1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  47  |   Order by default

Oct 7, 2001, 12:10am

It seems a tad.... plain. Were you planning on putting any graphics in
there at all?

[View Quote] > I've got the new front page for the Cozmo-X website pretty much done. I just
> want you to know that this is not final and most of the links do not work
> yet. Alls i want is some feedback if you don't mind on how the layout and
> colors look The template is the very top and bottom so that part will appear
> on every page, the middle is the content, and all the pages will most likely
> have the same color scheme.
>
> If your wondering, Cozmo-X has been in existance for 3 or more months now
> under a few other names. This name is final. We primarily do hosting and
> bots. But i added a few extra things on the site.
>
> There is:
>
> Hosting - Worlds, Object Path leasing, and others. I will not realease the
> price yet.
>
> News - AW news, website news, any other news and articles.
>
> Bots - I am in the middle of several programming projects right nwo whitch i
> will not discuss. This would be where the primary place for distributing my
> bots, scripts, and any other bot related things.
>
> Downloads - Lists of usefull programs like activeworlds utilities, RWX
> utilities, bots, and other programs.
>
> Listings - Lists of all AW sites (i'll try hehe), bot sites, object sites,
> and other sites put into categories of use.
>
> Reviews - I hope to write reviews for a lot of things like bots, new
> programs, services, etc.
>
> Forums - I'm working on this one but it will proboly be a little later on
> until its done. Here you'll be abel to post comments, feedback, and whatever
> else you want.
>
> So thats what i've gotten so far. The names will most likeley change later
> on and i'm hoping to get my domain name up and running after i've completed
> it.
>
> http://cozmo-x.zapto.org (for now)
>
> --
> - Cozmo Of Cozmo-X
> http://cozmo-x.zapto.org
> World: A'Dude
>
>
>


--
Goober King
Graphics nut...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 17, 2001, 6:29pm

Yea, they'll work, but you won't be able to see/use newer features, like
move, rotate, lights, etc. Plus, actually finding them to download might
prove difficult...

[View Quote] > do versions like of AW 2.2 still work? Just wondering.
>
>
>


--
Goober King
Still has a copy of 3.0 lying around somewhere...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 26, 2001, 12:47am

<snip>
> You need to get either a higher level of maturity or get a better
> personality.
</snip>

Unfortunately, it seems that in IA's case, neither is very likely to
occur... :(

[View Quote] > I was not subscribbed to the community one, and you need to stop before you
> do something you regret. You need to get either a higher level of maturity
> or get a better personality.
>
> --Bowen--
[View Quote] --
Goober King
Never was very good at taking a hint...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 26, 2001, 1:17am

Unfortunately for you, both you and Henry are in the distinct minority,
as the vast majority of Americans *support* what's going on in
Afghanistan and how our President has been handling all this. (myself
included) Of course, if you think this means that everyone *likes* war,
then you obviously don't know human nature very well.

Very few people *like* warring with other countries and seeing more
innocent (and even not-so-innocent) blood spilled. However, the
terrorist attacks were *far* too severe to just sit back and try to
"talk it out" with the perpetrators. These are not the kind of people
you can "talk to". Osama, and those of his ilk, hate all things American
and view us as the greatest evil this world has ever known. They see us
as "defiling" the world with our Western philosophies. (And if you
honestly believe he attacked us because we support Israel, then you
really need to do some more investigating)

You want to talk about a "repressive society"? Try looking at a country
where women are barely allowed to breathe. The Taliban have made
Afghanistan into a starving nation, where people get shot on the spot
for doing anything that doesn't follow their strict Islamic interpretations.

Now granted, this alone does not grant us an excuse to bomb them into
submission, but the fact that they support and harbor terrorists who
would commit such atrocities means they should no longer be allowed to
operate as such. Hell, we gave them almost an entire month to comply to
our fairly reasonable demands, and all they did was stall. The Taliban
have brought this upon themselves, plain and simple, and we have done
our utmost to ensure that innocent casualties are minimized, while at
the same time trying to show the rest of the Afghan populace that we
don't hate them, just those who oppress them. (Although how well that's
actually working has yet to be seen)

This so-called "War on Terrorism" is not about Americans being
self-righteous. In case you've forgotten, this isn't just about America.
Britain, Germany, France, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, and even China, among
others, are all pitching in to help eradicate this evil from the Earth.
And while some may say that trying to wipe out terrorism is a futile
effort, is it any less futile to hope for a world full of "peace and
love"? As long as evil exists in the world, we will never know true
peace. Someone has to take a stand against it and say "Enough is
enough." It's nice to know that at least a sizable portion of the world
community agrees.

So feel free to sit there and contemplate your navel, hoping that the
rest of the world will suddenly have a huge, collective epiphany and say
"Why can't we all just get along?" In the meantime, the rest of us will
be doing what we can to make sure this little gruesome piece of history
doesn't repeat itself...

P.S. And as far as the whole anthrax business goes, our government is
devoting just as much attention to this problem as they are to
Afghanistan. Just because we haven't found out who did it in under a
week doesn't mean we're not working on it. Try looking around and
getting educated on the whole mess before shooting your mouth off, hmm?

[View Quote] > Henry, I can agree with some of what you are saying, but the only thing I
> don't really agree on is the American mentality you are suggesting. I will
> agree that some Americans are what you suggst, but most are not. The war
> going on overseas is stupid. I have no doubt that people having nothing to
> do with the taliban, terrorism, or hatred towards the United States have
> been killed and it is not right in my opinion. I am not one for war unless
> it's absolutely necessary. Please don't hate me (being an American) or the
> United States though for the actions that are going on overseas because it
> was not my decision nor is it many people's decision to go to war. We
> [Americans] supposedly live in a land of freedom of choice that I greatly
> enjoy and take advantage of as many people do, but some things we cannot
> choose - our government chooses for us, such as this war. I likewise do not
> blame Afghanistan for what happened in NY or Washington or anyone overseas
> because those people as well cannot control what their leaders and people
> with power and money do either.
>
> However there is reason for the Americans to be mad because September 11
> many of our citizens were killed as well. People tend to lose focus on the
> real problem as a result from their anger. I think the only war that should
> be going on should be right here in our own country. New York and
> Washington is where the acts of wrong doing were committed, not Afghanistan.
> Anthrax is being spread all over the United States and nobody seems to know
> why or who's doing it because our government is too busy starting shit with
> people overseas and trying to blame everyone else but themselves for what's
> happened. Why can't our government take care of our homeland first and wage
> war against the terrorists that are amongst us in our own damn country? Is
> that too much to ask?
>
> For those Americans who think I'm anti-American I'm not trying to say I hate
> my country, otherwise I wouldn't live here. I love America, the American
> people here and the patriotism they show for their country. Henry I don't
> feel the patriotism we are showing in this time is in any way meant to thumb
> our noses at other nations (although some have made it out to be that way),
> but merely to show our respect and love for the people we lost 9/11 here at
> home as a united nation to each other, not against other countries.
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Proof that Goobers ARE as dumb as they look.
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 27, 2001, 10:07pm

Haven't you been paying attention to the news? We *are* taking care of
whatever terrorists are here in America; that's what the FBI is for. The
great thing about our American government is that, like a good computer,
it can *multitask* and do more than one thing at the same time! So while
the FBI is investigating terrorists and anthrax, our military is
fighting the Taliban. (Note how I didn't say "fighting Afghanistan"
because we are *not* at war with Afghanistan. We're at war with the
terrorists *in* Afghanistan and those who harbor and support them.
There's a difference.)

And do you know *why* we're focusing on Afghanistan, hmm? You say that
we should "deal with those here IN THE US that are responsible." Well,
guess what? It's going to be rather difficult to "deal with" these
people when the remains of their bodies are scattered amidst tons of
glass and metal. To put it simply, these people have already been taken
care of, killed instantly with the rest of those airline passengers as
they slammed into buildings (or the ground in PA). Now, it's time to
take care of the people who masterminded the whole plot, who,
coincidentally, are NOT in the US, but in Afghanistan.

The rest of the American public seems to be able to distinguish between
being at war with terrorists and being at war with an entire country.
Why can't you?

And as far as sentencing goes, the attacks go *far* beyond any crime
ever committed by an American criminal. (even Oklahoma City and
Columbine put together) Not only that, but most crimes can have various
motives that can lessen the sentence and other such ambiguities.
However, the attacks of Sept 11th could only have one motive: hatred.
There is no ambiguity here; we all know who is guilty and we have all
the evidence we would ever need. The only thing left to do is convict
the criminals. For a crime of this magnitude, there can only be one
sentence: Death. And whether the sentence is carried out via a war
tribunal, or a soldier's rifle in Afghanistan, they WILL be brought to
justice. Perhaps then, we all, Americans and Afghans alike, can truly
know peace.

[View Quote] > Oh believe me I don't condone anything that goes on in Afghanistan, but I
> could take every country in this world and pick out things that I don't like
> about it and decide to war against them, but to me that's stupid. The acts
> of terrorism IN THE US were wrong, and it's time to deal with those here IN
> THE US that are responsible. Maybe America has gotten too powerful for its
> own good and they feel every wrong doing in the world is their business
> nowadays. I don't understand why they just don't go ahead and bomb the rest
> of the world and take it over as well. It seems to be the concept that this
> resolves the problem.
>
> I do agree that we cannot talk this problem out with the terrorists or their
> leaders, but yet our government believes in doing this everyday within our
> own country in courtrooms for people who have committed crimes and giving
> them a chance to condone what they did wrong to get a shorter sentence or
> even off the hook. I'm sure if they ever catch the terrorists and the
> people who did the Anthrax crap (such sorry cowards) they'll only serve 20
> years in jail eating up the taxpayers money to support their life. Oh sure
> some court will give the lifetime sentence with no paroll at first to make
> it all look good, but get out on good behavior or some nonsense excuse in a
> few years. Aren't there four terrorists just now going to jail from the
> incident a few years back on lifetime sentence? Lord forbid we give anyone
> the death penalty to anyone comitting a crime nowadays in our own country
> because we might burn in hell for it, but let's instead go blow the hell up
> out of everyone else we feel is in the wrongdoing outside our country. I
> just feel that our country needs to get their business straight first here
> at home before blaming their flaws on other countries and do it quick before
> the terrorists and supporters within our country destroy it with the anthrax
> scares and other threats. If the majority feel that making sure justice is
> served to their country can be accomplished by having war, then maybe our
> country needs to start handling business with the same attention here at
> home.
>
> Americans, take care of your homeland first. It is where you live, not in
> Afghanistan.
>
> Ox64
>
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Proof that Goobers ARE as dumb as they look.
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 29, 2001, 11:36pm

AW Ear is a legitimate program and contains no trojans or viruses or
hacks whatsoever. You have nothing to fear from that program, at least.

[View Quote] > I wouldn't use AW Ear... it was made by Radon. He wrote the Stockquotebot that apparently had trojan code in it.
>
> Try Control Panel and the Speech icon.
>
> -Agent1
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Obviously can't say the same for all the *other* Radon proggies...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 31, 2001, 2:16am

When's the last time you heard anyone complaining about AW Ear, saying
it had wiped their hard drive or crashed their computer? When AW Ear
first came out, people were downloading it and using it all over the
place, and Radon was actually sincere about its success. It's
unfortunate that someone like that can go so wrong so quickly. The
saddest part was that he was actually proud of his actions and actually
expected to get *rewarded* for it. Such a shame... :(

Still, you all have seen what Radon is capable of, and *not* capable of.
Face it, he was just a script kiddie who managed to fool some people
with his other programs. I think you give Radon way too much credit when
you say he's capable of making a program as malicious as wiping out files.

[View Quote] > Well, it might not send information over the Internet, but that's not to say
> that it doesn't do something behind the scenes - it could delete a file or
> do something that you don't know about.
>
> -Brant
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Where do kids go so wrong?
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 31, 2001, 10:29pm

Well, let's put it this way: He *was* trustworthy when he made AW Ear.
But somehow, he got corrupted along the way (he blames Gavaroche's
little world hack stunt) and then became *un*trustworthy.

[View Quote] > Um no offence KAH but it's way too complicated. Malicious code can be and usually is invisible in hex except if you are an assembly wizard. To me Agent1 has a valid point, if you don't trust the developer do not run his/her executables. If you find Radon trustworthy I guess it's fine to use it.
>
> Baron
>
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Not that it makes much difference anymore...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 30, 2001, 2:27pm

Could it be you don't have a 3D video card? I noticed that you never
mentioned what kind of video card you have. If you don't have a card
with 3D hardware acceleration capabilities, then software mode is going
to be the only one that works well...

[View Quote] > yes tried open Gl first actually and everythink was slow sort of lagged and
> then went to "software" fingers crossed
>
>
>
>

--
Goober King
Wonders why no one else caught that...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 30, 2001, 6:28pm

Umm, actually your post doesn't seem to say much of anything. Granted,
it talks about bin Laden and the death penalty, but what are you trying
to *say* about it? You just sort of throw out facts and other people's
opinions, without bothering to either give us your position on the
discussion, or at least trying to refute someone else's position. Where
do you stand?

P.S. KAH, please learn how to quote! :P

[View Quote] > A cold war disabled veteran does not easily forget the cold war.
>
> You may think Russia has changed and you may also think that communism was abolished there, but frankly, I have trouble believing that.
>
> Besides, my post had nothing to do with communism, it had to do with the death penalty and prisons.
>
> Áine
>
> ======MhM 23x20===Coolavin===Áine/AHNya===================
> Imagine a moral code rooted in beauty, love, pleasure, and liberation
> instead of order, control, repression, and fear.
> ==============================================================
>
>
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Perhaps Aine is standing on the fence...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Oct 31, 2001, 10:40pm

Here's an idea that could solve the problem; and subsequently become
AWC's "Next Big Thing": NetWorlds^(TM)! Halfway between a World package and
a Uniserver, this package deal allows you to buy multiple worlds and
control all of them via a simple application. Not only would this allow
people with multiple worlds to manage them all better, but it would also
supply a Uniserver with a way of categorizing worlds (leading to a
categorized Worlds tab! woo!)

Plus, If something like this were in effect, then AWC could take all the
AWC-owned worlds and put them in an AWC NetWorld and then have a
NetWorld message that would be displayed before an individual world
message. Then, the Uniserver message could strictly be for Universe-wide
important announcements. (NOT advertisements)

Wow, I must have just sounded like JP there for a sec... That was scary!
*smirk*

[View Quote] > Sound ideas to me. Perhaps running around to all the awcom worlds and
> changing their world messages like it used to be done is the best way to do
> it.
> --
> SW Chris
> Eagle Scout, Philosopher, Peacemaker, and... Kung Fu Master?
> http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
To know your enemy, you must *think* like your enemy!
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Nov 1, 2001, 11:44am

Umm, if you have a business that isn't serious about things, then you
wind up with a company that isn't *competent* with things, which tends
to suck. Now, you could have a company that's serious about having fun,
and that wouldn't be boring at all. But if you're not serious about
anything, then you'll never get anywhere.

[View Quote] > why is it unprofessional? aw runs awbingo so why
> should they not promote it? they would promote the
> cy awards in that message too. is that
> unprofessional? was it a brithday of the staff or
> a citizen? if it was staff its not that bad. you
> dont want a company totally serious do you? that
> would be boring.
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
He's serious about seriousness!
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Nov 1, 2001, 11:55am

I think I'm going to have to agree with Ananas on this one. Granted,
spam advertising is annoying, regardless of where it shows up, but it
only shows up once. After that, you never see it again, and if you start
in a place like AWGate or AW GZ, then that Universe message disappears
pretty quickly.

Look at it this way: The only time the Universal message would appear in
a private world would be if someone set that world as their starting
point. Presumably, if that happens, then that person has been to this
world before and is used to whatever "atmosphere" the world contains.
Visitors to the world, however, won't see the Universal message, because
they already saw it when they first logged in somewhere else in the
Universe. Therefore, you don't have to worry about visitors getting
"suckered" into clicking an unwanted link or getting pulled away from
your world, and I would think anyone who was willing to set a private
world as a start world would much rather be there than wherever AWC is
advertising in the Universal message...

Now if only we can get them to limit the Universal message to
*important* things! :P

[View Quote] > I have to agree with you Moria and thanks for saying it so nicely. The Spam
> type messages should be limited to AWCOM's worlds and not the privately
> owned ones. I honestly thought that was how it was going to work anyway.
> People pay for private and commercial worlds. Many try to make extra money
> from them in one way or another. Pulling people out of those worlds to
> AWCOM's worlds is not right at all. It is a good idea for them within their
> worlds to communicate and let people know of their events. Also, is a great
> way for world owners through the AWEC or something to promote events.
>
> There should be at the VERY least the world option to turn it off like you
> suggested. I don't think it should have to be a world option though but
> should only go to their worlds period. Yes, a warning message of server
> problems etc enmass to all worlds would be helpful but should not be used as
> an excuse/reason to keep all worlds getting these messages. OH, and this is
> 'feature' is added before privacy/green checkmark off/ mute someone from
> gramming you is??
>
> My .02
> Casay
>
>
[View Quote] --
Goober King
Spam, any way you look at it, is still spam.
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Nov 6, 2001, 12:44am

I would suggest something sane this time...

[View Quote] > Hey i'm looking for people who want to help rebuild my world,ColKlink,what
> we are going to put in it,i do not know but Telegram me if you want to help-
>
>
>
>

--
Goober King
Can't anymore random flying ships or Boy Meets World pictures...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Nov 28, 2001, 9:43pm

Solution: Use Netscape 6.2, problem solved. Trust me, you'll thank me
later. :)

[View Quote] > If I load up MSIE and enter a URL like: "yahoo.com" it gives me that error
> popup with the "send bug report" button and everything...then I have to
> reboot my comptuer or else I get one about every minute until my computer
> locks up.
>
> I beleive the same things happen if I go to a subdomain URL without entering
> http:// (like entering "shopping.yahoo.com").
>
> I noticed this after I installed the *cough*leaked*cough* drivers for my ATI
> Radeon, and also after I installed MSIE 6.0
> I uninstalled MSIE (yeah I figured out how to do that crudely if you want to
> downgrade) and put 5.5 SP2 back on...I still have the problem. Running in
> Winblows 98 SE (I'm *NOT* going to XP until the ability of my computer to
> run depends on it!)
>
> If anyone knows why this is happening or how I can fix it...reply >_<
>
>
> --
> Captain MAD Mike
> -Governor, PC Addict, Odd Man
>
>
>


--
Goober King
You all know you want it...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Nov 29, 2001, 9:15pm

Umm, unless you installed the bare minimum version of Netscape 6.2, it
should *come* with Java, and other basic plugins...

[View Quote] > I'm sorry if this is getting annoying, but I promise this is pure
> coincidence. lol. Anyways, I have IE 6 and it's giving me problems today. I
> can't seem to open a link in a new window, whether it'd be manually or the
> link automatically opens the page up. The browser doesn't freeze up or
> anything, it just doesn't display anything. Clicking on links that open up,
> I found the error to be that a module or something is missing. I have
> Windows XP home (there's the problem right there. lol) and am considering
> downgrading, if I ever knew how. lol. For now, I just installed Netscape but
> it's really hard and extremely annoying to download all of their plugins to
> view embedded java, video, audio, and such. Can anyone help?
>
> Nornny
>
>
>


--
Goober King
Yea, he's a Netscape whore, so sue!
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Dec 18, 2001, 2:28am

Since uninstalling IE all together is probably not an option, try this:

In Netscape 6, go to Edit -> Preferences -> Advanced -> System. There
should be two boxes, one talking about handling file types and one
talking about handling protocols. In the first box, be sure HTML is
checked, as well as any other file formats you want NS to handle. In the
second box, be sure to check HTTP, HTTPS, and whatever other protocols
you want NS to handle (I would suggest all of them, unless you use a
separate program for FTP, like CuteFTP).

After all that, check the box at the bottom that says "Alert me if other
applications change these settings". Then, click Ok to save the changes,
close the browser, and restart your computer. If all goes well, NS
should now act as your default browser.

Another thing you can do is go into Control Panel -> Internet Settings
-> Programs and make sure the box labeled "Internet Explorer should
check to see if it is the default browser" is *un*checked. Lemme know if
this helps...

[View Quote] > Hi all, can anyone help me with a little dillemma? My internet explorer has
> been crashing and bugging left and right for a month or so now, and I'm
> finding Netscape to be a bit more convienent to me. Basically, I'm missing
> some modules or something that prevents IE from opening links in new
> windows. Also, there seems to be an error (javascript it seems) in the web
> browser in Morpheus (file sharing program, really great, I might add) and
> the program crashes after two seconds online. I have to uninstall then
> reinstall the program just to get it to work each time I want it to work. I
> was thinking that maybe if I set Netscape 6 to default, maybe Morpheus will
> work, but more importantly, I'll lose a few less hairs. :) Only problem is I
> don't know how. The Netscape site isn't really much help, as the info is
> outdated, they're giving me information on changing default browsers with
> Communicator, Windows 95/98, and IE 3 and 4, whereas I have Netscape 6
> Navigator, Windows XP, and Internet Explorer 6. :/ Any help would be much
> appreciated. :))
>
>
>


--
Goober King
The Official, One-of-a-kind, Netscape whore.
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Dec 18, 2001, 3:07pm

Umm... what are you talking about?! *boggle*

[View Quote] > You know all this new stuff that came out due to what went on Sept. 11, 2001
> Well some of that I just really hate.
> Think about it, we would NOT have it if it was not for that day, so in a
> sense if you buy it, sure the money is going where it should.
> This makes me mad but just think about who you have to thank for it.
> Yep thats right the terrorists, because without them we wouldn't have this
> stuff!
> Thats just sick!!!
>
> And why do we always have to name stuff after people that die, why not name
> it after them when they are alive!!!!
> Come on people we are making money off of someones death, and I hate it!!!!
>
>
>


--
Goober King
Does anyone else get this?
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Dec 19, 2001, 8:10pm

That joke's changed hands so many times, that this version is probably
completely different from the original (if it ever even occurred in the
first place). Last I heard, it was a battleship, not a aircraft carrier,
and it was off Vancouver. :P

[View Quote] > 1) The USS Lincoln isn't an aircraft carrier and sure as hell isn't the
> second largest boat we got
> 2) Aircraft carriers are deep water vessels, the likelihood that they come
> anywhere near a lighthouse anywhere except Norfolk on the Atlantic coast
> would seem to be slim to none.
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Proof that Goobers ARE as dumb as they look.
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Dec 26, 2001, 10:59am

One of the first things anyone should do when they're running out of HD
space is to clean out your temp folders. The reason they're called
"temp" is because they're supposed to be temporary. Unfortunately, some
programs (like your virus scanner, apparently) are naughty and don't
clean up after themselves, leaving huge amounts of data in the temp
folders to just collect dust (and more data).

So, in answer to your question, YES! Clean that sucker out ASAP! And
while you're at it, clean out your Temporary Internet Files folder and
any caches you may have (i.e. AW, Netscape, etc).

[View Quote] > I can't see it to add re's to it, but dose anyone remember the post I made
> about something using up around 1 GB of space each time I ran my V scanner?
> well this time I watched it along with the size of my hard drive and right
> when the scanner got to the directory C:/windows/temp it stopped and
> repeatedly scanned that temp folder, during this is when something is eating
> my hard drive up, I stopped the scan and it would not stop, I had to do a
> ctrl alt delete on it to stop it.
> in that temp folder I found 4 sub directories that are near 900MB each.
> each of them directories only have 1 file 0.dll
> the directory names are
> C:/windows/temp/0333bab0
> C:/windows/temp/Zipa294
> C:/windows/temp/Zipb121
> C:/windows/temp/08xtmp
>
> Would it be safe to remove these or anything in that temp folder?
>
>
>


--
Goober King
Time for a little Winter cleaning...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Dec 31, 2001, 3:18pm

The problem is you're using OE :)

Come join the side of the angels... *waves Netscape Mail in your face*

[View Quote] > hi, anyone know why OE suddently thinks that I'm not connected to the Inet
> and stores all posts on my disk and wants me to press F5 before sending it??
> this happens after I installed NIS (Norton Internet Security), but I've
> configured it to give OE full access, I even disabled it and restarted OE
> and it still is being stupid... OE is configured to send everything
> immediately, so I don't get it (well, sort off, since MS products allways
> are crap, maybe I'll try NS for a change...)
>
> KAH
>
>
>


--
Goober King
The converts are coming slowly... but they *are* coming...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Jan 12, 2002, 3:18am

Since when was coffee not a "simple word"? *boggle*

[View Quote] > I cant spell ether, so don't yell at me for mis spelling coffee. But some of
> the simple words you should spell without error.
>
> --
> TrekkerX
> Commatron & Athnex
> http://www.commatron.com
> http://www.athnex.com
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Great, now he's become that which he hates: an English professor!
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Jan 12, 2002, 5:30pm

I'm seeing it too... I also noticed it with a couple of the new
chairs... looks like this set was more screwed up than we thought :P Be
sure to let Gand know!

[View Quote] > Oh the joys of truespace objects :). I see it as well, so it's not just
> sme, anyone else?
>
> --Bowen--
>
>
>


--
Goober King
No use whining in an NG that no one important reads...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Jan 15, 2002, 9:44pm

Ugh, you got his drivel too? He must've sent that to every person who's
ever posted in the NGs.

As for what was actually said, he once again has demonstrated his
amazing talent to say a lot about nothing. I think we've long since come
to the conclusion that the so-called problems with 3.2 are on the user's
end, not AWC's, and as for his porn site comparisons, well, let's just
say apparently some things never change. :P

The main problem with his entire argument (if you can call it that) is
that he, along with a lot of other people who have similar arguments,
seem to like lumping AW in with other things (i.e. Sims, Everquest, and
now apparently porn sites *boggle*).

Newsflash, people: AW is not The Sims. AW is not Everquest. AW is like
nothing else out there. Some call it a chat room, some call it a
platform for artistic expression, and some call it an entire
sub-culture. The great thing about AW is that it's all of those things,
and then some. There's no end to the possibilities that can be
accomplished with the AW idea, which makes it a unique beast in today's
3D market.

Now, whether that uniqueness is worth entering a credit card number in
order to try it out remains to be seen. While I do agree that entering a
CC number isn't exactly the most inviting way to great potential
customers, I do understand that it's just about the only way AWC can
guarantee that people don't try and leech off them (i.e. stay a tourist
forever). So rather than piss and moan about how much AWC sucks and
throw a fit saying "I'm leaving and AWC better care about it!!", why not
try to do something constructive and come up with *reasonable* solutions
to these problems. I'd like to think AWC would be more willing to listen
to those than the endless string of complaints...

[View Quote] > I just got this e-mail. Not sure if he wants me to post it or what but
> iether way, it is well thought out. Take a gander:
>
> AWC removed my right to post in this NG, I have sat and read every post tho
> and now I have something
> to say.
>
>
> Tourists: How does AW propose it's going to get new members without them? In
> the past few weeks I
> have asked that question, no one seems to have an answer. I compared it to
> you needing a credit card
> to get into one of those porn sites, most people won't go in and keep
> looking for the free pics no
> matter how good the advertisement looks. 100% of the people I spoke to said
> they wouldn't have
> entered AW before knowing about it if they had to use a credit card.
>
> 3.2: A complete and utter disaster and if this is what AWC is claiming we
> need to pay more for I can
> see now why people are upset. I had nothing but problems with it from the
> get go and it hasn't
> stopped since. Even one of the so called new objects a ctable1 & 2 they
> offered up to us as some
> kind of resolution to all this when I put it near a wall the glass top made
> it so I could see right
> thru my wall all the way down to the color of the backdrop. Masked objects
> and transparent objects
> are a builders nightmare now. I don't think we ever had that problem in 3.1.
> Lighting is splotchy at
> best and makes zbuffering even on overlaped textures now prominent when
> there was no zbuffer before
> when the textures were aligned properly and brightness simply means I want
> to turn every untextured
> object in the area white. Speaking of white any objects that were not
> texture mapped when they were
> made also now have a problem, for example the chess pieces we all loved to
> use in our builds can no
> longer be textured in gold for example because the object simply turns
> white. The glass objects with
> the black border and the doorway objects with the black border, same problem
> turns white.
>
> New Pricing Scheme: Couldn't have named it better actually since one of it's
> deffinitions is a
> secret plan or plot, a plot deffinitely one thikening quite well but is
> going to cost AW alot of
> money in the long run from what I see.
>
> So in conclusion, I don't understand the way AWC does things, seems to be
> one stupid mistake or idea
> after the other with absolutely no planning whatsoever. The Sims another
> major online 3D service
> which is free btw when you buy the software and add-ons in the store atleast
> has a marketable
> product and if they put objects or textures with the same names on them
> people would most likely try
> to return it saying it is worthless when all the files are named the same.
> See you all think that
> because AWC gives you something you haven't paid for it, quite contrary if
> you look at it from The
> Sims perspective, we have paid for it, many years of it for some and paid
> for it when we buy a world
> too. It has been paid for, problem is what we are getting from AWC is pure
> crap now. Not worth the
> packaging it comes in. Paying to get in to see the fine builds we have with
> a credit card is like
> trying to get more porno from one of the many porn sites with a credit card
> now. But who is going to
> give out their credit card for something like this, no one. And if 3.2 is
> any indication of what's
> to come I don't want to pay those programmers saleries because for me 3.2
> has been a complete
> nightmare and still is and no one has offered any solutions to the many
> problems I have stated. So
> for me I will be renewing my world and changing over to this account perhaps
> and as far as my many
> builds in AW, ohwell I guess I build some more to replace them but I will
> not spend $114 dollars a
> year for something that doesn't even work right and increase the salaries of
> programmers that messed
> up a good thing when we had it with 3.1. I can goto the store tomorrow and
> spend $114 on The Sims
> and 1 add-on and then use it free forever. What makes AWC think they have
> something better to offer
> here that you can't get anywhere else for the same money and not have to pay
> again? Well all I can
> say is the people running this circus act are a bunch of clowns to think
> people are so gullible. And
> I am personally insulted that AWC has stooped to such a low. That's all I
> have to say now, and I
> believe everything I have said to be true. Later, Chucks Party :)
>
>
>


--
Goober King
Guess we'll never truly be rid of him...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Feb 10, 2002, 5:42pm

In case *you* didn't notice, AWC revised their pricing plan based on
*our* constructive criticism. I'd say that's a good indication that
their willing to listen to our ideas more than our complaints.

[View Quote] [View Quote]
--
Goober King
Sometimes stating the obvious gets tiring...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Feb 5, 2002, 2:23am

One word: AWNews.com

[View Quote] > Hey all whats up?
>
> anything new happen in AW since the last time I was in? Did the Juno fiasco
> end or did those kids learn to behave?
>
> Jeiden
> _________________________________________ Tarl Grenier ICQ#:62735926 Current
> ICQ status: SMS: (Send an SMS message to my ICQ): +278314262735926 More ways
> to contact me: http://wwp.icq.com/62735926
> _________________________________________
>
>
>


--
Goober King
We need a better press agent!!
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Feb 6, 2002, 3:25am

If you visit said site, it will answer his question easily enough. No
sense overloading the newsgroup server with all that's happened since he
left! (That would take forever!)

Besides, we need better publicity! :P

[View Quote] > you couldn't just answer the questions, could you?
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Don't you know a *plug* when you see one?! :P
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Mar 2, 2002, 2:03am

Maya isn't free on Macs any more than it's free on PCs. The only thing
that's free is the trial version, for which there are both PC and Mac
versions. But from what I hear, the Mac version of Maya is shit, so it's
not even worth it. :P

[View Quote] > the fuck?!?!?1 maya is free on macs? ahh! gotta get me one!
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
You *wish* it was free....
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Mar 2, 2002, 10:23pm

Surely you jest! The day Macs can do 3D as well as NT is the day I kill
myself. :P All I know is what I've heard, and what I've heard is that
the Mac version of Maya is crap. As far as I know, Maya for Macs is only
a recent thing, though I could be wrong. In fact, if you look at the PLE
site, it states that the Mac version will *only* work with Mac OS X,
whereas on a PC it will work with anything from NT to XP (excluding the
9x series, of course). Sounds to me like the Mac version is more recent
than the PC version...

At any rate, the PLE is the demo version I was talking about... It'll do
everything that Maya Complete can do (not to be confused with Maya
Unlimited), but it puts a watermark on everything you render, and you
can only use the PLE proprietary file format. There's a reason why it's
free. :P

[View Quote] > Maya was created with Macs in mind, I thought. This link is to the Personal
> Learning Edition of Maya, and it's Mac only.
>
> http://www.aliaswavefront.com/freemaya
>
> SW Chris
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Thankfully, there are *other* ways of getting Maya for free...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Mar 3, 2002, 7:29pm

Graphics cards actually do very little when it comes to rendering.
Rendering is mostly all processor, so having a dual processor set-up can
definitely reduce your rendering time. And networking PCs is just as
easy as networking Macs, if not more so. What do you think "Windows NT"
stands for? :P

[View Quote] > emmm, u went from bout 100 processors to 2? and emm another thing, graphic
> cards are also important to render shit, not just the processor, and since u
> cant do something with just 1 porcessor, they hock up lots, so it renders
> together, which u cant do in pcs, so thats why they would consintrate on
> making 3d shit on macs
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
Proof that Goobers ARE as dumb as they look.
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  47  |   Order by default