View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
segabob
Joined: 05 Mar 2004 Posts: 79 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:38 am Post subject: Need old version of UCON64 |
|
|
any one know where i can get an older version of UCON64.
The newest version will not work with the (java)Frontend.
And Dos promp command lines are a pain in the butt.
I have look all over the web and you cannot find an arch ive of any of the versions.
If anyone that still using the front end please let me know
Thanks |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dbjh
Joined: 02 Aug 2003 Posts: 167
|
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2004 9:24 pm Post subject: Re: Need old version of UCON64 |
|
|
The author of the Java frontend doesn't maintain it. Apparently it was just a programming exercise for him. I suggest to ask him if he would like to update it. The Java frontend was designed in such a way that it can be customised to a great extend (via the configuration file). Have you ever looked at the configuration file?
I could take over maintenance, but I decided to write a native Win32 and Linux frontend instead. Native (in this context) means that it runs directly under an OS and does not need an extra software layer (like Java). I use a GUI library (wxWidgets, formerly known as wxWindows -- thanks M$) that can be compiled for several OSes, so you needn't be afraid I write one for Linux first and then one for Windows.
BTW if you have good ideas for the new frontend I would like to hear them.
I'd rather not distribute too old versions of uCON64. One reason is that they contain bugs that have been solved in newer versions. In case you encounter a real bug with uCON64 you would have to upgrade anyway.
What exactly would you like to do that you cannot do with the current Java frontend? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
segabob
Joined: 05 Mar 2004 Posts: 79 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2004 2:32 pm Post subject: Java Front end |
|
|
It worked perfect for the last version of Ucon64 before I upgraded.
It will still load up but will not convert any thing It just resets.
It even said on the Web page it will not work with the latest version.
I have to go to a Dos-promt to use Ucon64 now.
It's pretty simple to convert But once you got used to the Frontend you got spoiled |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Filthy
Joined: 20 Jul 2004 Posts: 7
|
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 4:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
I need an older version too. Since the DOS prompt is unavailable in WinXP, there needs to be a front end of some sort. Unfortunately, no one seems to have the older version of ucon64. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dbjh
Joined: 02 Aug 2003 Posts: 167
|
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Filthy wrote: | Since the DOS prompt is unavailable in WinXP, there needs to be a front end of some sort. |
Windows XP does have a command line interpreter ("DOS prompt"). Please read the FAQ a bit. Don't use command.com under Windows XP, use cmd.exe.
Filthy wrote: | Unfortunately, no one seems to have the older version of ucon64. |
Because it contains bugs I don't want to be reminded of ;-) Neither do I want to deal with them anymore.
Really, the new frontend has high priority now. I have to finish it before university starts again (September the 1st). I had one setback, because wxWidgets turned out to be unsuitable for my needs... Now I use FOX. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
timofonic
Joined: 24 Jul 2003 Posts: 80 Location: Europe, Spain, Malaga
|
Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dbjh, do you have mockups about the thinked interface? Could be nice for see it and opine about them
Could be nice if seems as Norton Commander/DOpus4, dreamwriter has some interesting ideas too... Things that could be nice? Make it possible things as rename the name for multigame menu on tototek's carts... When you select a backup unit, personalize the interface for these backup unit... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dbjh
Joined: 02 Aug 2003 Posts: 167
|
Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First I want to finish the basic functionality. Then I can think of features to add. It doesn't make sense to show some pictures now, because the "design" isn't fixed yet. One thing is certain, it's not as general as the Java frontend. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|