1  |   Order by index

Apr 13, 2004, 4:30pm

Devteam,

it would be great for bots to be able to know beforehand if botgrams
are enabled in a universe, the current situation is you need to send
first and get a nonsensical reason code 31 RC_NOT_LOGGED_IN. A
suggestion would be to have a bool in the universe attributes that can
be tested by bots before sending a botgram, something like
AW_UNIVERSE_BOTGRAMS_ENABLED :)

Alex
(posted in beta and emaild to devteam)

Apr 13, 2004, 9:05pm

Botgrams were never disabled; a simple bug in the universe server caused them to not function. They should work in the main AW Universe.

[View Quote]

Apr 13, 2004, 9:07pm

What has this to do with my posting?

On 13 Apr 2004 18:05:11 -0500, "tony m"
[View Quote] >Botgrams were never disabled; a simple bug in the universe server caused them to not function. They should work in the main AW Universe.
>
[View Quote]

Apr 13, 2004, 9:10pm

I'm simply saying since the uniserver bug inadvertenly "disabled" botgrams, there's probably no actual option to disable them; so the addition of this attribute would be pointless.

[View Quote] > What has this to do with my posting?
>
> On 13 Apr 2004 18:05:11 -0500, "tony m"
[View Quote]

Apr 13, 2004, 11:26pm

*probably* vs *pointless*. If you are not sure, why don't you inform
yourself? I do not know myself, I just suggest an elegant solution.
Nice to know they solved a bug, now if AWI would care to answer
themselves about something they know, it would be nice.

Alex

On 13 Apr 2004 18:10:48 -0500, "tony m"
[View Quote] >I'm simply saying since the uniserver bug inadvertenly "disabled" botgrams, there's probably no actual option to disable them; so the addition of this attribute would be pointless.
>
[View Quote]

Apr 14, 2004, 12:55am

BTW, Tony, I'm not trying to antagonise you. I'm getting very weary
of AWI not directly addressing us in the ngs about these matters. I
have had to go mostly by hearsay and own testing in this new SDK
upgrade, making mistakes, fixing them, stumbling again, through lack
of proper documentation and feedback. This is not only insecure, it is
very tiresome, frustrating and wastes a lot of our time.

Alex

On 13 Apr 2004 18:10:48 -0500, "tony m"
[View Quote] >I'm simply saying since the uniserver bug inadvertenly "disabled" botgrams, there's probably no actual option to disable them; so the addition of this attribute would be pointless.
>
[View Quote]

Apr 14, 2004, 1:01am

I wholeheartedly agree with you. AWI's inability to communicate properly with its own customers is horrifying, and has unfortunately been rampant for some time. I have a feeling it will only continue to worsen, until AW just crashes entirely. Someone either within AWI or otherwise needs to start convincing them that proper communication with their customers will benefit them hugely, far more than the price-raising silliness brought on a year or so ago.

[View Quote]

Apr 14, 2004, 1:10am

Most of my sdk coding has been hit-or-miss too if its not documented, even
then its still hit-or-miss with the poor documenting.

-Ep0ch

[View Quote]

Apr 14, 2004, 1:44am

An example: at the end of february, I emailed Bill Hoover asking when
we would have an SDK for 3.5, explaining also that I had added lots of
features to xelagot, and would like to know whether to wait for the
new SDK to make it available or to release it then. His reply was
"soon". I also emailed Will, who is in charge of the SDK, and never
got a reply from him. Since that day, I checked 3 or 4 times a day the
SDK web pages... on april 3rd, I saw there was a new SDK.... great.

Has anyone seen an official posting in this NG announcing the new SDK?
Has anyone seen a reply from AWI to the questions posted here?

I did get a reply from on one question I had: as from what world
server does the Mega cell limit apply. The answer I got from AWI was
64. The correct answer is 62 (with a higher maximum value than 64,
true, 8192 bytes, which was later brought back to 5000 bytes in 64).
This correct info I do not have from any of the people working for
AWI. Do we have to rely on hackers, third parties or hearsay to get
the info we need? Do we have to spy the SDK web pages to find out
when a new version is available?

The same applies to the beta browsers and world servers. The universe
message says at present: "Welcome to the Active Worlds Universe! 3.5
is now in open beta!! Download the latest builds of the browser, world
server and SDK from
http://www.activeworlds.com/products/download.asp". What builds, are
we to guess when new ones come? The beta ng has not received ONE
notice of new beta builds since times inmemorial.

I think AWI should really get their act together on this. There a
lots of people very actively trying to contribute to the enhancement
of AWI, and we need proper feedback to do so.

Alex

[View Quote] >BTW, Tony, I'm not trying to antagonise you. I'm getting very weary
>of AWI not directly addressing us in the ngs about these matters. I
>have had to go mostly by hearsay and own testing in this new SDK
>upgrade, making mistakes, fixing them, stumbling again, through lack
>of proper documentation and feedback. This is not only insecure, it is
>very tiresome, frustrating and wastes a lot of our time.
>
>Alex
>
>On 13 Apr 2004 18:10:48 -0500, "tony m"
[View Quote]

Apr 17, 2004, 10:53pm

> Do we have to rely on hackers, third parties or hearsay to get
> the info we need? Do we have to spy the SDK web pages to find out
> when a new version is available?

Its hardly spying... but it is a lot more fun when certain hackers (we are
all probably thinking of the same person) releases new information and
various tools get released that have all the fun stuff in... (like the rest
of the commands, lol)

- MR

Apr 18, 2004, 8:56am

My point is not the hackers, of course. It is that we should get the
correct and full information from AWI, not from other parties :)

Alex

On 17 Apr 2004 19:53:20 -0500, "strike rapier"
[View Quote] >
>Its hardly spying... but it is a lot more fun when certain hackers (we are
>all probably thinking of the same person) releases new information and
>various tools get released that have all the fun stuff in... (like the rest
>of the commands, lol)
>
>- MR
>

1  |   Order by index