1  ...  18  19  20  21  22  23  ...  31  |   Order by default

Jan 5, 2001, 11:13pm

You don't get to sign up for beta testing. At first it'll be closed to a certain group of testers. Then, it'll be opened to the public and anyone will be able to test.


3.2 and 4.0 will be coming to the Internet nearest you on [insert release dates here].

-Agent1



[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2001, 11:52am

There's been talk of adding OpenGL support in an upcoming version. That'll allow AW to run on many more platforms that don't support DirectX. Some cards might even run faster with OpenGL than DirectX, as well. I've also heard talk that a software renderer is on the way for Renderware 3.0.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 8, 2001, 12:03am

[View Quote]
Not really... You don't need to know that much to "take down" a world. Many basic attacks (like a ping-flood) simply need the IP address of the victim, really.


-Agent1

Jan 8, 2001, 11:38am

All one has to do is enter your world and run netstat...

-Agent1



[View Quote]

Jan 10, 2001, 2:07am

It's for things like rotate and move that could be used to encroach in a public building world.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 11, 2001, 11:41am

Well, I would probably add it to the list, yes. I've already engulfed a few areas in light, but I think you have to be able to see the light object for it to have any affect.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2001, 11:48am

But that would also have to be taken care of by the world server. Apparently it would cause too much stress on it to check for each object.


Here's an idea: in the registry, the distance of the farthest point from center on the object gets recorded. The world server could use a sphere made with that radius/whatever for encroachment detection.


-Agent1



[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2001, 8:16pm

Not if it's just a text message with no attachements


[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2001, 8:15pm

Roland posted to beta:

"Due to widespread bypassing of the closed beta, the universe server now prevents logins of beta browsers on non beta accounts. Doing so will produce the error "Login failed (reason 79)" in browsers 363 and earlier. Starting with 364 (not out yet) the browser knows what reason 79 is and will print a more informative error message.

Those of you who are running 3.1 and who are not on the beta program will now have to re-install 3.0 from our web site. Sorry. Next time, wait until the beta is released.

Beta users can run 3.1 on non-beta accounts or in tourist mode by first starting the browser using your beta account. Once started, you can switch to another account or to tourist mode.

-Roland"






[View Quote]

Jan 16, 2001, 8:06pm

As far as I know, Eep isn't on the beta list.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 17, 2001, 12:04pm

[View Quote]
Wrong. If you were not on the beta list, you shouldn't have gotten the beta. That's how simple it is. Another thing: How are you beta TESTing if you don't "bug Roland" with things you find wrong with the browser?

-Agent1






>I had 3.1 for 2 days and found several bugs including the now famous MIDI bump (seems to be a botched
> attempt to delay the transition between MIDIs) and 3.1's inability to handle texture names larger than 16 characters (which whited
> out a lot of my textures). And some others that I worn't boar ppl with. I was sure that these bugs will be/have been discovered by
> the real beta group and since I wasn't supposed to have 3.1 I didn't mention them to Roland.
>
> I was just beginning to work out techniques for combining standard animation methods with the new move and rotate commands when I
> lost the connection to the server. When I tried to re-enter I got the infamous "reason 79" message and knew what had happened. I was
> really pissed at the idiots who spoiled my fun. You can still use 3.1 off-line but that sucks.
>
> --
> billyat (Bill the Yat)
> "if you don't like polls -- LIE TO THE POLSTERS"
[View Quote]

Jan 18, 2001, 11:18am

Yes, but in my opinion, you shouldn't have to report bugs through "other channels". You should be on the beta list.

Anyway, you know what closed beta means, Eep. You're not on the list, so you don't get to test the browser (online, anyway). Not a great decision, but it is what has happened.


I don't really think that was the problem either. Many people were flooding Roland with bug reports, not knowing if they had already been submitted. Really, the browser/uniserver should have been doing this little check from the start of the beta.


-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 19, 2001, 4:05pm

If you're not testing the beta, you have no business having a copy of it, authorized or otherwise.

-Agent1








[View Quote]

Jan 21, 2001, 5:49pm

Nah, he just got another citizenship and is trying to pass himself off as two people :)

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 21, 2001, 9:30pm

Nice signature :)

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2001, 10:53pm

That's it; I'm filtering you/Agent Fox Mulder from both newsgroups and mail.

-Agent1



[View Quote]

Jan 25, 2001, 11:08pm

Speaking of which: Don't make me get out hupdiha.wav! :)


(Somewhat of an inside joke) ;)

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 28, 2001, 3:30pm

*boggle* There should be a while where it's still in beta but opened to the public, I would think. Unless we want to have our build
number closer to 400 than 350 ;)

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 28, 2001, 3:28pm

Which bug is this that "made massive portions of AW world unbuildable"? Plus, quite a few of the obvious bugs have already been
caught by a closed beta. Roland just expanded it a little at the last Tech Talk, in fact.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 28, 2001, 9:48pm

It's probably because the floating point numbers that need to be juggled are getting rather large at that point and end up being less precise.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 28, 2001, 3:27pm

Nah ;)

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 28, 2001, 9:48pm

Sorry to disappoint, but "col klink" is the same as "agent fox mulder" :)

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 30, 2001, 11:13pm

Would "lead" happen to mean only? :)


-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 31, 2001, 11:46am

Tony, I've got a quick suggestion for you: if you want to be taken seriously, try to at least be original in your naming. One more thing, buy your domain name (or at least work it out so that the Namezero bar isn't required to be displayed anymore)


-Agent1



[View Quote]

Jan 31, 2001, 11:39pm

No, I mean that you decided to use "universe server", "world server", "telegram", and "eject".

-Agent1



[View Quote]

Feb 3, 2001, 4:21pm

Feb 4, 2001, 3:48pm

Well, I've got some Intel chip ("Intel 82810 Graphics Controller") that does my video (instead of an actual card D:). I see the seams.

-Agent1



[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2001, 11:34pm

Tools->Options...
Click Send and look at the bottom.

-Agent1



[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2001, 10:22pm

Part of the problem with that is, we aren't told by any of the "AWCI-ers" what it IS like. Maybe if more employees were to participate in the newsgroups and respond to telegrams/email, it would be easier to understand. I appreciate that you do this already, Facter, and I thank you for it. But I believe Rick & JP should at least try to counter what Eep is saying, provide reasons for it, etc. Otherwise, they will fall even more out of touch with their "user base", and vice versa. Personally catering only to the bigger clients isn't going to make the "regular user" feel very special. Sure, a few employees (like you and the support team, Roland, Flagg, etc...) listen to the public and sometimes voice our concerns, but I believe I am correct in saying that we would have a much greater sense of pride in AW if we could have things we want considered.

I've never actually spoken to/at Rick or JP unless I hunted them down first. They have never personally responded to my emails, and have only sent a few telegrams and a few lines of text. Either they don't care enough about what I (as a "regular user") may try to tell them, or they don't want to interact with us. Personally, I would like to get to know Rick & JP and see what their side of the story is, but I've never been able to talk to them long enough to do so.

Oh well, the life of 309603 will go on... :)

-Agent1




[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2001, 8:32pm

As I doubt Eep will apologise, I'll just skip that part...

About this vote thingy, I will not take part in it. I won't decide to have one user removed in favour of another and I will not try to "pick sides" in this argument by doing so, either. I don't think it fair for you to make us choose to either have someone from the company who provides us with fabulous support and general insight or someone who is always there to give AWCI a little bit of a challenge or a nudge. I feel that Eep has become almost a user "advocate", in that he never just lets things be explained away in a short sentence or two. After personally having a few flame wars in this newsgroup with various users, I've only filtered one. This user just would not stop posting things devoid of anything remotely intelligent. If I wanted to filter Eep from the messages I read, I would have done so by now. Simply because his "attacks" turn towards someone that has the ability to get a person banned from the newsgroup is not a reason that you cannot also simply filter him from your
newsreader. I'm sure he's said equally bad things to other people, and this is the only time in the unmoderated community newsgroup (while I've been around) that he's been threatened with being banned.

I'm not sure how much AWCI and the "community" in these newsgroups need me to keep posting here, but that is beside the point. If Eep is banned from this or any other newsgroup, I will stop posting to all of the AWCI-owned newsgroups as well. I will not tolerate a user being censored simply because someone was looking his way while he was yelling at someone this time. I would prefer very much if all of us could stay, and if you feel it to be nessecary, "then mute him".


-Agent1



[View Quote]

1  ...  18  19  20  21  22  23  ...  31  |   Order by default