[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

This is my last say in the matter, brought about not by a wish to convert anyone to my opinion, but my amazement at having a communication breakdown over such a simple explanation.

Clearly, there is no communication breakdown, in any form but you have made attempt to "convert" to your opinion, there isn't any problem with that in itself. Knock yourself out on that one, however what that opinion represent may one of question.

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

First of all, let me say that if 6DoF camera movement is made with the trackIR SDK you have a point that even when not using NP software but interfacing with something that's made with NP software, then there is ground to stand on.

Agreement on that you have, no doubt, subject to the licensing arrangements and copyright considerations though and method of access.

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

My disagreement with you comes in the case that a game already features the smooth camera transitions needed for 6DoF in the relevant axes, coded by the developers themselves into the game without the help of such an SDK, which let's face it, is a given in most modern games.

If by that you mean Mouse Look (aka Freelook), then that has around since the early 90's

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

In this way the situation resolves itself regardless of what either of us believes:
a) for old games where smooth camera movement is made with the NP SDK, anyone can use the old non-encrypted interface because there is no enforceable legal drawback for doing so
b) for new games where the camera movement is coded by the developers of the game, people can just instruct their PC to work with an alternative DLL

We've been over the "legalities" before

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

The first case is a bit iffy due to the use of the SDK, to make a judgment call on that we'd have to know if something made with proprietary software is legally equal to using that company's software or not. For example, if i code a small OS kernel on C/C++ and distribute it for free,

Do you mean free of charge, or free of licensing conditions?

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

do the people running my test OS violate any of the C/C++ copyrights if they don't have a license for the programming language or not? I'd hazard a guess that it's not, otherwise the whole industry would be a circle of royalty fees going from one company to the other, but i don't know for sure so i reserve judgment on that.

see above

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

However, it's the second case the confusion is mostly about and what prompted me to post. You say that making one's PC "think" it's using NP software when it's not, is equal to actually using that software.

will the TIR package wortk without that DLL?

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

So let's have the simplest example possible following the same principles of thought:
if i grow up in an environment where people call apples bananas and an "outsider" gives me an apple, i'll say thanks for the banana. Your reasoning implies that me thinking it's a banana actually makes it one

No, there you are attempting to call an apple a banana to justify your stance on modifying a dll supplied as part of a copyrighted software package.

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Maybe i'm misunderstanding you somewhere along the line, but it does look that weird from where i'm standing.

misunderstanding? nah, you know what is going on and also realise that it isn't part of the front row of a Guns 'n' Roses concert present.

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

In the end, no matter what we say we both know there will be a working alternative within a few weeks/months, one way or the other.

Undoubtly, you may even recall that a consensus was reached that other headtrackers should be accommodated, the sticking point being on how they go about doing what they do.

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

And the best part of it is, being a naturalpoint customer myself means that no matter if the workaround uses NP software or not i'll be able to use it with a clear conscience (i already paid for the right to use it after all).

you have the right to use the software conditionally and after all your comment earlier on 6DoF being already in games you go on to say that? there isn't a need for a "workaround" and FT should be able to remove from its sofware, any and all method of access to the TIR interface.





*Edit

Something for your consideration there BD... http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...t=18723&page=8 post #70 ~ #78 inclusive -enjoy