Phasing Verticals
 

Tom Ring wrote:

I would gladly pay double without a blink, and I doubt that it would be
that much work, in the long run, to make a Linux version. Your SW and
your call obviously, but you are making a very wrong assumption that
porting a version that runs under a different OS takes nearly the same
development effort.

I would gladly assist in making it work. I have no idea what language
it is written in, but as long as it is not in something MS specific it
shouldn't be that hard to port.

*Sigh*. I get this a lot.

The main program, 70,000 lines of code at last count, is in Visual Basic
6 and incorporates many direct calls to the Windows API for speed and
increased functionality. The calculating engines (a few tens of
thousands of lines of code) and some main program routines are in
Fortran, and make use of commercial math libraries for fast calculation
of some complex functions. The Fortran routines also make a limited
number of Windows API calls.

The port of a functioning EZNEC program from DOS to Windows, back when
EZNEC was somewhat smaller, took me about two years of full time work.
After some short experiments with VB.NET, it looks like a port to that
(Windows) language probably would take something like six months, plus
an unknown amount of time to find and solve the huge number of subtle
bugs caused by the port. But not only would the user not gain anything,
there would actually be a negative impact, so I don't plan on doing it.
Converting to a C Windows program would probably be a one or two year
project. That might make it easier, although by no means simple, to port
to Linux, but would be of no benefit to Windows users so the Linux
market would have to pay for the effort. Sorry, you'd need to pay a lot
more than twice the current price. (I happily run my EZNEC business for
a fraction of what I can make doing consulting, but I don't work for
nothing. Contrary to what seems like a common perception, I'm not
retired but earn my living from EZNEC and consulting.)

I encourage anyone who thinks it's a simple matter to develop a Linux
program of the level of EZNEC to have at it. It's an untapped market.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Phasing Verticals
 

I'd like to add a question.

Why, instead of trying to get the Windows program developers to spend
countless hours developing programs for the minuscule Linux market,
don't the Linux users spend a little time getting Wine to work properly?
If it seems to simple to port programs to Linux, why is it so hard to
get open-source Wine to work?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Phasing Verticals
 

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
.. .
Roy Lewallen wrote:

Tom Ring wrote:


Hint hint Roy. There are a lot of us out here that use only, or almost
only, Linux.


The "lot" comprises about 5% of the total market at the outside. Are you
willing to pay 20 times as much for EZNEC as Windows users?


I would gladly pay double without a blink, and I doubt that it would be
that much work, in the long run, to make a Linux version. Your SW and
your call obviously, but you are making a very wrong assumption that
porting a version that runs under a different OS takes nearly the same
development effort.

I would gladly assist in making it work. I have no idea what language it
is written in, but as long as it is not in something MS specific it
shouldn't be that hard to port.

tom
K0TAR

Hi Tom

I recognize that you are discussing *programming* and that you know alot
more about computers than I do. But, I am so impressed with the capability
of the EZNEC as a tool for learning that I wanted to remind other readers
that a "good enough for running EZNEC" computer can be purchased for no
more than $50.00.

Jerry

Phasing Verticals
 

Roy Lewallen wrote:

I encourage anyone who thinks it's a simple matter to develop a Linux
program of the level of EZNEC to have at it. It's an untapped market.

And it points out that when people look into buying a computer or
operating system, they should pick what tools (software) they want to
run, and build their system around that. Most people buy a computer or
install an OS, then want vendors to write for that.

I'm coming in a little late on this discussion, has EZNEC been tried on
the Intel based Mac's running windoze?

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Phasing Verticals
 

Jerry Martes wrote:
"Tom Ring" wrote in message
.. .

Roy Lewallen wrote:


Tom Ring wrote:


Hint hint Roy. There are a lot of us out here that use only, or almost
only, Linux.


The "lot" comprises about 5% of the total market at the outside. Are you
willing to pay 20 times as much for EZNEC as Windows users?


I would gladly pay double without a blink, and I doubt that it would be
that much work, in the long run, to make a Linux version. Your SW and
your call obviously, but you are making a very wrong assumption that
porting a version that runs under a different OS takes nearly the same
development effort.

I would gladly assist in making it work. I have no idea what language it
is written in, but as long as it is not in something MS specific it
shouldn't be that hard to port.

tom
K0TAR


Hi Tom

I recognize that you are discussing *programming* and that you know alot
more about computers than I do. But, I am so impressed with the capability
of the EZNEC as a tool for learning that I wanted to remind other readers
that a "good enough for running EZNEC" computer can be purchased for no
more than $50.00.

Bingo! Or making that Linux box Dual-boot.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Phasing Verticals
 

On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 04:46:00 GMT, "Jerry Martes"
wrote:

Hi Tom

I recognize that you are discussing *programming* and that you know alot
more about computers than I do. But, I am so impressed with the capability
of the EZNEC as a tool for learning that I wanted to remind other readers
that a "good enough for running EZNEC" computer can be purchased for no
more than $50.00.

Jerry

Very good point indeed. Additionally, for those who do not wish to
have two computers on the desk there's always the option of having a
dual boot system. That's what I use here and have the best of both
worlds.

Danny, K6MHE

Phasing Verticals
 

Roy Lewallen wrote:
I'd like to add a question.

Why, instead of trying to get the Windows program developers to spend
countless hours developing programs for the minuscule Linux market,
don't the Linux users spend a little time getting Wine to work properly?
If it seems to simple to port programs to Linux, why is it so hard to
get open-source Wine to work?


I have a computer with Linux installed. Perhaps I is a dummy, but even
just installing programs, or searching for drivers is a nuisance. I'm
always told how such and such flavor of Linux doesn't have that problem,
but I'm on flavor number three, and still waiting for I don't have
enough experience in it to make a firm judgement, but I think we are
supposed to be happy if the operating system and hardware just works,
let alone the software.

Awaiting my one-way trip to Linux hell for what I just wrote....

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Phasing Verticals
 

On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 20:22:39 -0800, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

why is it so hard to get open-source Wine to work?

Hi Roy,

Non portable design issues inherent in self-serving Microsoft
products. [This is not an aspersion on EZNEC or similar products or
vendors, it is simply the fact of life when you are tightly wed to the
Microsoft platform.]

M$ is a marketing company, not a development company. Ask any vendor
facing Vista, especially those whose Security niche market (Symantec,
McAfee) is being blind-sided.

M$ is claiming to have gotten it (Security) right this time. Of
course, this claim is indistinct from any similar claim made in any
week's press release for the past two decades. Their LATEST release
of (proprietary) Internet Explorer came complete with a feature that
allowed hackers to take over your machine. This news, too, is
indistinct from any industry weekly press release for those same
decades.

The sub-text response to your question is, "Why would Wine try to
emulate everything given this level of jeopardy?" At some point (and
as you basically offered Tom) you simply start over and do it right.
The alternative is that dedicated soul who finds their mission in
bringing down the evil empire by burrowing into every line of reverse
engineered code.

M$ and other industries think they dominate through sheer force of
numbers. One Jon Lech Johansen proved that both Hollywood and Apple
cannot summon up enough engineering head count to withstand being
whipped by a single individual. Of course, both Hollywood and Apple
relied on Marketing to do the Security issues, not their legions of
design engineers (many of whom are equal or better than Johansen).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Phasing Verticals
 

On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 11:16:13 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Awaiting my one-way trip to Linux hell for what I just wrote....

Hi Mike,

Did you purchase your ticket through Red Hat or Suse's vendor support
for a fee? Or did you roll your own for free?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Phasing Verticals
 

Mike Coslo wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote:
I'd like to add a question.

Why, instead of trying to get the Windows program developers to spend
countless hours developing programs for the minuscule Linux market,
don't the Linux users spend a little time getting Wine to work
properly? If it seems to simple to port programs to Linux, why is it
so hard to get open-source Wine to work?


I have a computer with Linux installed. Perhaps I is a dummy, but
even just installing programs, or searching for drivers is a nuisance.
I'm always told how such and such flavor of Linux doesn't have that
problem, but I'm on flavor number three, and still waiting for I don't
have enough experience in it to make a firm judgement, but I think we
are supposed to be happy if the operating system and hardware just
works, let alone the software.

Awaiting my one-way trip to Linux hell for what I just wrote....

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Wow........when I posted back about phasing verticals and my questions
were answered by Roy, I mentioned sort of half hardily that I would
have to use Windows to run EZNEC. Looks like my post took on a life of
it's own. I'm what you can call a "Joe sixpack" when it comes to a
computer and I have found the latest distributions of Fedora, SUSE, or
Ubuntu to install and find all my drivers and hardware without a hitch.
The finished install will give you a system that will be able to surf
the Internet, do E-mail, chat with your buddy's on an IM if that is your
bag. comes with a fine office suite, photo imaging software etc.

The only drawback is propriety stuff such as multimedia programs etc.
That stuff is available but it has to be installed later and that's
where the "one-way trip to Linux Hell" begins for the first timer.
although now even that is becoming point and click with the latest
distros out there. I boot 4 different flavors plus Windows on one computer.

For those that want to give Linux a try for the first time my advice is
to install it on a separate computer just for Linux. It behaves nice on
a Windows box, but if you are not somewhat familiar with partitioning
and writing to the MBR for a dual boot and getting it back to a Windows
default if you mess up, keep it on another machine.

There is plenty of help on the Web, just do a Google search for a guide
for which ever distro you have. The best part?...........with a
broadband connection you can download and install Linux in half a day or
less for FREE. check out http://distrowatch.com/ and pick your poison.

This is not quite on topic for antennas, so excuse my rant on Linux. For
me it's great, for you, maybe not. It's not Windows and I hope it never
is. It's a Unix type system like a Mac, with a hell of a lot less worry
about viruses and spyware.

John / K1BXI