The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
What are the 'publication' requirements of Kickstarter though? You might not necessarily want to decribe your intentions in enough detail to attract funding, for fear someone else would get in before you?
If its MS based, look up BizSpark - they offer a lot of help (although I think you need to already have a company before you can join, but worth checking out) they have access to venture capitalists who may be able to throw money at you.
Advice I remember from venture capitalists includes:
DO NOT ask for money to pay yourself while you develop. Ask for more money than you want, and ask for it to buy hardware, furnish your office, buy machinery to develop prototypes etc.
Be Honest - don't try to be coy with your idea thinking they may want to steal it - that's not the business they are in.
Be prepared - they get thousands of people telling them they have a unique idea that nobody has ever thought of - only to find out that lots of people have thought of it, but there's a very good reason why they haven't proceeded with it/made any money out of it!
They need a plan. OK - you're going to develop this app, and sell x thousand which will make you and your inverters a reasonable whack of cash. What next? How big is your initial market, and how big is the potential market - if the potential market isn't huge, find out how it can be!
I had (indeed, have) a great idea that the investors agreed was a great idea - but my total potential market was too small for them to get out of bed for, and the amount of money I required was just small change to them so they again weren't interested (although they were very helpful and the BizSpark program provided free access to them, which was great)
the alternatives, I suppose, are Kickstarter, relatives and friends, the bank (loan not robbery) or the lottery
Was finally able to install SharePoint Server 2013 in Windows Server 2012 in Hyper-V on the Windows 8 Boot Camp partition.
Here are some impressions / notes for people who are considering a similar route:
The Beast. SharePoint is a real PITA to get installed, but it seems that's the case regardless of environment (had the same issue in VirtualBox on OS X and Hyper-V on Windows 8).
Virtual Machines. Hyper-V comes with Windows 8, which is a godsend. This allows you to create virtual machines without third-party software.
Resources. A VM with 12GB of RAM is evidently enough to develop for SharePoint, though the requirements state 24GB. It also requires 4 CPU cores, which is OK since this Mac has 8.
Backup. I can boot into OS X and backup my Windows partition (57GB of 300GB used) to a single compressed file (18GB) in under 4 minutes. If you don't have an SSD, Christmas is around the corner.
Boot Camp. Boot Camp installs some extra software in your Windows install, and it mostly works for Windows 8 (it's meant for Windows 7). Only hiccup so far is that using the "restart in OS X" button doesn't work, but holding down the OPTION key during boot works fine.
Resolution. The retina display is nice for working with VM's, but on my Windows install I lowered my resolution to full HD (I don't need the extra pixels).
I've had a few issues with my Mac, but good bits more than make up for them.
My thoughts, exactly. But what else are they going to report on in order to sell more advertising?
It's interesting (and depressing) to me to look back over my adult life, and realize that not once has my Party offered me a credible candidate to vote FOR, though the other Party has had no trouble fielding candidates I wanted badly enough to lose that I forced myself to vote. If one Party can consistently offer up candidates who are evil and incompetent, one would think that the other Party would have enough sense to offer a clear alternative. But, Nooooo....
If you want mainstream buy-in, provide for the consumer. Remember that the consumer is lazy (like me). I want to use your thing, likely on Windows, give me binaries I can use. I don't really want to compile it.
If you are going to make me compile, package the whole thing in one spot. I don't want to have to hunt down and download half the internet just to see if your library will work for me.
Why no VS projects? I'm lazy remember, I don't want to be messing with makefiles and command line compilation - I'm not hardcore like you.
In this instance, libgeotiff, but it seems a common malaise. Almost everytime I've read about features of an OS lib and thought 'Sounds interesting, I might be able to use that' I find I have to download their source, and some other lib and a different framework etc. Then figure out how to compile it in Windows - which often seems to require code changes, modifications to makefiles and the like.
Generally I don't actually have time to figure it out, especially if it's a bit of a speculative inquiry. I get the impression that some OS proponents do it deliberately, being so rabidly anti-Microsoft or anti-PC, but that smacks of cutting off your nose to spite your face to me.
Some, like GIMP, provide well for Windows users. Some do provide win-binaries, but don't seem to emphasise them or market them very well, others don't give you anything.
ROI is usually so low for me, I often turn to closed solutions I can BUY and use straight-away, which is surely more 'harmful' to the OS movement??
I feel your pain. It is a hassle to go on to try several libraries and see which would work best and face those bizarre errors. It comes to the point I am completely surprised when one of those suddenly work out-of-the-box, specially when it is C/C++ code.
But by the way, it turns out I am also the developer of an open source library - so if you find anything to rant about it, please let mw know!
Well you have to pay for VS, makefile are free, that's why!
Codeplex did make MS-opensource better friend, yet it mostly worked for C# ...
Most C++ opensource project are only using opensource tools. There is only one open source cross platform world accept tool for C++, it's makefile!
I know it's a pain!
But... did you know (Myself learned quite recently) that... there is a way to convert makefile to visual studio (I stumbled upon it recently but forgot and can't find it again!) I think it might be a make option...
try "make --?" and see if one option fits the bill...
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.
They could use VS Express perhaps? But surely, providing support for 'consumerist' developers running Windows and using VS would substantially increase their potential pool of contributors? Which I would think they would see as a benefit.
The 'OS project must only use OS tools' attitude again seems needlessly self-limiting to me. OK, support other OS projects, but not to the exclusion of a potentially large pool of time-poor developers!
I don't know whether to feel hurt, offended or "uggh fire".
Well, keep in mind that I was also taking a potshot at myself, having hosted a couple open source projects. But I agree with the OP, it is one of my frustrations as well, and is why, when I was in the heyday of MyXaml, I tried to be as thorough as possible (granted, the point of that project was the code, but I also provided a lot of examples in binary and source.)