Photometric, HDR Lighting Engine.

HDR on windows...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

OpenGL compatibility for older / low-end devices.

not yet

View this comment - View article - View full comments

just to put that into perspective:
blender eanrs 208.222/month.
godot raised 8.5 millions.
that is 40 months of blender funds (3 years 4 months)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Valck[1] with all the vanilla out there, does anyone actually still crave for more? How about bananas?
[2] relatively, for an open source project. Peanuts for "the gaming industry".

1)the more we need now is more income for developers using godot, consoles might help with this.

2)do you think its more likely for godot to "kill it self" than for the competition to kill it?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ssj17vegetaThat's very good news. 8 millions seem like a big number !

Can't wait to put my fingers on Godot 4 :)

considering they were receiving 15k in donations, that IS a big number indeed.

other than that, they had the epic mega grant and a few other big donations

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Bumadar

Quoting: KimyrielleLet's see where this goes, but I am not too worried. If the worst case happens and that company gets taken over by big-evil-business, I am very confident that Godot will get forked by a new dev team and live happily ever after. It happened after OpenOffice got taken over by big-evil-business, too. The good thing about open source is that it's fairly immune against hostile takeovers.

In the best case, this could be a positive game-changer for Godot. While not everything the team will be working on will get upstreamed to Godot, I am sure that a lot of it will.

To keep it interesting for the investors I would guess the console market... so keeping that out of godot and as a payable add on, or something like that.

I do agree that forking OpenOffice in the longrun worked out, although I am not sure how that works for game engine's, the big gaming dev's tend to write a lot of in-house stuff against an engine to help there needs, a fork of a game engine which is used by companieswith self written add ons or bought add ons is diffrent from a fork of an office suit which we end users use.

it should be an easier migration because (almost) every game engine user do know how to code, while not every office user do.
the average joe has no idea what an fork is, and if he face any problem during an migration he will be helpless the same cant be said about the average game developer.

the main issue would be use forks on consoles.
this company will support the official build of godot but im not sure about derivative codes.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

so... linux subsystem for linux?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: elmapulare you sugesting that an government pc should be offline

Are you seriously... actually seriously... suggesting that if a government entity is so incompetent to be running a decades old operating system (when multiple upgrade paths have been available for years and years) that they should "just pass a law" to force Microsoft to produce patches long after its well-announced EOL date??

i think you dindt understand a single word that i said, so i will try to explain again with other words.

no, i dont think that an company should be forced to support an product forever.
companies should work with open standards and open protocols whenever possible, especially when their clients are using "public money" (by pulic money i mean, charity, governments, and others, i dont know the exact term)

companies shouldnt be allowed to lock their users to thenselves as the only providers for something ,especially if the money used to purchase the product/service is "public money".

Quoting: scaineManaging your legacy O/S footprint is bread and butter in most enterprises. I'm currently overseeing the removal of our last 100 or so Windows 2012 servers right now at my workplace, for example. Because believe me, there will be no laws created to cover this easily avoidable threat.

removal of 100 windows servers to replace then with what? another product from microsoft? because a lot of governments give up migrating to linux, not because linux wasnt capable of doing what they need, but, because microsoft put an lock on then that was too expensive to break, it was consuming too much time and money, so they just gave up.

that, should be illegal.
and even if you think this is acceptable, why the hell an company should be allowed to charge as much as they want for their product if its the only option, not because other companies werent capable of doing an similiar product, but due to vendor lock in?

how much money its acceptable for an government to invest into purchasing software licences? 1 trillion of dollars?
if microsoft deciced to increase the price of their next windows versions while at the same time, drop support for older versions, but they have put an great lock on the content avaliable for it, should an government be forced to pay whatever microsoft want to charge to update their machines?

the way i see things, the only reason you were able to migrate from windows server 2012 was because this lock wasnt strong enough to prevent you from doing, or because you didnt changed your provider.

when companies abuse their power to ransom users, i think they should be forced to one of 2 things:
1)keep supporting the product even if that harm their profits (wich they wont like and as result, they will see thenselves forced into 2)
2)open the documentation of how to implement their apis/procols/file formats.

TL:DR i dont think ransomwares should be legal and legaly encouraged.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: EikeGrooming the data from time to time, or use a disconnected PC with an outdated OS - like everybody else.

are you sugesting that an government pc should be offline? in 2022 an government should put all of their machines offline? seriously?
how do you do income tax? by fax? by letters?

Quoting: EikeI'm with you that minimum support times should be enforced. (EU is at this topic, by the way.) But I'd say something like 10 years for PC stuff is good enough. And I don't think governments should use their power just for their own good/self-inflicted problems. They can care for their data and software just like everybody else. And, you won't be surprised here, I'd recommend that they use FLOSS software more.

10 years in some cases is the time to upgrade every machine on the company, in other words, by the time you finish the migration for an new tech , its already obsolete.
we are talking about millions of machines here.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: elmapulthey cant legaly completely drop support for something used by millions

Of course they can. What global law are you referring to that obligates a company to support well announced end-of-life products??

do you forgot that governments use windows?
they can make laws like that if they feel like they are being harmed by an company pratice.

Something doesn't become illegal because they could make a law, but only when they actually did.

And, my opinion: Microsoft is not doing the job that bad. Of course, Debian is doing it better, but I wouldn't expect that much from a profit oriented company.

microsoft used to save user files in a file format that only then and god knew how it worked inside, and it can be argueed that their apis are similiar.

if an program only work on an older version of windows, and an important government file only open on this program, and the company who made the program already gone bankrupt, how is the government suppose to open the file once this version of windows is no longer supported?

of course i understand that no company should be forced to support an old api/abi forever, but an government can stabilish an reasonable minimum time as an law, especially when the company who made the software has an monopoly (as microsoft have) have and the government got traped into using it back in the days governments knew nothing about computers to build their it infrastrcuture.
imagine if an government couldnt control their own drones in an war because microsoft said so? or if they had to use an unsuported operating system?
an company margin for profit can really be prioritized over peoples lifes?

we are paying companies for whatever they want to charge with public money, and they got to decide for how long they plan to support one of their system after lock us inside?

View this comment - View article - View full comments