|
Hey everyone, I hope this isn't too off-topic. I'm very keen to develop software for the Xbox 360, and ideally I'd want to do it in C#. At the moment neither of those things are possible though.
From what I've read, Microsoft is planning to open up development of the console, but I'm not sure by how much. I haven't read anything about them porting .NET to the Xbox 360 at all.
So my plan is to find out how many people share my interest, and to try and get a petition going to get some support for the idea.
Here is my text for the petition at the moment... if people could tell me what they think, what I should change, etc, I'd be really greatful. Once I've got enough feedback, I'll stick it up on PetitionOnline.com and try and get a good number of signatures.
Once again, sorry if it's off topic... this seemed like the best place to find interested people.
----------------
Xbox 360 Development with the .NET Framework Petition
"At this time, access to development tools for the Xbox 360 video game console is limited to developers working on approved titles for licensed publishers. This will change over time..." [1]
This petition is to encourage Microsoft to use the Xbox 360 console to promote .NET development, and in turn encourage developers (both professionals and hobbyists) to create games and applications that would run on the Xbox 360 under the .NET CLR.
This would allow any developer to exploit the power of the Xbox 360 and its convenient location in the living room without being hindered by requirements such as backing from a publisher or distribution costs.
Using the .NET framework gives a secure and isolated sandbox for applications to run in, which can be used to safeguard the Xbox 360 and the owner's data against malicious or buggy code.
An example of how this could be achieved is as follows:
The Xbox 360 Dashboard could have an "Xbox 360 Addons" area. This area could integrate with a site such as GotDotNet.com to allow Xbox 360 users to browse, download, rate and potentially buy .NET applications that have been written specifically for the Xbox 360.
The user could run these applications in the knowledge that the .NET sandbox provided by the Xbox 360 would protect their console from malicious code, and return them safely to the Dashboard should the application crash. Should an application hang (e.g. in an infinite loop) a special button (for example the Start button) could bring up a menu to terminate the application and return to the Dashboard.
For extra security, permission from the user would be required to enable an application to access features such as the hard disk (especially write access), the network (and therefore the internet), and extra accessories such as webcams.
Applications would have access to a managed DirectX interface to enable them to make full use of the console's hardware.
None of these features would be required to exist from the launch of the Xbox 360. Instead they could be added as part of a routine update to the Dashboard though Xbox Live.
Finally, none of this would be likely up upset Microsoft's revenue stream from games sales. Any large development project would still require the marketing, support, ease of use, and all the other benefits that comes with distributing a game through traditional channels.
In addition, Microsoft could implement some kind of payment scheme for downloaded Xbox 360 .NET applications through which they could get additional revenue.
This petition has been signed both by those who would like the opportunity to develop for the Xbox 360 using the .NET framework, and by those who would like the additional range of applications and games that could potentially be made available in the comfort of their living room.
[1] http://www.xbox.com/en-US/dev/developingforxbox360.htm
|
|
|
|
|
An interesting idea, but I don't think you'll get very far with it. The problem is the Microsoft (and Sony for that matter) sell consoles at a loss and make up the money by licensing games. If people could write and sell their own stuff for the xbox without giving Microsoft their cut then Microsoft would lose money.
From what I've heard Sony's latest PSP firmware upgrade did, amongst other things, lock out a lot of hacks that people had been using to write their own PSP apps. Sony doesn't get a cut from homebrewed apps so they don't want them on the PSP. Microsoft will no doubt take the same stance.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm completely with you 100%. I've been waiting to hear if they were going to do something in .NET so I could pursue a career in game dev. Where do I sign up?
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting but I'm not sure it will fly. Is there even a .Net Framework for the XP Media Center? (I honesty don't know either way) Does XBox360 even have the concept of "user" let alone principals?
Ultimately, I suspect the don't want to "open" any part of the XBox 360 due to lowering the bar for the evil specter of "piracy". If any Joe Programmer can write a C# program that can create a secure channel from the hard drive to the audio/video codec then what is the point of DMR or other security features they try to design into these things? Sure that would be great for us but rotten for MS.
So I guess I need to see exactly how they are going to open the platform up. If it is anything more pesky then what needs to be done for developing for PocketPC then forget it. If the API available to hobbiests is only a small subset where you can only create "toys" then forget it. Then the ubiquitous "someone" needs to implement a .Net Framework that is hopefully on par of the Compact version if not better *plus* documentation. All of this is some resource coming from somewhere...
In short, it would be nice but I don't know if it is even in MS's best interest let alone a good idea. Lower level programming on highly specialized hardware platforms is...how to put it...not as "fun" as a general computing platform. I can't begin to think of what I would put on an XBox 360 since it is not a standard computing platform...
|
|
|
|
|
|
All the documentation and code examples I have seen for the WaitAny function states that this is a static function residing in the WaitHandle class. When I try to utilize this in my C# code I get the error message "System.Threading.WaitHandle does not contain a definition for WaitAny". (I am using ManualResetEvent and Threads within my application without any problems).
|
|
|
|
|
public static int WaitAny(WaitHandle[] waitHandles);
public static int WaitAny(WaitHandle[] waitHandles, int millisecondsTimeout, bool exitContext);
public static int WaitAny(WaitHandle[] waitHandles, TimeSpan timeout, bool exitContext);
xacc-ide 0.0.99-preview2 (now with integrated debugger)
|
|
|
|
|
I have this function:
[WebMethod]<br />
public string SetUserInfo(string AuthID, DataSet dg2)<br />
{<br />
if (AuthID=="********")<br />
{<br />
Oconn.Open();<br />
da.Update(dg2);<br />
Oconn.Close();<br />
return "it seems to have worked.";<br />
}<br />
else<br />
{<br />
return "Your Authentication Failed";<br />
}<br />
<br />
}<br />
and this is my da (dataAdapter) var:
public SqlDataAdapter da = new<br />
SqlDataAdapter();
but it keeps coming back with an error: "Update unable to find
TableMapping['Table'] or DataTable 'Table'"
http://digg.com
|
|
|
|
|
You should supply a DataTable named as Table in WebService function inputs(DataSet dg2)
|
|
|
|
|
public string SetUserInfo(string AuthID, DataSet dg2)
{
if (AuthID=="********")
{
Oconn.Open();
string connection = "server = localhost;database=urdatabase;uid=urid;pwd=urpswd";
string updatedata = "update urtable set AuthID = " + " '" + this.textbox1.text + "where AuthID = "********";
SqlConenction conn = new SqlConnection(connection );
SqlCommad cmdupdate = new SqlCommad(updatedata ,conn);
da.Fill(udataset,"urtable");
Oconn.Close();
}
else
{
return "Your Authentication Failed";
}
}
Maybe this helps u
Regards;
|
|
|
|
|
Hi everybody.
I load an assembly into another AppDomain, not a default one. As there is no way to unload the assembly, I need to unload the domain. This is where the app hangs.
The problem is this assembly has references to one dll, currently not performing any work.
I tried this:
1. Setting the assembly to null,
2. Implementing a ClassFactory and returning an interface of the object, then removing it,
3. Making assembly to implement the IDisposable interface.
None of this works. All examples on the Net just shows how to create AppDomains, load assemblies and then unload the AppDomain. None of those show what happens if the assembly has referenced assemblies.
Thank you for your help.
Sarajevo, Bosnia
|
|
|
|
|
I believe you also must unload the referenced assemblies. Is there a reason you cannot do this?
Picture a huge catholic cathedral. In it there's many people, including a gregorian monk choir. You know, those who sing beautifully. Then they start singing, in latin, as they always do: "Ad hominem..."
-Jörgen Sigvardsson
|
|
|
|
|
There is no way to unload the assembly at all. You can do this under Framework 2.0 but not under 1.1.
The only way is to unload the AppDomain, and it is clearly said that way at the Microsoft site.
The main assembly does not "realize" the AppDomain it is in is getting unloaded, so that it can do a clean up or something.
Also important to note is that no unmanaged code is accessed anywhere, so this is not the reason.
Thanks.
Sarajevo, Bosnia
|
|
|
|
|
Right, I was just saying that you could load the referenced assembly in the same appdomain and then upload that appdomain.
Picture a huge catholic cathedral. In it there's many people, including a gregorian monk choir. You know, those who sing beautifully. Then they start singing, in latin, as they always do: "Ad hominem..."
-Jörgen Sigvardsson
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, he probably meant AppDomain.Unload, but this is not working.
I will try today to impement a WaitHandle to set a ManualResetEvent so that the assembly stop processing if the service singals that it should stop, so hopefully the unload will work.
The funny thing is that this area is much improvedin Framework 2.0, you can do anything with unloading single assemblies from the AppDomain.
Thanks.
Sarajevo, Bosnia
|
|
|
|
|
I've tried loading assemblies that in turn refer to other assemblies in an AppDomain and it worked.
mirano wrote: This is where the app hangs.
Have you implemented any finalizers in your code? It's very much possible that one of the finalizers hung and that resulted in the hang?
Regards
Senthil
_____________________________
My Blog | My Articles | WinMacro
|
|
|
|
|
Can anyone help me with this:
I have a windows service(Already created)
That I want to read app.config,
and launch a DLL, (NOT an exe...)
This DLL, will also be called by a webpage at some point,
which is why we are using a dll, and not an exe...
(It is hard to shell an exe from a webpage inside the corp firewall)
Any suggestions? Comments?
Thanks,
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
What do you mean "launch a DLL"? Assemblies and shared objects contain executable stuff but without a context to run against its pointless. As far as the platform knows, it is just a collection of functions. By itself, there is no execution instructions or order let alone rhyme or reason so how can it ever be launched?
The purpose of a "service" is to often do non-"user interactive" tasks so why would you want the service to run anything external? Why not incorportate the functionality inside of the service itself?
I suspect you either misunderstand the purpose of the assembly/shared object or you need to provide more information.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys!
I have a question to do:
i wanna know how to check if a task is executing or not..(programmatically i mean)
thank you
Enrico
|
|
|
|
|
Checkout the Process[^] class and it's Responding property along with it's GetProcesses method.
RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome
|
|
|
|
|
I have a openFileDialog which allows the user to specify the location of an application to open. He also selects times to open and close the application. Now all I need to know how to do is run the application.
So ... does anyone know how to execute an external application that has the path to the executable specified?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
System.Diagnostics.Process
here is an example of running PING with some arguments:
<code>
using System.Diagnostics;
public void RunPing()
{
Process p = new Process();
p.StartInfo.Arguments = "www.codeproject.com";
p.StartInfo.FileName = "ping.exe";
p.StartInfo.WindowStyle = ProcessWindowStyle.Normal;
p.Start();
p.WaitForExit(5000);
}
</code>
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
My network has a restriction and it doesnt allow me to download files from the internet for eq. .zip, .exe, .doc etc...... i believe they have restricted download for all possible file extensions. But i was amazed to see that it does allow me to download zip files from certain sites for eg. i am able to download the zip file from this loacation
https://www.microsoftelearning.com/ek_content/content/enus_085636/lsn_2/tpc_b/enus_085636_02b_4_procedures.zip[^]
but i am not able to download the zip file for this location
http://codeproject.com/miscctrl/gridctrl/gridctrl_demo225.zip[^]
Can anyone explain me why this is happening.
Regards
Deepak
|
|
|
|
|
No offense to you, but you can probably get a better answer in a different forum than the c# forum. I'll do the best I can though:
Firewalls allow the ability to restrict/allow on a URL name basis. Whoever set up your network probably has codeproject.* allowed.
|
|
|
|