpassed what ild and wav can provide so, I use neither at this point but if I were back to creating and saving, even complex, frames/shows, I would just use ild because it never limited me. Is wav an alternative, yes but why use it if I don't need to? Why use it if the gains are SUPERFLUOUS and no software plays nice with it?? This has been answered before but circularly. So this argument becomes a dog chasing it's tail, only less fun to watch.Quote:
Originally Posted by james
You are correct. It is a circular argument.
No one uses it because no one uses it.
It's not implemented in software because you are thinking about a very small number of applications that you use to create laser show material.
There are other developers making everything from embedded micro, Android, Mac, Linux, whatever... That's all part of the software space as well.
It all has technical merit. It can and does coexist.
Everything I proposed adds to capability and interoperability in this space.
This is how technology and use-knowledge base develops and thrives.