ID:132902
 
So, an interesting thought occured to me. What if someone made a mobile version on BYOND for the iphone and ipod touch. multiplayer games thru wifi, 3G or Edge. All of which could either connect to the current server, or then maybe have a specific server for mobile, but only have the top... 5 maybe 10 games that r played on BYOND. Its an interesting idea. I mean... Hell id love to b at my buddys house or at my local card shop, and hook up to dmu and play. So... If anyone is experienced with the SDK for the 3.1 ipod touch/iphone fimware, and would like to under go the task, thatd b awesome, and of course id b more than happy to test. OR! If someone wants to make it 3.0 compatible, potentially.... A jailbreak exclusive app as opposed to an app store app, then we could work on that aswell... Plz let me know what u guys think.
Learn to use the search functionality. This has been brought up and shot down dozens of times before.
In response to Popisfizzy
I was going to make a comment about how appealing to the trendy, overpriced mobile hardware market may ease their parent's disposable income BYOND's way, but it occurred to me that the same people already use BYOND on a PC.
In response to Mobius Evalon
Mobius Evalon wrote:
(...)but it occurred to me that the same people already use BYOND on a PC.

Are you sure?
I would have guessed different.
In response to Schnitzelnagler
Schnitzelnagler wrote:
Mobius Evalon wrote:
(...)but it occurred to me that the same people already use BYOND on a PC.

Are you sure?
I would have guessed different.

My complete thought was something along the line of "the same people who want BYOND on their overpriced Apple products already use BYOND on a Windoze-based PC", it just didn't all come out at once.
In response to Mobius Evalon
Mobius Evalon wrote:
Schnitzelnagler wrote:
Mobius Evalon wrote:
(...)but it occurred to me that the same people already use BYOND on a PC.

Are you sure?
I would have guessed different.

My complete thought was something along the line of "the same people who want BYOND on their overpriced Apple products already use BYOND on a Windoze-based PC", it just didn't all come out at once.

Why apple products. Forget apple products.
http://www.android.com/
In response to Mobius Evalon
I just wouldn't bet on this.
I have no statistics as base to my prejudiced assumptions, but it seems to me like a lot more people would consider BYOND style games on something like an overpriced Apple product (due to the restricted functionality available), than they would on the PC, where they play whatever_latest_graphical_hype_engine_is_cool, given their PC is likely to support it when money is less of an issue.

I actually wonder if Stephen001 and Kuraudo could get permission of Tom to attempt a conversion, as they would need no insight on the source code to start, rather than only knowledge on the byte code.
I have the feeling they would both enjoy the challenge and I doubt Tom would mind the additional hits/customers, given that even if there are no new customers at all, you'd still see likely more hits on BYOND when the client is not restricted around a hard-wired PC.
As Fizz mentioned, it's a good idea to search the forum for similar suggestions, because this is one of those ideas that people post about every two weeks or so.

BYOND won't work on a mobile platform currently for several reasons. One is that typically most mobile devices don't have enough memory for it. The bigger issue is that a whole new interface would have to be written for it, and our existing skin concept would need to be entirely rethought to function adequately in a small-screen environment. That's not to say that down the road it won't be more feasible to do this kind of port, but it won't be in the foreseeable future.

As for the iPod Touch or iPhone, that is an impossibility. To get to that point in the first place BYOND would probably have to have a full Mac port, but then you've got the problem that Apple is a big believer in the concept of closed devices. You can't simply load a program onto their hardware. It has to be sold through their app store, which has an approval process so byzantine that many major developers now question whether it's worth putting major time and money into a platform that may well reject their app on arbitrary grounds.

Besides, playing or hosting a BYOND game over a cell network would be a brilliant way to get soaked with enormous bills. Cell phone service providers are notoriously miserly with the rates for their Internet plans and they impose very low bandwidth caps with huge overage charges. The good news at least is that hopefully if BYOND ever did have a mobile port, by that time cell phone companies would have started playing by more civilized price rules.

Lummox JR
As others have mentioned, a mobile version in general is impractical, we can't even get them to get the website mobile formatted >.>

As for the iPod Touch/iPhone specifically: Although the iPhone OS is a modified version of OSX which is based on BSD, both of which BYOND supports(for hosting only):

-The processor architecture is different, requiring some porting.
-Apple is very picky about what programs are allowed to be placed on their device, and BYOND would undoubtedly be rejected.
-Applications for the iPhone/Touch are not allowed to be in C++
-This would be hosting only(pretty much pointless)
-If a client was developed, and by some miracle was accepted into the app store, it would require game developers to create two different interfaces for their game

Of course, a port of the hosting binary would likely be very easy on a jailbroke iPhone, but that would be pointless.
In response to Danial.Beta
ok. i can see what ur saying about the iphone FW. but for the ppl who bashed me for not searching... one this is my first post. two, i was on my ipod, so searching and what not is a pain with the tiny view of the browser.. third.. yeah.. frankly all i REALLY want is to have DMU Mobile.. so.. i'd have 2 get in touch with the programmer.. maybe do a modified version for OSX and for a mobile format as well.
In response to DJxSilence
Just a tip to make the forums a bit more useful on a device like the touch, the forums actually do have a trimmed down version made for low screenspace/text only environments.

http://www.byond.com/developer/forum/miniforum.cgi

Adding miniforum.cgi to the end of any BYOND forum should make it smaller, even user owned guild forums. However there is currently no mini view for the blogs/guilds or hub, which is a bit of a shame. I can understand not having it for the hub, as you can't actually join a BYOND game on most low screenspace devices, but the blogs are a natural fit. Also the URL needs to be adjusted to m.byond.com/.../ to make it easier to access for those of use using mobile devices which tend to have difficult text entry abilities.

As for using the search, normally people aren't so aggro about it, but because this question comes up so very much it gets on people's nerves. It's practically a weekly request. Although with recent developments in the smart phone and personal media player markets it is far more possible to port BYOND than it has ever been in the past, it is still not possible as it stands. So it's great to keep the question alive, the frequency is just a little too great. It should be more along the lines of a yearly question, just as a reminder to the development staff to keep an eye out for emerging technologies.
In response to Danial.Beta
Danial.Beta wrote:
So it's great to keep the question alive, the frequency is just a little too great. It should be more along the lines of a yearly question, just as a reminder to the development staff to keep an eye out for emerging technologies.

Not even yearly. The underlying problem of the difficulty behind porting the interface code remains completely unchanged. This ties in with the oft-repeated open source request as well. If we did get to a point where we could at least open-source our API and let people develop their own apps, then we'd be in much better shape for a mobile port. But no reminder is needed that there are exciting mobile technologies out there. I've thought about the possibilities myself quite often, so if it ever became truly feasible to do this I'd probably jump on it.

I should point out though that devices that can't run compiled code are a deal-breaker. Our backend code is all C++ and while that's portable, it isn't something that could be changed for instance to Java or another language. If Apple has a no-native-code policy for their mobile devices, that's as far as it goes.

Lummox JR
In response to Lummox JR
Apple does allow native code, but it must be Objective C if I remember my developer rants correctly.

My point in a yearly reminder is that the overall movement of mobile devices has become moving closer to the PC in almost every respect, and it is entirely possible that we may end up on x86 based processors in the majority of phones in a matter of just a few years, but this could easily slip by most people, as processor architecture isn't the first thing listed on phone specs. In fact, it is normally not mentioned at all in any consumer writing, but rather only in developer information. So we could end up with a device open to 3rd party software and running an x86 processor on a Linux kernel in a lot of hands without it ever being publicly stated that that is what has happened.

A client API is a great way of handling this, as it makes it far easier for to port the interface to the 3 or 4 mobile OSs that will likely dominate in the coming years. 3 or 4 OSs would be harder to support than the current 1 you guys are used to, but consumer choice is fantastic for helping to advance the technology and design, something that really hurt the PC market for the past 10 years.
In response to Danial.Beta
Danial.Beta wrote:
My point in a yearly reminder is that the overall movement of mobile devices has become moving closer to the PC in almost every respect, and it is entirely possible that we may end up on x86 based processors in the majority of phones in a matter of just a few years, but this could easily slip by most people, as processor architecture isn't the first thing listed on phone specs. In fact, it is normally not mentioned at all in any consumer writing, but rather only in developer information. So we could end up with a device open to 3rd party software and running an x86 processor on a Linux kernel in a lot of hands without it ever being publicly stated that that is what has happened.

Which would be irrelevant to the central point that the interface would need to be completely redone for Linux. If there was a mobile device that could run full Windows on x86, that would actually already be BYOND-compatible by definition. Otherwise the problem of needing to port the interface remains unsolved, as it does for Linux and Mac.

A client API is a great way of handling this, as it makes it far easier for to port the interface to the 3 or 4 mobile OSs that will likely dominate in the coming years. 3 or 4 OSs would be harder to support than the current 1 you guys are used to, but consumer choice is fantastic for helping to advance the technology and design, something that really hurt the PC market for the past 10 years.

I support the idea of opening our API as I've mentioned previously; the bottleneck is time and effort. Much of our API is in flux so we'd need to set up some sort of auto-documentation for those bits of the API people would be able to hook into, as well as the ability to auto-generate the .h files needed to use them, and we'd probably need to redo the DLL files so as not to use decorated names (or provide a .def or something that could be used to hook them by number). Of course on Linux this gets a little more confusing as I have no idea how modules in Linux work, but in principle it's all possible.

Lummox JR
In response to Danial.Beta
Actually, I'm pretty sure Apple also allows objective-C++.
In response to AJX
AJX wrote:
Why apple products. Forget apple products.
http://www.android.com/

Apple sucks. If you can't think outside the box, at least work with an open box. Maybe something like...
http://www.symbian.org/
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
If there was a mobile device that could run full Windows on x86, that would actually already be BYOND-compatible by definition. Otherwise the problem of needing to port the interface remains unsolved, as it does for Linux and Mac.

I have to say, I strongly believe that Android based phones will be taking over a large chunk of the market in the coming years. Google has pretty much been expanding their control over every technology based market they can get their paws on and it has been working pretty well.

http://www.android.com/

I can't tell, but wouldn't this be able to do what it is you're discussing?
In response to AJX
AJX wrote:
Lummox JR wrote:
If there was a mobile device that could run full Windows on x86, that would actually already be BYOND-compatible by definition. Otherwise the problem of needing to port the interface remains unsolved, as it does for Linux and Mac.

I have to say, I strongly believe that Android based phones will be taking over a large chunk of the market in the coming years. Google has pretty much been expanding their control over every technology based market they can get their paws on and it has been working pretty well.

http://www.android.com/

I can't tell, but wouldn't this be able to do what it is you're discussing?

No. Android runs applications written in Java. BYOND is written in C++; it will not port to another language.

Also the same problem of needing to port the interface would still apply even if Android could run C++ apps.

Lummox JR
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
AJX wrote:
Lummox JR wrote:
If there was a mobile device that could run full Windows on x86, that would actually already be BYOND-compatible by definition. Otherwise the problem of needing to port the interface remains unsolved, as it does for Linux and Mac.

I have to say, I strongly believe that Android based phones will be taking over a large chunk of the market in the coming years. Google has pretty much been expanding their control over every technology based market they can get their paws on and it has been working pretty well.

http://www.android.com/

I can't tell, but wouldn't this be able to do what it is you're discussing?

No. Android runs applications written in Java. BYOND is written in C++; it will not port to another language.

Also the same problem of needing to port the interface would still apply even if Android could run C++ apps.

Lummox JR

Oh, I meant modding the OS to allow it to run, not like an android ap (through the java VM), but as its own ap.
The OS itself is open source, but I just found it that it runs Linux. So yea, you'd have to change the interface to work on linux. :(
It's a very good idea, one that has been suggested before.

I don't think it is realistic to port the server to a mobile app, since that is fairly low-level, written in C++, and as such requires access to the OS (which many platforms won't provide due to security reasons). However, what interests most people is the client, for playing games.

At the moment, the primary hangup with porting our client is that it is a "thick" application-- it's a fairly big project that does a lot of processing itself. For example, the client caches resources, keeps track of the user's view, and only updates the server as needed. This doesn't even mention the (new) interface functions, which are almost all performed locally.

I think that the best way to support a mobile app would be as part of a more general setup: say we made a version of the client that ran in Flash and could thus run in any browser (mobile or otherwise). Such a client would be a big departure from our current one due to the limitations of the Flash sandbox-- it would probably be limited to basic input/output and the map. Also, there are currently some security issues with how daemons for Flash games must be hosted, but we could probably figure out a way around that.

I do think this would be a great thing for BYOND, in part because the natural graphical limitations wouldn't be a problem on mobile devices, and multiplayer seems natural for a phone (although I never got the appeal of playing on a tiny screen, but YMMV). However, it is a big project, almost a completely different product for us.
Page: 1 2