Subsector mapping
- Thread starter DElrick
- Start date
BeRKA
SOC-13
There are lots of tools. You can try this web based Random SubSector Generator.
Thanks for that. It's a great site (I've used the LBB cover generator before).
But what I'm after is something I can plug the already created stats into and produce a map. I don't mind doing the work but I'm trying to avoid creating the whole thing from scratch.
BeRKA
SOC-13
* Traveller Universe
* Galactic 2.4 (Yahoo Group)
* Heaven & Earth
* sec2pdf (Makes pdf from sector files)
* Galactic 2.4 (Yahoo Group)
* Heaven & Earth
* sec2pdf (Makes pdf from sector files)
Thunderbolt
SOC-12
The 'Traveller Universe' page talks about it being compatible with Windows NT and how it doesn't support Access 97.
Given that these are last century technologies, should I take this to imply it is a dormant/dead product?
I'd want to run it on SQL Server Express and Windows XP, but if the thing was last revised so many years ago, I'd want to check if other people are running it OK on modern platforms first.
Given that these are last century technologies, should I take this to imply it is a dormant/dead product?
I'd want to run it on SQL Server Express and Windows XP, but if the thing was last revised so many years ago, I'd want to check if other people are running it OK on modern platforms first.
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
It's fine on XP (not tried Vista yet).
The developer is still working on version 2 ... slowly. Real life really does seem to get in the way sometimes. The current version is quite old now in terms of the technology supported.
According to the updates that Hemdian has posted, the next version is based on SQL Server Express (personally I'd prefer Oracle XE). The current version runs on Interbase, still a SQL database. I'm running it quite happily on a laptop with Windows XP SP2. I think there's a known issue over dual (quad?) processors. Details of the problem are on the Traveller Universe website.
Last edited:
I'm the developer of Traveller Universe and here is the latest from Rumour Control:
Version 1.7 is old but it is still supported (I'm still getting support calls for it) and its still in production (I have to burn another batch of disks this weekend for the BITS eBay store). A few months ago I go my first Vista machine and can confirm that Universe WILL run on it ... the install needs to be tweaked, you need to run in compatability mode, and you need to download a file from Microsoft to make the help work, but it does run. If I get time I'll write up my notes on Vista installs and post them.
Version 2 is proceeding ... as Valarian said "slowly". I'll add the word "very". But its certainly not dead. In fact I recently invested in some expensive third-party components for it (paid out of my own pocket). Version 2 will use updated technology, and as such will NOT run on any Win9x machine or on any WinNT machine prior to WinXP. Also, as Valarian said I'm targetting MS SQL Server Express. While InterBase was great at the time it no longer "cuts the mustard". (However I will have a quick look at Oracle XE and see if a port is feasable. On the other hand I'm currently using Oracle 10g at work and don't like it much compared with MS SQL Server 2005.)
Version 1.7 is old but it is still supported (I'm still getting support calls for it) and its still in production (I have to burn another batch of disks this weekend for the BITS eBay store). A few months ago I go my first Vista machine and can confirm that Universe WILL run on it ... the install needs to be tweaked, you need to run in compatability mode, and you need to download a file from Microsoft to make the help work, but it does run. If I get time I'll write up my notes on Vista installs and post them.
Version 2 is proceeding ... as Valarian said "slowly". I'll add the word "very". But its certainly not dead. In fact I recently invested in some expensive third-party components for it (paid out of my own pocket). Version 2 will use updated technology, and as such will NOT run on any Win9x machine or on any WinNT machine prior to WinXP. Also, as Valarian said I'm targetting MS SQL Server Express. While InterBase was great at the time it no longer "cuts the mustard". (However I will have a quick look at Oracle XE and see if a port is feasable. On the other hand I'm currently using Oracle 10g at work and don't like it much compared with MS SQL Server 2005.)
Icosahedron
SOC-14 1K
Oh dear! <sigh>.
Actually, it MIGHT work on Win2K, the documentation on the third-party components is ambiguous. The current range is looking like ...
Windows 2000 (maybe)
Windows 2003
Windows XP
Windows Vista (32 bit and 64 bit)
Windows 2008 (32 bit and 64 bit)
That's four, possibly five, generations of Windows it WILL be compatable with. Windows 3 and Windows 9x are long dead lines. On the Windows NT line NT3.51 and NT4 are long dead, mainstream support for Windows 2000 has ended and will end for Windows XP at the end of this year. (Curiously, for Windows XP only Professional and Tablet will have an extended support phase, not Home or Media Centre. *)
I had to make a choice between fossil tech and current tech ... I chose current tech but hopefully that means it'll also work on Vista's successor when it arrives.
And I'm not excluding earlier versions of Windows just to be snarky, I'm using technologies that are only supported on the above list ... when Beta testing starts (not for a long time yet) if someone thinks they can hack them to work on older machines they are welcome to try.
(* = Last time I checked.)
Last edited:
Icosahedron
SOC-14 1K
They might be long dead to you, but I'm in the land where we tried once to stem the progress of the tide, and I'm still trying to stem the tide of progress.
Personally, I have a deep-rooted objection to phoning Mr Gates everytime I want to reload the software I bought for ten times the price his rival is asking, but I don't want to get into a political debate. It's just one reason why I do what I do.
If you didn't need a Master's in Geekology just to turn it on, I'd have been using the Open Source stuff long ago. AFAIK, that's still about loading this here and that there, then adding a couple of files in this folder and a few more in that folder... I don't know enough to tinker!
All I do is write a couple of letters, visit CotI and poke about with a spreadsheet. I'd still be on Win 95 if it spoke to USB sticks... Grumble, mutter...
There you go, XP is on its way out and I haven't even entered its market.
Of course, you have to go where the market takes you, and I'm well aware I'm a grouchy old fossil. What the hell is Windows 2008? Last I heard, Vista was little more than a view on the horizon. I didn't even know it was on sale yet... Shows how out of touch I am. :nonono:
I know you're not being snarky, Hemdian, it's me being facetious. As I said, you have to follow the market, and I'll have to keep up where I can. Hell, most of my system and star chart generation is done with pencil and paper at present - how outdated is that?
When I find a some computer software that can create custom universes anywhere near as flexibly as P&P I'll invest in it immediately, even if it means buying a dedicated computer to run it on - but I can't see that happening anytime soon. Software, like the hardware, has to be produced for the masses, not for grumpy ascetic heretics like me.
As for hacking in favour of 9x, hackers are all cutting edge guys. They're not going to retrofit anything.
"Ethelbert! Stop laughing and pass me that towel."
and there is the problem with developing software for a specific platform: it can change and break everything previously. But cross-platform development has its own issues, so there is no golden middle.
The next version of Windows, rumor has it, will be significantly more modular. More like Unix & Linux, with a minimal core. And it will, of course, break with everything before. However, as previously mentioned, using a virtual machine will be the only way to run older software using the OS it was written for. And I've heard it may be out late 2009/early 2010: MS is admitting Vista is not working out as planned (the original next version was due 2012 or so). So my guess, based on reading far too much, is that the next version will be like the Apple OSX: start from scratch, don't worry about backwards compatibility, and supply a virtual machine version of XP & Vista. They already have virtual machine software.
And this explains the huge CT computers: not only are the programs huge due to hundreds of years of maintenance patches, but each program has to run in a virtual machine
The next version of Windows, rumor has it, will be significantly more modular. More like Unix & Linux, with a minimal core. And it will, of course, break with everything before. However, as previously mentioned, using a virtual machine will be the only way to run older software using the OS it was written for. And I've heard it may be out late 2009/early 2010: MS is admitting Vista is not working out as planned (the original next version was due 2012 or so). So my guess, based on reading far too much, is that the next version will be like the Apple OSX: start from scratch, don't worry about backwards compatibility, and supply a virtual machine version of XP & Vista. They already have virtual machine software.
And this explains the huge CT computers: not only are the programs huge due to hundreds of years of maintenance patches, but each program has to run in a virtual machine
IMTU, yes, the reference computers are the "Imperial Virtual Machine", for which standard code bases exist. Minimum live performance standards are set, and to use the logo for "IVM Model 1" you have to meet the model 1 spec. Since the logos are property of the Imperium, unlicensed use is treason....
Much smaller dedicated systems are available, some of which are true model 1 true implementations. (I put those at about 20% size, and about 500% cost.)
Much smaller dedicated systems are available, some of which are true model 1 true implementations. (I put those at about 20% size, and about 500% cost.)
jfetters
SOC-14 1K
Pro and Tablet have a high enterprise adoption rate, so the decision on which flavors of XP continue with support was primarily business.
Which all businesses have to do, even for supportability.
Icosahedron
SOC-14 1K
English please, guys.
Let me guess, even the virtual machines (if I'm correctly guessing what they are) probably won't be written to support wayback OS like 9x?
Once upon a time, I could tinker with my car, too. These days I haven't a clue what all the black boxes are for. I used to be able to do a roadside repair by sandpapering the contact breakers - these days I'd need to tow a trailer with its own clean room and twenty technicians...
Gripe, moan...
I have emulators for Mac OS 1 - 6.2.2, So there a re suppouts for many older systems. Also, I have emulators for MS-Dos,Virtualizers for Win/9 & Win XP, and SO me other odd hardware such as the Amiga. Whwt 1 don't have is a system 7-9 emulator, although there are several available.
jfetters
SOC-14 1K
English please, guys.
Sorry.
Actually, they do, and that is one big reason as to what they are for. So a virtual machine is essentially a program that runs a file on the computer you are operating that acts as a separate hard drive for the virtual computer. Most virtual machine software displays the system in its own window, so you see the familiar startup messages that you are used to seeing when turning on the power of your own system. Most VM software should allow you to run MSDOS, and thus a flavor of Win 9x. The hitch is that you have to install the OS on the virtual machine yourself, unless you can find someone who can either do it for you or has done it already and can make a copy of the virtual hard drive.
So yeah, there is some tinkering, I'm afraid...
Similar threads
