Messages

151

Developer's Corner / Re: Silly question about localizing C/C++ applications

« on: January 03, 2012, 02:26 PM »

There always are resource DLLs. I believe Microsoft still recommends them. They contain string tables (numeric_id=>"string value") and also dialog resources (allowing you to rearrange controls if they do not fit). You can have multiple different translations for the same phrase and you can have larger labels on dialogs if they are needed in a translation, you can have even different pictures or accelerator tables. Accessing the resources is fast. It all works perfectly - on the paper.

I have used resources DLLs in the past, but I have switched to a gettext-like method few years ago and it was the right move. With resource DLLs, you need specialized expensive software to do the translation, there are problems with updates and patches. Users are unable to contribute. I had people offering help with translation and had to turn them down, because the process was too complex.

With gettext-like method, there are limitations, but there are also results. My application was translated to multiple languages year after I made the switch. Granted, the translations were not perfect, but I bet the users are very happy they have a localized application with few weak points instead of just English app. If you are a one-man software shop, I would definitely stick with gettext or something very similar. If you have a lot of money to spend on a professional translation service and a long release cycle, you may want to try another, "more perfect" method.

Also, I would not worry about speed with a gettext method. If you put the strings in a map, it will be fast enough with thousands of strings.

152

N.A.N.Y. 2012 / Re: NANY 2012 Pledge & Release: Image Grid

« on: December 31, 2011, 07:46 AM »

Implemented the requested features. You can now see the image name in status bar and you can drag and drop pictures to swap their positions or to remove them (drag them out to remove).

153

N.A.N.Y. 2012 / Re: NANY 2012 Pledge & Release: Image Grid

« on: December 30, 2011, 02:01 PM »

Thanks for the feedback and thanks for the donation, mouser

I have fixed the typo, but I do not think I have enough time to add the requested features before the deadline. I'll try to have them ready tomorrow, they are not too difficult.

154

N.A.N.Y. 2012 / NANY 2012 Pledge & Release: Image Grid

« on: December 30, 2011, 12:13 PM »

NANY 2012 Entry Information

Note: a screencast has been prepared by kyrathaba

Application Name	Image Grid
Version	1.0
Short Description	Turn multiple (equal sized) images into one large image
Supported OSes	Windows 2k, XP, Vista, 7
Setup File	[url=http://download.rw-designer.com/1.0/ImageGrid.exe]ImageGrid.exe
System Requirements	nothing special, just mouse & truecolor display
Author Info	http://www.rw-designer.com/image-grid
Description	This tool allows you to take several smaller pictures and create one big image with all the smaller pictures arranged in a rows and columns. Personally, I will probably do not use this, but because several people requested tool like this, here it is. At this moment, I know it will be used to: create custom wallpapers from photographs create previews of multiple images for sites like deviant art or for designers' clients create pictures for a printing service that only supports pictures of certain size and the client needs lots of smaller pictures
Screenshots
Installation	none - 100% portable
Using the application	Run the .exe, drag and drop images, save the result
Uninstalling	just delete the .exe
Known Issues	Since I was working on this 1 hour ago, I am sure, there are issues, but they are not yet known to me.

155

Living Room / Re: Adware is not freeware, right?

« on: December 24, 2011, 07:17 AM »

I have seen these automatically added links on many web sites, it has been here for years. But it is nice to see that people are noticing it.

The forum owner is most likely getting cut of the profit from VigLink or another link-broker company. If it is some kind of free forum (running on a sub-domain), the moderator is most likely not the owner though.

BTW are you sure you did not give your permission when agreeing to the forum TOS?

The "free" word is so empty these days. I never use it on my web. Despite that, I got an funny email from an angry user few days ago, because I did not warn him that some of my software was not free. 

156

Coding Snacks / Re: Image Tile Joiner

« on: November 24, 2011, 01:16 PM »

That is actually a good idea, this is not the first time I see someone trying to arrange images in a grid. I guess it should be my NANY this year. 

157

Coding Snacks / Re: Image Tile Joiner

« on: November 24, 2011, 12:29 PM »

Smobu, you can use my freeware painting program ( http://www.rw-designer.com/image-editor ) for that. The easiest way would be this:
1. open the first image, but instead of opening it normally, use the dropdown arrow on the Open button and select "open as animated image" (or click Create->Create animation after opening the image normally)
2. drag and drop the other images on the lower part of the window on the list of frames to create an animation with all the images
3. click the Animation->Create filmstrip from main menu and then select the number of columns - the program will arrange all the animation frames into a single image in left to right, top to bottom order

158

General Software Discussion / Re: Fairware: an interesting experiment in getting paid for Open Source

« on: October 31, 2011, 06:19 AM »

After reading all db90h's posts, I have to agree that it could disrupt the market. Often in a negative way. I am on both sides of the barricade, having both - free and paid apps.

It is my opinion, the biggest problem is that there is a skewed measure of value of a software. Value (as benefits/expenses) of freeware is often perceived as infinite and thus intrinsically higher than any the paid app's value. Google rankings of freeware apps are insane. I would you expect to see photoshop to be #1 when searching for "image editor" - it is #16 - on the second page that none visit. Is Photoshop's value so low or is Google a "bit" wrong?

There is no authority source of software value. The software directories have failed miserably in delivering the users an unbiased measure of software value. They are full of ads, some of them are charging unreasonable prices for a bland review, they are outdated. The social ones are not much better. They only reflect the popularity of a software, not its value.

There are of course indirect costs associated with a freeware. Users must invest time in learning the software. The computer uses electricity, users spend time working with software. If a freeware gets the job done in twice the time, when does a paid app break even? When does a paid app break even when you count in that you have to re-learn how to use yet another free app, because the old one died? Very few think about this.

There is no free lunch, just an illusion of one. But what can we do? I see no solution. I would just wish, it would not be embarrassing to answer when someone asks me how much money I am making from my shareware or freeware apps.

BTW db90h fairware success motivated me do one thing I wanted for some time: making the donations public so that everyone can see them. 

159

Announce Your Software/Service/Product / Re: RealWorld Paint 2011.1 finally complete

« on: October 10, 2011, 03:45 AM »

Thanks for the kind words, I focused on features in the past and I hope I managed to implement all the fundamental ones. I feel I should switch my focus to the user interface now as there is a lot of space for improvement.

BTW for Photoshop owners, RWP can act as a portable backup sitting on an USB drive, ready to be used in an internet cafe or at work or school.

160

Announce Your Software/Service/Product / RealWorld Paint 2011.1 finally complete

« on: October 09, 2011, 05:02 PM »

Hi all,

first of all, I would like to thank all donationcoders, who helped with testing (https://www.donation...ex.php?topic=27867.0) and with picking the right name (https://www.donation...ex.php?topic=28144.0). After a long I hesitation, I decided to keep the RealWorld Paint name as many of you have recommended.

RWPaint is a free image and animation editor focused on bloggers and other people who work with pictures and animations online. Notable features include:

• Support of layers with styles.
• Import and export of .psd, .xcf, .pdn formats with layers and in case of Photoshop also with some styles (is there any other non-Adobe image editor that imports layer styles?).
• Many drawing tools (pencil, image brush, rectangle, ellipse, lasso, polygon, flood fill), and photo-retouching tools (red eye remover, clone, shape-shifter (liquify-like) tool).
• All basic image effects (shadow, fill, outline, bevel, glow, exposure adjustments, content-aware resizing, colorize, shift hue) and some less usual ones like displace or environment mapping. Plus a javascript interface for custom filter creation.
• Decent gif optimizer.
• Animation <-> filmstrip conversions.
• And a cute splash:

The splash was created entirely in RWPaint and can be easily modified, because it uses just a few simple shapes and a lot of layer styles. I'll be releasing a tutorial that explains how it was made during the next week.

Oh, and here is a download link: http://www.rw-designer.com/image-editor

Reading the recent topics here on DC, I should also mention a few possibly controversial features:
1) There are silent automated updates that are enabled by default (you can disable the in application options).
2) There is an embedded Internet Explorer control that displays latest news and allows downloading of plug-ins and media packs. In the process, it must (of course) contact the web server. If you do not like that, you can again choose a different start up page in application options.
3) There is a .msi installer and a .zip portable version (native 64-bit version coming soon, but it won't be able to use Photoshop-compatible plug-ins (cause they are 32-bit), so it is better to stick with the 32-bit version if you plan to user Ps plug-ins with RWPaint). The installer does not need admin rights if you select an installation folder that is writable without admin rights.

Edit: I am totally exhausted. Going to sleep...

161

General Software Discussion / Re: Lodsys Patent Troll - Get Ready to Scream...

« on: October 08, 2011, 02:48 PM »

The situation with software patents is getting out of hand. I decided to add this line to the EULA of all my freeware apps:

You may NOT:
* Do evil things with XXX. Evil things include, but are not limited to, promotion of racism, software patents, extreme religion or totalitarian organizations, cyberbullying, or spamming.

( whole EULA here: http://www.rw-designer.com/entry/315 )

I doubt it would have a direct effect, but there may be indirect ones. I hope it will draw attention to the topic and it feels good having "software patents" and "racism" in one sentence.

Will anyone join me?

162

Living Room / Re: App vendors discover a new way to abuse Windows

« on: October 08, 2011, 06:47 AM »

> App vendors discover a way that illustrates how Windows program installations are basically overly complicated, fragmented, and difficult to work with

Is it a problem with abusing Windows, or is it a problem with how Windows sets things up?

-Renegade (October 08, 2011, 03:54 AM)

100% agree - it should be the OS responsibility to set up the file system on a computer in a sensible way. Today, every developer, who wants to improve installation experience on Windows (allow isolated, non-admin installs), ends in the %APPDATA% folder. It is the least of all evils (better than Desktop, better than Start menu folder, possibly better than Documents).

163

General Software Discussion / Re: The confusion about the term "lifetime license"

« on: October 07, 2011, 07:16 PM »

Like tomos said, these are some subscription-based apps ("software as service"). They stop working when the user stops paying the recurring fees. They are mostly web services or MMORPGs, but also regular desktop software. It sounds ridiculous, but this business model may actually be better than the current one (pay once, use until the app becomes obsolete (~5 years?)). If the pricing is right...

But this is not really relevant in this case, a developer offering lifetime whatever is usually bad sign. "Lifetime" usually means "as long as the author chooses to". There is nothing easier than renaming the product or simply stop developing it if the income is insufficient... I think offering X years of free upgrades and eventually overdelivering is better in the long run.

164

Living Room / Re: App vendors discover a new way to abuse Windows

« on: October 07, 2011, 01:10 PM »

Well, exploits are exploits. There will always be holes. That does not mean, applications should not behave correctly. Not requiring admin rights if they are not needed is correct in my book.

BTW If you read carefully, I said the same Eoin said using different words.

---

%APPDATA% is folder like any other, I see nothing insensible there. Granted, if Microsoft designed a "Personal Program Files" folder and named and placed it properly, it would be much better. Such a thing IS needed. We are basically arguing about names.

165

Living Room / Re: App vendors discover a new way to abuse Windows

« on: October 07, 2011, 12:36 PM »

I have to disagree, it really is a good feature. If the program you are installing does not require admin rights, you can be sure, it won't install any adware, a virus or add an invisible service or firewall exception. And if it does, it will only affect one account and not the whole computer. Not requiring admin rights is a step towards portability.

I actually do not like the opposite. Recently, I have chosen not to install some applications, because they required admin rights and I was not sure they won't do more than just "installing themselves". In today's world of adware, one can never be sure.

Though, I agree that installing into %APPDATA% should not be the default behavior. All my apps can be installed without admin rights, but the default target is the good old "Program Files" folder and users must manually override it, if they want to instal to Documents or whatever. I consider this optimal.

166

General Software Discussion / Re: RIOT tool that respects folder hierarchy? (for JPEG compression?)

« on: October 04, 2011, 01:41 PM »

Well, stripping metadata is quite usual when optimizing images - metadata include EXIF info, color profile, etc. They are relatively useless when the pictures are simply displayed online. But it is your choice.

If you want to keep metadata, rename it to PhotoResizeP100IMRSOEQ85.exe

It is not a specialized "RIOT" tool as you call it, it simply resizes .jpegs, but with P100, the physical size remains the same, and it only re-compresses them. Today's digital cameras usually produce relatively large file with unreasonable compression options, so saving a lot of space with negligible quality loss is possible - experiment with the compression quality.

167

General Software Discussion / Re: RIOT tool that respects folder hierarchy? (for JPEG compression?)

« on: October 04, 2011, 12:57 PM »

If you only want to re-compress JPEGs (or strip metadata), you can use my tool PhotoResize.exe http://www.rw-design...r.com/picture-resize

Rename it to PhotoResizeP100IRSOEQ85.exe to recursively process all .jpg file in given folder(s) and overwrite the images. Change the 85 to a quality level you want.

168

General Software Discussion / Re: Cnet's Download.com and the installer scam

« on: September 25, 2011, 08:51 AM »

OK, I appreciate the info. They used to be #1 years ago. I did not mean to imply that your post was not important, I just wanted to say that ignoring them is probably the best that can be done today. They have demonstrated that they only care about money and not about user experience multiple times.

169

Living Room / Re: Question to Everyone: Setting aside the technical meaning, does Donationware...

« on: September 25, 2011, 08:15 AM »

I think, "Pay what you want" implies a kind of business relationship. Once someone pays, they become a customer and they expect to be treated like that. Customers have rights, expectations, needs...

"Donationware" feels more like, well, a charity collecting donations. The donors contribute, because they believe in the cause.

170

General Software Discussion / Re: Cnet's Download.com and the installer scam

« on: September 25, 2011, 06:16 AM »

Nothing tucows does surprises me. I do not bother adding my software there anymore. 8 months until they manage to approve a submission? The outrageous review fees (that apply to freeware too)? The offer to create a 30 second video review for several hundreds USDs? Tucows is a dying money machine. Let's ignore them...

171

General Software Discussion / Re: Help me pick the right name for my software

« on: September 24, 2011, 12:14 PM »

Thanks for the responses! It seems like almost everyone directly or indirectly recommends

RealWorld Paint

or a variation that uses another imaging-related word instead of Paint. It is likely that I will pick this name in the end, and it seems like a natural choice.

But I feel like I am not in control, like the name just happened, not like I chose it. RealWorld is kind of random - I started with 3D editor years ago that was supposed to be called RealWorld Designer, because VirtualWorld Designer was too ordinary, and it stuck. For me, it is a bit hard to pronounce (maybe native speakers do not have this problem) due to the amount of Rs and Ls. The RW is even longer (R-double-U). I have hard time imagining someone recommending the software on the street or in the pub and the other side remembering it correctly. That is the reason I tried to find another name - something that can live without the RealWorld. A general purpose image/animation editor has potentially many more users than an icon editor or a cursor editor and I think an unique and easy to remember name (I can also rank for) could help.

Edit: what would you think about something like RealWorld Paintee?

172

General Software Discussion / Help me pick the right name for my software

« on: September 24, 2011, 08:37 AM »

Hi all,

I know I suck at naming my software, so maybe this time I should ask before making another bad decision.

The program is an image/photo/animation editor (I mentioned it in this topic, when I was looking for beta testers). Until now, it was called Paint.COM, which I thought was funny, but apparently it wasn't to some people. I decided to change it.

Here are some candidates:

RealWorld Paint - unimaginative, but fitting my other tools. Probably hard to remember.

Paint Quest - painting is an adventure, a holy quest :-). It has a gaming feel and could appeal to younger people. I was also thinking to eventually make interactive tutorials, where the users will be given tasks to fulfill, but that would not be done in the near future.

Paint++ - it seems there already is a software called Paint++, but it looks like 1:1 copy of the old Windows Paint and it is likely to die. So, the name is more or less still free. Would probably appeal to programmers.

Qaint - Q = P+1 or maybe Quaint (new English word I learned today, yay!). It sounds good to me, but I am unsure if I can become #1 in Google for the quaint keyword. People would probably misspell qaint. Also, the relation to painting is not straightforward.

P-Paint - short version of Portable Paint.

5Ps - Portable + 3 other adjectives starting with P + Paint.

or...

Thanks for any opinions or suggestions.

173

Living Room / Re: You Selfish E-books! (Contains the F word)

« on: September 21, 2011, 05:39 PM »

Did you ask? 

-mwb1100 (September 21, 2011, 04:10 PM)

No, I am not the right type of person for this. 

174

Living Room / Re: You Selfish E-books! (Contains the F word)

« on: September 21, 2011, 01:15 PM »

As I said before, I am happy with the current model - buying physical books.

But if I got an e-book and did not like it, I would not send any money to the author. And would not download any other of their e-books and waste my time on them.

After seeing the latest Conan the Barbarian in a 3D cinema, I really wished there were a way get my money back.

175

Living Room / Re: You Selfish E-books! (Contains the F word)

« on: September 21, 2011, 12:17 PM »

I don't get the sentiment here.  They're still someone's work.  I also don't get the sentiment that all forms of a media should have the same utility.

-wraith808 (September 21, 2011, 09:55 AM)

I guess I was just trained to think like that. If there is a fixed price tag, I want something physical to own - a real book. If I do not get anything physical, I want to give the amount of money I decide it is worth directly to the author (if they still live) - not to distributors, not to marketing agencies, not to lawyers.

The media licensing is a mess. The license is not tied to the physical medium, because I cannot make copies. The license is not tied to a person, because I do not get a replacement (or a discount) when my book burns or when I am buying a CD of the same album I already bought in the past on LP or MC.

In case of software, we have user license and workstation licenses. That is fine. With books and other media, the distributors are trying to pull something like a user-workstation license that has the worst of both. I do not like that.

I'll just keep buying books. If the distributors decide to throw in a e-book version with it, fine, I may start using that. But buying just the e-book? Not in the near future.