|
|
Post by liljuni0r on Mar 19, 2008 3:55:33 GMT 1
I haven't posted here since ~rc4 or something. Doesn't mean I still don't check by often  Anyways, I was playing 1.0 Final (Bugfix 1) and I can't recall if this was in an older RC, but can the currently selected rom name be white? Sure you can argue that your attention span (however short it may be) should allow to remember what rom you just highlighted, buuut... this is first and foremost an aesthetic request. Thank you for your time, good sirs. |
|
|
|
Post by tgwaste on Mar 19, 2008 7:01:57 GMT 1
ya the blue makes its hard to read the rom name you've selected.. the old color (a few versions ago) was clearer
|
|
|
|
Post by _Em on Mar 19, 2008 16:52:05 GMT 1
I agree |
|
|
|
Post by tgwaste on Mar 19, 2008 17:15:54 GMT 1
well that settles it.. everyone should go pay $25 right now so that you can change the color!!  hehe |
|
|
|
Post by _Em on Mar 19, 2008 18:18:42 GMT 1
Hmm... I have SkinUI disabled for LJP to free up memory... maybe I should enable it for the launcher.
|
|
|
|
Post by metaview on Mar 20, 2008 11:23:04 GMT 1
Well, who ever sends me the $25 will get white selection text in LJP. Ok, just kidding, I will fix it.
|
|
|
|
Post by setsuna203 on Mar 20, 2008 23:56:02 GMT 1
I see, next time metaview will include more and more flaws so he can earn more money... :-P
|
|
|
|
Post by tgwaste on Mar 21, 2008 1:08:32 GMT 1
yep.. like a REAL programmer.. |
|
|
|
Post by samphex on Mar 21, 2008 5:15:52 GMT 1
please say you didn't light a bulb in your head tinnus.
let ljp be free.
let the world be in peace
We do not need anymore Micro$ofts
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by countbuggula on Mar 21, 2008 15:33:15 GMT 1
Considering everything we're working with here is open-source, I think we all know just how likely that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by samphex on Mar 21, 2008 16:20:28 GMT 1
Considering everything we're working with here is open-source, I think we all know just how likely that is. *GASP! very likely?  |
|
|
|
Post by _Em on Mar 21, 2008 18:56:41 GMT 1
Not the EULA... it would go against the copyright declaration (which means it would be a criminal offense in the US to flout it).
|
|
|
|
Post by tgwaste on Mar 21, 2008 19:47:56 GMT 1
so how does nesEM get away with it?
|
|
|
|
Post by _Em on Mar 21, 2008 20:02:11 GMT 1
Get away with what? NesEm is a commercial closed-source venture. If it were found they were actually using someone else's open source code, they could be sued by the original authors.
|
|
|
|
Post by tgwaste on Mar 21, 2008 20:27:38 GMT 1
oh so they made it 100% from scratch? didnt know that. |
|
|
|
Post by countbuggula on Mar 21, 2008 20:30:42 GMT 1
None of us are actually coding emulators here - we're just taking existing open-source emulators and porting them to the PalmOS (and many more platforms with LJX).
|
|
|
|
Post by _Em on Mar 21, 2008 20:44:07 GMT 1
Well, Tinnus and Metaview are doing a bit more than just porting -- they've also been applying bugfixes the the core code from time to time and adding extended code for input methods etc. But for most devices out there, someone has already produced an open source code emulator everyone else is free to hack at and improve/port/modify.
|
|
maxer
Junior Member
Sit, Ubu, sit! Good dog! Woof!
Posts: 77
|
Post by maxer on Mar 22, 2008 0:55:53 GMT 1
oh so they made it 100% from scratch? didnt know that. 100% from scratch until it is found otherwise ...  |
|
maxer
Junior Member
Sit, Ubu, sit! Good dog! Woof!
Posts: 77
|
Post by maxer on Mar 22, 2008 0:57:30 GMT 1
also - 3 cheers for Tinnus and Metaview - for they really have been putting blood sweat and tears into this project, not just porting readily available open source code
|
|
|
|
Post by countbuggula on Mar 22, 2008 3:30:24 GMT 1
Well I didn't say that the porting was a simple process, or that they didn't inject their own optimizations and useful features, but they're not changing the emulator core by doing those things.
That doesn't make what they do any less worthy though.
|
|
hehe
