=?iso-8859-1?q?eep=b2?= // User Search

=?iso-8859-1?q?eep=b2?= // User Search

1  ...  3  4  5  6  7  8  ...  13  |  

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 6, 1999, 2:51pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] You seem to have a problem with basic reading comprehension. Not being able to AFFORD a 3D card doesn't make you an idiot. Using 3D apps WITHOUT a 3D card DOES. Read more carefully.

>

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 6, 1999, 8:59pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] Dude, you ARE an idiot. First of all, it's not "S3-directx-based-video card", but "S3 DX-based vid card". DX is a name of a 3D chip made by S3. They are VERY cheap (in price AND quality) but they are still 3D nonetheless. You seem to have extrapolation problems. Is English your native language?

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 6, 1999, 9:03pm
[View Quote] > Grover had a P100 until about 4 months ago. Now I have a PII-400. AW ran fine
> on both. Needless to say, it runs better on the PII-400, but 90% of the time it
> bogged down, it was because of idioticly agressive scenes (full of 25-frame
> animations and 3000-vert objects) demanding so much RAM my hard drive went
> a-chugging. RAM is much more important to AW than pure processing speed, imho-
> Before the hard drive light came on, I rarely had a complaint with my P100.
> 3fps isn't good enough to play an action game, but AW ain't an action game so it
> never bothered me.

Shyea right. AW ran like shit on your P100 and you know it. I have a Pentium-class AMD-K5-PR133 (99MHz) and AW runs like shit on it. Why are you defending AW so much? You know its 3D engine sucks so get off the debate stint, eh? CPU is the most important part in 3D rendering (and if AW supported 3D hardware better, the 3D CPU would be next important). RAM is secondary (or triary).

> Besides, if you don't like yer car, you just buy one you like better, duh!

Right, and in this case, the car is AW, not a computer. Changing analogies to try and prove your point ain't gonna work...

[View Quote]

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 6, 1999, 9:09pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] Um, how clearer can I BE? If YOU don't think AW is a 3D application, you truly ARE an idiot. Perhaps you need to go find out what computer 3D, and what Renderware, are. Then perhaps you'll get a clue. Start at http://tnlc.com/rw/ (my site) and you might just learn something...assuming you understand basic English...

> Or do you think I should stop using awb cuz I haven't got a 3d-card.
> Actually I do have one, (Viper330) but unfortunately this card is not
> supported, because it can't render in a window. Or do you mean 3dfx-cards
> when you say 3d-cards? Well a Viper (or any other Direct3d-card) *is* not a
> 3dfx-card but it *is* a 3d-card.

Nope, wrong again. You seem to have a problem with basic reading comprehension. If I MEANT 3Dfx cards, I would've STATED 3Dfx, but I didn't, did I? Nope. Stop reading more into what I'm stating. This ain't neurosurgery, sport. The Diamond V330 is too supported (just not well in the RenderWare Direct3D driver). The Riva 128 chip can't do rendering in a window? I thought only 3Dfx Voodoo/Voodoo² chips had that problem...

> P.S.: Talking problems: Appearantly you have a problem with basic human communication.
> You could be a little less offensive and short-tempered. (euphemism)

I communicate fine. You're the one who has problems with basic reading comprehension. And I offend when offended. Your ignorance and idiocy offend me. :)

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 8, 1999, 2:59pm
[View Quote] > I'm beginning to think your AMD is the cause, Eep... I had a Cyrix 686/PR150
> (now a P2/450 :) ) and AW ran "ok" on it... got sluggish (<2fps) in Tyrell's
> area but then Tyrell's area is slow even on the 450... most of the time I
> got a fairly decent 4fps at 40-50m vis... And AW *flies* on the 450, assuming
> I'm, again, not in an area like Tyrell's where it's about the same as the
> 150 was anywhere else (but with higher vis - 60).

A PR150 is better than a PR133 so of course AW will run a little better on it, Dth.

> to try and prove your point ain't gonna work...
>
> grover meant you could buy a better real-time 3D building environment. Of
> course, there doesn't seem to be much of a supply...

Exactly. Grover's analogy was irrelevant in this discussion. AW is THE best online 3D VR chat-build environment out there at this time. And that's not saying much...

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 8, 1999, 3:02pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] When did I say speed was the ONLY factor worth considering? I never did. I said it was the most IMPORTANT. Bells and whistles are fine, providing they attract people to a car that can actually run adequately...

>
> How is that changing the analogy??? If you're comparing AW's 3D engine to the motor, and options like a sunroof to the extra little nicities in AW, than you're saying that the AW-car is a certain combination of engine, styling and options. And if in RL you don't like the combination of engine/styling and options, and the dealer says "sorry, that's the only engine we offer" than you
> just hit the road and buy a sports car. Just as in RL, there are tons of other 3D programs out there with different combos of rendering engines and bells & whistles for you to choose from... By your own arguments you say that other programs out there are pure speed at the omission of the nicities. So if speed is your only concern, why not switch software to something more your liking?

Speed ISN'T my only concern so your confusion about what I meant negates your new car analogy.

> Well, that was a rhetorical question, but I think I know the answer: it's the nicities that make AW. TR III has a fast engine and good graphics. But lacks such fundamental nicities as a simple chat interface! Which pretty much cripples it's usefulness. Same with Quake.

Actually I could care less about that chat interface. All I'm concerned about is being able to build an environment in 3D. AW offers this but TR doesn't. However, TR's environment is much more advanced (and better performance) than AW is...and both were created at about the same time.

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 8, 1999, 3:05pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] Fairness is relative. Within the context, only idiots assume without further research. Cubic knew I was already talking about 3D cards so why would I bring up a special DirectX-based vid card?? Hello...look at Cubic's responses to anything on 3D. He doesn't know what he's talking about. In my mind, all things point to him being an idiot (at least in terms of computer 3D experience/knowledge), so... :)

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 8, 1999, 3:08pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] No, most IDIOTS will ASSUME "DirectX". However, if you bothered to read more carefully, you would've realized I was referring to a specific S3 3D chip (hence why I mentioned the cheap price and why I even mentioned the S3 DX in the first place). Duh.

> nonetheless. You seem to have >extrapolation problems. Is English your
> native >language?
>
> No but that's not the problem here.

Yes, it is. If you don't know all the little nuances of the English language, miscommunication will occur.

> The problem is that you think you have to right to call ppl idiots when they
> don't understand or misunderstand what you say.
> Maybe explaining would be a better help...

Maybe understanding common English would be "a better help".

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 8, 1999, 3:10pm
Exactly. And people in here should know by now I hardly abbreviate...(AW and RW being major exceptions).

[View Quote] > Well, let's turn your question around: why think it's directX? Just because
> DX is a nice abbreviation?
>
[View Quote]

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 8, 1999, 3:18pm
[View Quote] > Why not let COF make some more and better 'bells and whistles' and first of all
> better GUI (graphical user interface) so they attract users wich "fall in love" with
> all the extras, THEN they can concentrate more on the engine as the hardware
> developes.. That would at least be better than having a better engine and no one to
> ride it, since the program isn't good enough.

You must be new to AW. AW's over 4 years old and has used the same 3D engine, Criterion's RenderWare, as well as has basically looked the same (GUI). No matter how good a car looks, if it runs like shit, it won't survive the market. Hence why AW and most online 3D virtual reality chat environments (based on VRML) aren't doing too well--they render like shit and jerk, twitch, and lag. Perhaps 1999 will be the year this changes, but not with software 3D rendering like RenderWare uses (for the most part).

> And Eep and cubiac.. There's no need to say that I'm not enjoying AW, since I am! I
> love AW, but I didn't fell in love with the engine. It did play an important part,
> but that wasn't before after a while!

Oh, so you fell in love with how AW jerks, lags, and twitches? You must be a Christian or something (a glutton for punishment). While I don't necessarily NEED a "super-charged" car, I want something that works adequately and is reliable.

> So I'm saying that COF sould make a better sunroof, car stereo and maybe even mobile
> phone to attract new users, then they can develope the engine as they get more money
> and more users.

Think about that. If the engine is laggy, twitchy, and unresponsive, how are all the fluff features in the world going to make up for the basic functionality that AW lacks? It won't. The 3D engine is the most important part of any 3D application. Period.

> When testers from for example magazines open AW and see a over 3 year old layout,
> they get a bad impression.. AW's new component (forgot the name) got WAY to many
> extras, and they got a very bad engine, so it's important to find a baance but still
> don't scare the new users off!

Right, and the balance begins with better 3D hardware support. Do you (or have you ever) work(ed) in the computer industry? I doubt it.

> When you come in to a car store, do go right to the Monstertruck or the el-car?

"car store", "Monstertruck", and "el-car"--English is DEFINTELY not your native language. :)

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 8, 1999, 9:34pm
[View Quote] >
> Only idiots make problems where they don't *have* to be.

Only idiots are idiots even though they don't HAVE to be idiots. :)

> Couldn't you have told me in a *normal* way that you meant something else??
> Or do you think it *is* normal to shout and flame as soon as someone makes a
> mistake?

"Normal" is relative. <yawn> I wasn't shouting but I WAS flaming. :)

>
> Cuz it didn't cross my mind that you might mean the chipset. If you're talking about 3d-stuff under Windows I don't think it's weird to associate Direct-X. Besides that, I didn't imagine s3 makes real 3d-cards.

What ELSE does S3 make? And actually they make 3D CHIPS, not cards, although I'm sure they made/make cards at one point. Yes, their chips are shit; hence why I even use them as an example to prove my point about not having a 3D card in your system. Duh. You're slow, huh?

>
> Everything fine and allright, but what the heck is that smiley doing there?
> Appearantly you find it also *funny* to make fools of other people.
> Honestly I think your making a fool of yourself picking at me because of a
> misunderstanding...

Wee. No, I just think you're an idiot because you don't quite understand the English language so, in your failed attempt at English communication, you look like an idiot. :) Hence the smiley. It amuses me. Duh.

> Are you systematically trying to ruine the atmosphere?

No, your idiocy has already ruined it.

> Are you trying to scare everyone away by behaving yourself like this?
> Is that why you are here? This stupid little thing is turning in to a fight.
> Isn't that pathetic?
> Try and get along man...

<yawn> Get off your pop psychology trip, sport. I'll get along when you stop being idiotic, deal? :)

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 8, 1999, 9:36pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] Apparently you never really studied your own either or you wouldn't be idiotic. :)

> Mostly it only annoys me.

Well you annoy me so I guess we're even. Wee.

> Your not really like contributing to a 'cosy' atmosphere..

Cosy? You want cosy go sit on a heated couch. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Buh-BOOM! Don't babble about stuff you don't know shit about in the future; it's one way to avoid this "non-cosy" atmosphere you're now involved in.

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 8, 1999, 9:39pm
Heh, I'm the "3D engine" of social communication, not the "sunroof fluff" of social interaction. I don't come here to play social mind games; I come here for concise AW-related discussion and 3D technical info. Anyway...

[View Quote] > And though Eep² doesn't always present his views in a really respectful way, he's usually right.

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 10, 1999, 2:12pm
Um, if that were the case, the cards listed at http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/direct3d.html wouldn't work in AW using the RW Direct3D driver.

[View Quote] > The only cards I know about that are capable of rendering in a window are
> voodoo rush and banshee based cards. All other cards only do full screen.

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 10, 1999, 2:15pm
<ego mode: on> OK, tell you what: when England becomes the most powerful, influential nation in the world, I'll learn "proper" English. Until then it's American all the way, baby. <ego mode: off>

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 10, 1999, 2:17pm
There is no "american" (or "American") language. It may be AmericanIZED English, but it's still English. There are also many DIALECTS of English...however they're still English.

[View Quote] [View Quote]

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 10, 1999, 2:24pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] Then quit replying with babble and senseless responses. Lay off the mind games and stick the topic.

> card. AW's minimum >requirements are shit.
>
> Again not right. You said COF gives a way too low minimum requirement, and
> that the current engine is shit. You say they have to correct at least one
> of these two. Then, I give AW's performance on a reasonable good computer
> with 3D acceleration. Then I say that the performance still isn't very high.
> I agreed to you on that point, I didn't decline it.

See above. Lay off the tangents.

> ADEQUATE RenderWare Direct3D drivers. You'd think after COF (although
> probably actually Worlds) paid, what, $10K (or a few $K to upgrade from
> version 2.0) for RenderWare 2.1 they'd at least want to get their money's
> worth. I already tried bugging them but I can only do so much since I don't
> actually have a license with them. COF should. I even posted about this on
> their listserve but Criterion never responded and some other people who paid
> big money for RenderWare were pretty pissed too. For all intensive purposes,
> RenderWare is dead.
>
> Mabye Roland should try OpenGL. Nowadays, it's reasonable fast, gives a WAY
> better image quality, has full 3dfx support (and other hardware
> acceleration, I believe), is system-independent, and well documented. And
> best, its totally *free*. No licenses, no $10K. OpenGL lives, more and more
> hardware accelerator producers deliver OpenGL drivers with their cards. More
> and more games and apps use OpenGL. OpenGL is worked on all the time. In my
> opinion, a *far* better choice than sticking to RenderWare.

If Roland can't even program with Direct3D (also a free license with the most popular 3D card/chip support), he ain't gonna do any better with OpenGL (not even anywhere NEAR as many 3D cards/chips support OpenGL as they support Direct3D). And if it's taken COF (Roland, ENZO, Cryonics--who knows who) THIS long to realize software rendering is not the way to go, they truly ARE idiots and shouldn't even be TRYING to develop a 3D app at all. 3D Anarchy and Flatland have more promise at their current development life (in utero and fresh out of the womb, respectively) than AW has had in probably all 4+ years of its infancy.

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 10, 1999, 2:30pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] The POINT is S3 ONLY makes video cards/chips. Not knowing that (and trying to talk like you know about 3D) just makes you look like an idiot to me. Do you get it yet or do I have to beat your head into the curb some more?

> made/make cards at one point. > Yes, their chips are shit; hence why I even
> use them as an example to prove my point about not
>
> Even if you 'proved' your point":
> I'd still rather have no 3d-card at all than a bad one. Not 3d-card saves
> money (which I could use for buying a good one) and a bad one is a waste of
> money.

No, if I proved my point to you, you'd've shut up long ago in this thread and not bothered to continue making yourself look like even more of an idiot. But keep it up...it's mildly entertaining to badger you on like I have been. :)

> the English language so, >in your failed attempt at English communication,
> you look like an idiot. :) Hence the smiley. It >amuses me. Duh.
>
> Ok let's assume my English is worhtless so I shouldn't try to speak it.
> What do you want me to do?
> Speak Dutch? (I *do* speak dutch very well..)

See above. Don't "speak" at all...or type.

>
> Overreacting? [euphemism]

relative

> stop being idiotic, deal?
>
> The only one who thinks I'm being idiotic because of a misunderstanding, is
> you.
> So maybe I should try not to misunderstand you and you should try not to
> overreact.

To not misunderstand me means not even TRYING to understand me in the first place. You continually fail so why bother future attempts? You obviously aren't going to "understand" me anytime soon.

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 10, 1999, 7:52pm
Lay off the pop psychology bit, eh? I won't respond to you in the future if you persist.

[View Quote] >
> Anyone that expresses a contrary opinion is automatically a newbie or an
> idiot??

No, anyone who expresses newbieness is a newbie; idiocy is an idiot. :) Dig this circular logic, eh?

> Why can't you accept that other have VALID opinions (generally in
> this thread they are not disagreed that the 3d engine can be improved, but
> on relative priority)

Oh, my opinion of their opinion isn't valid? How cliche you are...try again. Opinions go both ways.

> eg:
>
> have you ever) work(ed) in the computer industry? I doubt it.
>
> Need for a put down to validate your arguement? I think not.

You'll see later that it was true. Therefore it wasn't a "put down". Wee.

> a Christian or something (a glutton for punishment).
>
> Now I'm no puritan, but is it necessary to make religious slurs here?

Yup.

> native language. :)
>
> American-centricity again? English IS my native language, and I have used
> both car store and Monstertruck inconversation.

How wasted were you? "car store" is just silly and "monstertruck" should be two words, also not capitalized as Cubic had it. And I don't even need to mention "el-car"...

> I actually think that the
> non-english-as-native-language posters here make perfect sense. The ability
> to learn a second language to a level they have shown is quite hard. Do you
> speak any other languages?

Nope. I concentrate on the language I communicate with. "perfect sense" to you is "not quite got it" to me, in this respect.

> Honestly Eep², you should rethink your need to denigrate others to support
> your arguements...let them stand on their merits.

Their "merits" already give me enough basis to "denigrate" them.

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 10, 1999, 8:00pm
[View Quote] [View Quote] You must just mainly chat or something. Try moving around and actually GO somewhere in AW; build and play with the visiblity settings—you know, actually USE AW.

> It's normally on 8-9 kbps and that's enough for me.

Um, throughput has very little, if anything, to do with FRAME RATE (fps). Try to at least know what you're talking about, eh?

> I don't need anymore to enjoy AW!

Well that's obvious. But REAL computer users DO need more from AW to enjoy it better, however.

> And I got a 3 yrs old Pentium 133 with resently updated ram (now 32), and it have been a bit slow before, but it works just great now and it has been for a long time..
> I hope 1999 will be a year of changes (c:

Yea, me too. A way to filter twits like you and make them get clues so they don't sound like idiots.

>
> Nope, it didn't jerk twitch and lag! I'm not even religious, I want the same as you, but I've already had that for a while. It wasn't always that reliable, but I think it is now.. And it is good enough to enjoy AW and do what you came to do!

Um, no. AW may be good enough for YOU to enjoy what YOU "came to do", but not for me.

>
> They may do more work on the engine, I'm not saying that that's out of the question, but at least refresh the look a bit! For instance the gesture buttons.. Those are a bit old... The 3D engine IS a very important part, sure.. What would the application be without it? Just a good looking piece of shit, I know.. But I'd rather enjoy AW with 8-9 kbps and a new look on the program than wait some months till COF has improved the engine, so i must upgrade my computer and still have the old fasion look!

Now YOU'RE hung up on the sunroof. I give up dealing with idiots. I'm outta here.

>
> Nope, I'm only 14 years old, so that wouldn't be possible.. I've only worked with some programming and webdesign.. Maybe that's why I'm so eager to get a better look?
>
> If COF would make AW's engine so good that it required Voodo, Pentium 200+ and 64 MB RAM , most of the user would still be stucked with the old fasion look and nothing else! My computer is already soing its best, and that's ok for me, since I can't upgrade my computer (costs too much for a 14 yrs old boy)!
>
>
> As I said, I'm only 14 yrs old, and live in Norway, so you shouldn't expect more (c:
>
> -CyberTwins

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 11, 1999, 9:57pm
God damn you're slow, man. I gave you a URL (http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/direct3d.html) to my Direct3D Support help section which lists all the 3D cards/chipsets that work (and don't work) with AW's Direct3D RenderWare driver. If you even bothered to READ the page, you'd know one of the requirements for the driver to work with a 3D card is that the card must support rendering in a window. Do you see other cards listed there besides Voodoo and Voodoo² cards? Go check, sport.

[View Quote] [View Quote]

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 12, 1999, 1:36pm
Just because they had problems with AW's RW Direct3D driver doesn't mean they fail in all other 3D window-based apps. "Duh, sport."

[View Quote] [View Quote]

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 12, 1999, 2:25pm
And if you understood English correctly, YOU would know why I consider you an idiot when it comes to basic English comprehension. Good god you're lame...

And quit quoting the entire message if you're only replying to part of it.

Don't MAKE me filter your ass, punk...

[View Quote] [View Quote]

*Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 12, 1999, 3:55pm
And YOU...lose the long sig, eh? Your sig is longer than most of your message text (excluding quoting).

[View Quote] > Not so much development in this thread... ;)

An Object refresh button would be good.

Jan 2, 1999, 2:51pm
I'm thinking the reason why this has never been implemented is because the database system AW uses (Faircom) can't dynamically refresh or something (or at least Roland doesn't know how to MAKE it do so), because this suggestion has been around for at least a year (I remember Queen Bee promoting it a lot anyway). But the real problem is COF needs more programmers. As great a programmer as Roland may or may not be, AW is just too much work for one person. I mean look how long it's taken AW to develop THIS far, and it's 4+ years old. Most other software develops MUCH faster. If only software developed as fast as hardware...

[View Quote] > It would be nice to have a button to refresh a specific object, or the
> avatars.dat file. Useful for making changes in the .rwx files when fine
> tuning your world, and cleaning up the occasional bad masks that seem to
> crop up from time to time. Doesn't sound difficult from a technical point
> of view, and definately useful.
>
> Especially for those times when dumping your cache seems like swatting a
> gnat with a sledge hammer.

Re: *Yes* File-transfering is here! (Soon)

Jan 13, 1999, 3:02pm
[View Quote] > This better? :)
>
> Maybe i'll keep it up.... but not very likely.

Is your name necessary? And your email address? Both of these are in the headers. The quote? Definitely unnecessary. The ICQ # and alternate email address can be placed in the organization field—and even the quote if you must.

> --
> Fluxen fluxen at bigfoot.com
> ICQ: 11760568 dean2 at bigfoot.com
> "The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from." --
> Andy Tanenbaum
>
[View Quote]

3D cards...again

Jan 23, 1999, 5:58am
The RW Direct3D driver's performance depends on how many polys are in view. The more, the worse frame rate will be; the fewer, the better frame rate will be. http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/direct3d.html for more info.

[View Quote] > Well, just bought a Monster Fusion (3dfx chip) 16Mb video card, hoping it
> would improve the AW performance.
>
> It has, but not how you might think.
>
> I run a P100 (getting old now and soon to be upgraded), and had an old
> Trident Chip 2 Mb video card. I was getting <2 fps in AW.
>
> With the new card I zoom at around 6fps, UNTIL i installed the renderware
> Direct3D drivers then it dropped to around 3-4fps.
>
> Acceleration provided, but renderwares abilty to use Direct3D sux.

URL's

Jan 26, 1999, 6:57pm
Idiots. Make the colors CUSTOMIZABLE. Duh. I hate programmers who force-feed THEIR idea of "design" down everyone else's throat...

[View Quote] > naww - make it white. That would make the "whisper" really silent - even the addresse wouldn't hear it :)
>
[View Quote]

URL's

Jan 28, 1999, 8:43pm
Fine, you can be spoonfed all the defaults and live with the programmer's narrowmindedness. Enjoy.

[View Quote] > Let's make it customizable wheter you want or don't want to have things
> customable.
>
[View Quote]

URL's

Jan 29, 1999, 12:38am
No shit, Sherlock. It's been on The List™ for over a year...it might just get implemented some century, too.

[View Quote] > all you clods....my point was to make any URL, typed into the chatbox, be a
> clickable link....i don't give a shit what color it is

[View Quote]

1  ...  3  4  5  6  7  8  ...  13  |  
Awportals.com is a privately held community resource website dedicated to Active Worlds.
Copyright (c) Mark Randall 2006 - 2024. All Rights Reserved.
Awportals.com   ·   ProLibraries Live   ·   Twitter   ·   LinkedIn