Software, Computers, Video Games and D&D UtilitiesGeneral discussion on computer software and hardware, PC and console games, and RPG utilities such as eTools, PC GEN, etc.
On August 13th, Lone Wolf Development will release the eagerly-awaited Pathfinder Roleplaying Game data package for Hero Lab. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game package allows you to create adventurers and NPCs in the world of Golarion, described in the upcoming "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook" from Paizo Publishing.
The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game data package includes all the races, character classes, spells, feats, magic items, and all the new mechanics introduced by the Core Rulebook, presented in Hero Lab's award-winning user-friendly interface.
Like all of Hero Lab's supported game systems, the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game data package allows players to create characters in minutes, verify them with Hero Lab's built-in validation engine, and print out character sheets (or use Hero Lab itself at the game table). GMs can create NPCs, and use the Tactical Console to manage encounters between the players and their foes.
(Note - this is an early release of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game data package, so the integrated data file editor, prestige classes, and some other functionality are not yet available. These will be corrected in free updates that will be made available in the weeks after the initial release.)
It's my wish that someday developers will realize that a cross-platform language will net them more customers, but I'm not holding my breath waiting. Too bad, 'cuz Hero Lab sounds like a perfect complement to the PF PDF I plan to purchase on Thursday.
__________________ If this post mentions MapTool, here's the disclaimer: I am the site admin for RPTools.net and a sporadic code contributor. My only other relationship to them is being a happy customer!
Curse you Lone Wolf, curse you! Now I may be forced to purchase both the Pathfinder rulebook AND Hero Lab!!! Have you no respect for my bank balance!?!?!
__________________ Brian Zuber
Proud Member of ENWorld since 2000 (under several lost screen names). Gaming since the mid-80s!
Favorite Settings: Love all of the official settings, Mystara is my nostalgia fave! Trying to create a homebrew that blends the best elements of the various settings. Favorite Edition: Can't decide between 3rd Edition and 4th Edition, like them both!
It's my wish that someday developers will realize that a cross-platform language will net them more customers, but I'm not holding my breath waiting. Too bad, 'cuz Hero Lab sounds like a perfect complement to the PF PDF I plan to purchase on Thursday.
Developers will need to realize that making software cross-platform will net them enough new customers to balance out the extra expense of going cross-platform. And seeing how developers for RPG software and many videogames repeatedly fail to see this leads me to believe . . . . that the answer is no.
Macs are awesome, to be sure. But if you are going to go with any platform other than Windows, you're going to have to be prepared to have less choices when it comes to entertainment software. It's just the way it works (well, for now, until Apple manages to increase the Mac's market share, which is very possible).
__________________ Brian Zuber
Proud Member of ENWorld since 2000 (under several lost screen names). Gaming since the mid-80s!
Favorite Settings: Love all of the official settings, Mystara is my nostalgia fave! Trying to create a homebrew that blends the best elements of the various settings. Favorite Edition: Can't decide between 3rd Edition and 4th Edition, like them both!
Developers will need to realize that making software cross-platform will net them enough new customers to balance out the extra expense of going cross-platform.
The extra expense is more mindset than reality, however.
Quote:
Macs are awesome, to be sure. But if you are going to go with any platform other than Windows, you're going to have to be prepared to have less choices when it comes to entertainment software. It's just the way it works (well, for now, until Apple manages to increase the Mac's market share, which is very possible).
Heh, I never mentioned Macs.
Of course, I'm typing on one right now, but the rest of my machines run Linux.
<threadjack>
I can understand the ROI for video games on Windows; there is a huge financial investment in performance-driven software in that industry. But those criteria for development don't affect programs like HeroLab. A few milliseconds here or there are not going to matter. There's really no reason to shut out a large segment of the market (totaling about 20%) except fear of change. It's a typically human reaction, but not rational.
</threadjack>
__________________ If this post mentions MapTool, here's the disclaimer: I am the site admin for RPTools.net and a sporadic code contributor. My only other relationship to them is being a happy customer!
...in fact I have several, including the one that I'm typing this on at the moment (2.4 Ghz Intel core Duo MacBook Pro). I run Windows XP through Parallels on my Macbook Pro and because of that I'm able to run Hero Lab with no problems.
I'd prefer my apps to be native but I like Hero Lab enough that it was worth it.
__________________ I'm thinking you're totally out to lunch on this one. Find another form of foreplay that doesn't involve 3 hours of explanation and a pocket calculator.
I can understand the ROI for video games on Windows; there is a huge financial investment in performance-driven software in that industry. But those criteria for development don't affect programs like HeroLab. A few milliseconds here or there are not going to matter. There's really no reason to shut out a large segment of the market (totaling about 20%) except fear of change. It's a typically human reaction, but not rational.
If we were to start writing Hero Lab from scratch tomorrow, then your argument would have some merit to it. However, Hero Lab traces its roots to two other products of ours, and shares a common code base with them. Those products - and portions of the codebase - date back to 1997. Twelve years ago, there were no good solutions for cross-platform portability between Mac and Windows. Heck, many major companies wasted tens of millions of dollars apiece trying to develop suitable cross-platform solutions back in those days. Since Hero Lab is built on a foundation that long pre-dates the recent cross-platform solutions, it is tied to Windows.
Would I prefer to have a native Mac or cross-platform solution? Absolutely! But then we would need to stop forward progress for nearly a year while we re-worked everything for Mac compatibility. Alternately, we could re-write everything in a new language that provides cross-platform portability, but that would entail an even longer period (our active codebase is roughly 500,000 lines of C++ code). That's a huge opportunity for someone else to come in and overtake us in terms of features and functionality. So it's not a viable business option. And since our development staff is only two guys, it's not possible for us to do a port in parallel.
There is no irrational fear of change here - just practical business trade-offs being made, which are purely rational.
It's frustrating when very bright people take a myopic view of business from a single vantage point, without considering that there might be other factors involved. This lack of perspective results in blanket statements being made that are wholly inappropriate and patently incorrect. And then people like myself are left with the choice of either ignoring the misinformation (and allowing it to propagate through lack of any challenge) or rebutting it (and thereby having to "dress down" someone who I'm sure means well). It's a lose-lose situation, and I hate being stuck with it.
If we were to start writing Hero Lab from scratch tomorrow, then your argument would have some merit to it. However, Hero Lab traces its roots to two other products of ours, and shares a common code base with them. Those products - and portions of the codebase - date back to 1997. Twelve years ago, there were no good solutions for cross-platform portability between Mac and Windows. Heck, many major companies wasted tens of millions of dollars apiece trying to develop suitable cross-platform solutions back in those days. Since Hero Lab is built on a foundation that long pre-dates the recent cross-platform solutions, it is tied to Windows.
Would I prefer to have a native Mac or cross-platform solution? Absolutely! But then we would need to stop forward progress for nearly a year while we re-worked everything for Mac compatibility. Alternately, we could re-write everything in a new language that provides cross-platform portability, but that would entail an even longer period (our active codebase is roughly 500,000 lines of C++ code). That's a huge opportunity for someone else to come in and overtake us in terms of features and functionality. So it's not a viable business option. And since our development staff is only two guys, it's not possible for us to do a port in parallel.
There is no irrational fear of change here - just practical business trade-offs being made, which are purely rational.
It's frustrating when very bright people take a myopic view of business from a single vantage point, without considering that there might be other factors involved. This lack of perspective results in blanket statements being made that are wholly inappropriate and patently incorrect. And then people like myself are left with the choice of either ignoring the misinformation (and allowing it to propagate through lack of any challenge) or rebutting it (and thereby having to "dress down" someone who I'm sure means well). It's a lose-lose situation, and I hate being stuck with it.
To bad it is written in C++. If it was VB I know a development platform that would port all the code for you and you would be cross platform in a couple weeks at most.
But I feel your pain when it comes to consumers not taking a look at the big picture. It is a give me what I want mentality no matter how much it costs you, as the business. Oh yeah and if you do give us what we want we aren't going to pay for it either. So again I have to agree with you and also say I think you all have a great app.
To bad it is written in C++. If it was VB I know a development platform that would port all the code for you and you would be cross platform in a couple weeks at most.
The fact that it's written in C++ is definitely a liability for cross-platform portability. However, it's also been a huge benefit in allowing us to do some of the really cool stuff in Hero Lab. I've done some VB programming in years past and I'm honestly not sure that VB could achieve some of the things we've done - at least, not without being so cumbersome as to render the feature not worth adding. So, as with anything, it's a tradeoff, with everyone making their own assessment of which benefits are more important and which liabilities can be lived with.
I'm looking forward to seeing what you guys ultimately release. I'm sure you're not going to give us a moment to breathe with Hero Lab, so we'll have to stay on our toes. Users are definitely going to be happy about that!
It's frustrating when very bright people take a myopic view of business from a single vantage point, without considering that there might be other factors involved. This lack of perspective results in blanket statements being made that are wholly inappropriate and patently incorrect.
I apologize for my choice of words. A bad mistake on my part.
I am impressed that you continue to develop the product with just two programmers on staff! Those must be some true hotshots to cover such a large code base!
I haven't worked in a proprietary software environment for ... about 20 years. (Hmm, actually closer to 18.) And even then it was in an industry in which the sale of an application suite was expected to include source code, although the license was still quite restrictive. (Those who were around in the heyday of mainframes may remember that such machines always came with source code to the operating system.)
When I referred to "fear of change" I was talking about the overall environment. For example, suppose you have two programmers on staff that both know C++ very well but know little or nothing about Eiffel. Even if Eiffel provides the absolute "best" environment for writing a new application there will be that fear of something new, that fear that perhaps the programmers won't pick it up quickly enough or that the compilers will have bugs or that deployment will be difficult or... These fears are often a large factor in driving management to make a business decision against switching to another language. (This is obviously a blanket statement and won't apply in every situation or to every company, which is why I used the term "often". For an analysis of this 100% human reaction, Google for "software risk analysis" and "risk avoidance". This is a documented artifact of the software development industry.)
An interesting corollary is that such a business will always be playing catch up with others in their market: they can never be at the front of the pack because they cannot truly innovate. Oh, they can develop new features or extend existing features, but they are always held back by the existing code base and having to work within that framework. Innovation requires change, quite often a very radical change. (Ask your programmers how much of the code base they'd like to rewrite if they had the chance. It will likely be about 30% of the code and the largest portion of that will be library functions that are used frequently. See Martin Fowler's book, UML Distilled for his empirical evidence.)
Sorry, I've started rambling. I'll stop now.
Quote:
And then people like myself are left with the choice of either ignoring the misinformation (and allowing it to propagate through lack of any challenge) or rebutting it (and thereby having to "dress down" someone who I'm sure means well). It's a lose-lose situation, and I hate being stuck with it.
Again, I'm sorry. My tone above was inappropriate and I don't have any excuse for it. I was a bit exasperated at the entire Windows software development industry and took it out on LWD.
The next time you're in Tampa, drop me a note and the first (and second!) beer will be on me.
__________________ If this post mentions MapTool, here's the disclaimer: I am the site admin for RPTools.net and a sporadic code contributor. My only other relationship to them is being a happy customer!
I am impressed that you continue to develop the product with just two programmers on staff! Those must be some true hotshots to cover such a large code base!
Thanks. We stay pretty busy. :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by azhrei_fje
Those who were around in the heyday of mainframes may remember that such machines always came with source code to the operating system.
I've been doing software development - for pay - for 29 years now. So I remember those days. :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by azhrei_fje
When I referred to "fear of change" I was talking about the overall environment. For example, suppose you have two programmers on staff that both know C++ very well but know little or nothing about Eiffel. Even if Eiffel provides the absolute "best" environment for writing a new application there will be that fear of something new, that fear that perhaps the programmers won't pick it up quickly enough or that the compilers will have bugs or that deployment will be difficult or... These fears are often a large factor in driving management to make a business decision against switching to another language. (This is obviously a blanket statement and won't apply in every situation or to every company, which is why I used the term "often". For an analysis of this 100% human reaction, Google for "software risk analysis" and "risk avoidance". This is a documented artifact of the software development industry.)
I wholly agree with this tendency. I find myself tempted down that path as well sometimes. But, with our tiny size, its more about expedience and not losing all the time spent spinning up on new technologies. That being said, we're actively switching over to another language for an upcoming product that isn't substantively tied to our existing codebase. So it's a balancing act.
Quote:
Originally Posted by azhrei_fje
An interesting corollary is that such a business will always be playing catch up with others in their market: they can never be at the front of the pack because they cannot truly innovate. Oh, they can develop new features or extend existing features, but they are always held back by the existing code base and having to work within that framework. Innovation requires change, quite often a very radical change.
On this point, I disagree. Such a business will *sometimes* be stuck in catch-up, but switching to a wholly new language or toolset is *not* required to innovate. Languages and toolsets are merely tools that a good developer keeps readily available in his toolbox. You come up with an idea and then choose the best tools for the job. Sometimes, one particular tool is clearly best for the task, but many times, the pros and cons of different tools result in multiple tools that are roughly equal in utility for completing the task. If any of those tools is one where you already have greater competence, or if using a familiar tool will save you many months or a year in development time, the "best" tool for the task from a business standpoint is *not* necessarily the best tool from a purely technical standpoint. So it's all a matter of ensuring the business is being smart overall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by azhrei_fje
Ask your programmers how much of the code base they'd like to rewrite if they had the chance. It will likely be about 30% of the code and the largest portion of that will be library functions that are used frequently. See Martin Fowler's book, UML Distilled for his empirical evidence.
I'm one of the two developers, so I'm very familiar with this issue. We're also very proactive about this. We periodically rewrite large chunks of our framework, evolving it over time, so that number is below 30% for us. However, there are definitely still a few areas that would seriously benefit from a rewrite. Those are the areas we'll likely be hitting the next time we revamp chunks of the codebase.
Quote:
Originally Posted by azhrei_fje
Again, I'm sorry. My tone above was inappropriate and I don't have any excuse for it. I was a bit exasperated at the entire Windows software development industry and took it out on LWD.
No problem. As I assumed, you meant well, but the words could have been chosen better. And I don't blame you for being exasperated at the software development industry. I was a developer here in Silicon Valley for 15 years and got fed up with it, so I went freelance for awhile and finally ended up creating my own products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by azhrei_fje
The next time you're in Tampa, drop me a note and the first (and second!) beer will be on me.
Sounds like an opportunity to share lots of war stories.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
