1  2  3  |   Order by index

Jan 24, 1999, 3:21am

Rolu, why not update the list more frequently? HTML isn't THAT hard to edit. If you don't, I will...and I'll move it to tnlc.com...

Anyway, this is on The List™ but not on Rolu's List(sm):

Better audio mixing so multiple WAVs can play simultaneously and more realistic fading depending on WAV volume level.

This one isn't on either list (but I told Roland about it many months ago):

There should not be pauses while playing "bump noise"es. These pauses make sound effects, specifically walking ones, annoyingly impossible. This probably won't be possible unless DirectSound is implemented, which probably won't be for a while (unless COF—er, Activeworlds.com—gets another programmer or 2 or 3 or...to get DirectX—includes Direct3D and DirectSound—implementation done quicker).

Jan 24, 1999, 11:06am

My list will be out soon, I wanted to wait until AW 2.1 goes final, but if
that takes too long, I will release it anyway.

[View Quote]

Jan 24, 1999, 11:52pm

Just update it whenever you get a new suggestion that's not already on it. Simple. HTML editing isn't THAT hard...

[View Quote] > My list will be out soon, I wanted to wait until AW 2.1 goes final, but if
> that takes too long, I will release it anyway.
>
[View Quote]

Jan 25, 1999, 1:42pm

I almost finished a program that does that for me: it counts the votes,
sorts the list, and outputs a HTML file out of a database that I can edit
from within the program.

[View Quote]

Jan 25, 1999, 8:20pm

[View Quote] The problem is the thing has to be re-uploaded every time it's updated.
The updating itself is no problem, that's right...

--
Cubic
ICQ - 18557607
cubic at mediaport.org
http://welcome.to/cubic

[View Quote]

Jan 25, 1999, 9:21pm

If the updating isn't the problem, neither is the uploading.

--

[ Fluxen Dean-Christian Strik ]
[ ICQ: 11760568 ISG RhinoSoft ]
[ fluxen at bigfoot.com dean2 at bigfoot.com ]

The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from.
-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum

[View Quote]

Jan 25, 1999, 10:27pm

Uh, so what. Welcome to the joys of being a webmaster, Cubic. Now sit down, shut up, and let the REAL webMASTERS work their magic. :)

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Jan 25, 1999, 10:36pm

If you are worried about uploading, find a different web page provider.
There are dozens of free ones and many of them have online editors so you don't
have to even bother uploading the page after making changes, unless you are
adding a new image or other file, of course.

A good review of free web page providers is at:
http://www.digiweb.com/~maxlee/FWPReview/

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Jan 26, 1999, 6:25am

[View Quote] Not a problem.
But it's more work.
BTW: If you upload it every time you update it we'd get kindof a
Winamp-situation here: 3 new versions per week ;-)

--
Cubic
ICQ - 18557607
cubic at mediaport.org
http://welcome.to/cubic


>The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from.
>-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum
>
[View Quote]

Jan 26, 1999, 6:27am

[View Quote] I don't meany that it costs a thing.
I mean that it takes time and effort tu opload it. And more important: if
you re-upload it with every update the version numbers would rruuunnn up!

--
Cubic
ICQ - 18557607
cubic at mediaport.org
http://welcome.to/cubic

>A good review of free web page providers is at:
>http://www.digiweb.com/~maxlee/FWPReview/
>
[View Quote]

Jan 26, 1999, 6:41am

Um, for *me* uploading isn't a problem. I can post a new version to the NG's
and upload it within about two minutes or less. However, if I made a new
version every time I received an email, I would have been at v25 or so. That
gets annoying, when there's a new version every day. Other people should be
able to keep up with it. That's why I want to release only once, maximum
twice, per week.

--
Rolu
Rolu at Bigfoot.com
AW 5000s 2000w


[View Quote]

Jan 26, 1999, 11:04am

[View Quote] > I don't meany that it costs a thing. I mean that it takes time and effort tu
> opload it.

The cost was not my main point. My main point was that there are many, many,
many web page provider services out there and many of them have ONLINE editors
where re-uploading html pages is unnecessary and a waste of time.

> And more important: if
> you re-upload it with every update the version numbers would rruuunnn up!

I don't understand your fixation with versions. It is a web page, not a
program. It is unnecessary to number the lists. Just add an ID number to
each wish on the list and allow people to track the progress of the list as it
is revised. Besides, new versions would make old versions obsolete, so why
keep the old versions around for reference?

Jan 26, 1999, 6:52pm

[View Quote] [View Quote] Exactly. Kids (i.e. immature people) new to programming (and web design) just like to have some sort of sense of accomplishment, so version numbers give this dillusion—er, sense—that what they're making actually MEANS something...at least to them. Anyway, Cubic and Rolu, look at my RenderWare news/updates page (http://tnlc.com/rw/updates.html) and you'll see that updating a website isn't that hard once you get a system down. Rolu's page is SMALL compared to my site, for example, yet I had more updates in the same amount of time than him. I also run a Tomb Raider level editor site, which also has an updates page (at http://tnlc.com/eep/tr/updates.html). Then there are pages I don't have an updates for, but I still change the "last modified" date up top. http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/, http://tnlc.com/eep/tr/compare.html, and http://tnlc.com/eep/tr/improve.html for those pages.

All depends on how organized you are...and how you show that organization in your web page design.

Jan 27, 1999, 1:51pm

[View Quote] I have had the ID idea too, and all idea's now have an ID. However, I think
version numbers do make sense. Now it's easy to see what version is newest.
I won't keep around every version I have ever released, however, I will keep
the last two or three versions or so, so you can have a look at them.

>

Jan 27, 1999, 3:32pm

But, why bother with "versions"?

Just make one list and change it when necessary. Chances are that no one
will bother keeping up with what version is out, anyway.

[View Quote] > Um, for *me* uploading isn't a problem. I can post a new version to the NG's
> and upload it within about two minutes or less. However, if I made a new
> version every time I received an email, I would have been at v25 or so. That
> gets annoying, when there's a new version every day. Other people should be
> able to keep up with it. That's why I want to release only once, maximum
> twice, per week.
>
> --
> Rolu
> Rolu at Bigfoot.com
> AW 5000s 2000w
>
[View Quote]

Jan 27, 1999, 6:13pm

Exactly, Dean. Rolu's reasoning is a prime example of programmer narrowmindedness...they just can't see outside the box...

[View Quote] > But, why bother with "versions"?
>
> Just make one list and change it when necessary. Chances are that no one
> will bother keeping up with what version is out, anyway.
>
[View Quote]

Jan 27, 1999, 8:30pm

Would you rather be forced to upgrade your software every few hours, Eep? Because that's often what is entailed as you fix
each individual bug. I can tell you from experience that people tend to get tired of that veeery quickly, unless it was
*their* bug that just got fixed. Hence, you only give updates when it's either a serious deficiency, or after a certain
period of time. Otherwise, the user just begins to ignore the updates and it accomplishes nothing.

grover

[View Quote] > Exactly, Dean. Rolu's reasoning is a prime example of programmer narrowmindedness...they just can't see outside the box...
>
[View Quote]

Jan 27, 1999, 9:06pm

I am sure (?) that Eep knows that, but the problem here is that Rolu is treating an HTML list as though it were a program rather
than a list that can be revised with out having to release a new "version"

[View Quote] > Would you rather be forced to upgrade your software every few hours, Eep? Because that's often what is entailed as you fix
> each individual bug. I can tell you from experience that people tend to get tired of that veeery quickly, unless it was
> *their* bug that just got fixed. Hence, you only give updates when it's either a serious deficiency, or after a certain
> period of time. Otherwise, the user just begins to ignore the updates and it accomplishes nothing.
>
> grover
>
[View Quote]

Jan 27, 1999, 9:31pm

Er..... if uploading is a waste of time, then ONLINE EDITING isn't? I think
online editing is worse than offline editing + uploading. And online editing
really doesn't save time. It the time span changes, it's only because it
takes longer...

--

[ Fluxen Dean-Christian Strik ]
[ ICQ: 11760568 ISG RhinoSoft ]
[ fluxen at bigfoot.com dean2 at bigfoot.com ]

The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from.
-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 1999, 9:33pm

Yes, better just use the date as the version. Just don't crosspost (post it
just to wishlist) then.... :)

--

[ Fluxen Dean-Christian Strik ]
[ ICQ: 11760568 ISG RhinoSoft ]
[ fluxen at bigfoot.com dean2 at bigfoot.com ]

The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from.
-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 1999, 9:34pm

Hehe.... time for a CVS project for AWFWWL? ;-)

--

[ Fluxen Dean-Christian Strik ]
[ ICQ: 11760568 ISG RhinoSoft ]
[ fluxen at bigfoot.com dean2 at bigfoot.com ]

The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from.
-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 1999, 9:36pm

Ding, ding! Dean's got it right again. Dean, you rule. :) Seeing as how Grover claims to be a part-time programmer, he obviously can't see outside the box either. hehehe

And if programmers programmed correctly in the FIRST place, there WOULDN'T be so many versions with bug fixes. :)

Then of course there's automated upgrading, but that's probably too advanced for grover... :P

[View Quote] > I am sure (?) that Eep knows that, but the problem here is that Rolu is treating an HTML list as though it were a program rather
> than a list that can be revised with out having to release a new "version"
>
[View Quote]

Jan 27, 1999, 9:53pm

[View Quote] > And if programmers programmed correctly in the FIRST place, there WOULDN'T be so many versions with bug fixes. :)

ahh, to be an idealist again :-)

Jan 28, 1999, 6:41am

I once maintained a similar list. I called revisions, not versions. They
were called rev. X (mmddyy), e.g. rev 12 (140398).

--

[ Fluxen Dean-Christian Strik ]
[ ICQ: 11760568 ISG RhinoSoft ]
[ fluxen at bigfoot.com dean2 at bigfoot.com ]

The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from.
-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum

[View Quote]

Jan 28, 1999, 2:00pm

Hehe, it should be 031498 :)

--

[ Fluxen Dean-Christian Strik ]
[ ICQ: 11760568 ISG RhinoSoft ]
[ fluxen at bigfoot.com dean2 at bigfoot.com ]

The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from.
-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum

[View Quote]

Jan 28, 1999, 2:18pm

[View Quote] I think that's what Eep said too.
The difference is that the 'IMHO-degree' of Eep's messages is usually a bit
lower than yours ;-)

--
Cubic
ICQ - 18557607
cubic at mediaport.org
http://welcome.to/cubic


>[ Fluxen Dean-Christian Strik ]
>[ ICQ: 11760568 ISG RhinoSoft ]
>[ fluxen at bigfoot.com dean2 at bigfoot.com ]
>
>The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from.
>-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum
>
[View Quote]

Jan 28, 1999, 8:25pm

I do the same thing, but instead go yyyyddd. That way, it's a straightforward <
> calculation to see which build's older :-) AND y2k complient! <g>

grover

[View Quote] > Hehe, it should be 031498 :)
>
> --
>
> [ Fluxen Dean-Christian Strik ]
> [ ICQ: 11760568 ISG RhinoSoft ]
> [ fluxen at bigfoot.com dean2 at bigfoot.com ]
>
> The nice thing of standards is that there are so many to choose from.
> -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum
>
[View Quote]

Jan 28, 1999, 8:43pm

Ahh, there to be good programmers...

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Jan 29, 1999, 5:02am

[View Quote] >Exactly. Kids (i.e. immature people) new to programming (and web design)
just like to have some
>sort of sense of accomplishment, so version numbers give this dillusion—er,
sense—that what
>they're making actually MEANS something...at least to them.

If it means nothing to you why do you make a problem of Rolu updating it
'only' once a week?
And of course Rolu thinks it means something. Otherwise he wouldn't bother
updating it at all.

>Anyway, Cubic and Rolu, look at my RenderWare news/updates page
(http://tnlc.com/rw/updates.html)
>and you'll see that updating a website isn't that hard once you get a
system down. Rolu's page is
>SMALL compared to my site, for example, yet I had more updates in the same
amount of time than
>him. I also run a Tomb Raider level editor site, which also has an updates
page (at
>http://tnlc.com/eep/tr/updates.html).

Wow, wow..
Quite proud of yerself, aren't ya?
Pffrt... As if the amount of updates says something about whether it means
something.
As you already said yourself (I think in an other reply): with programs
frequent updates rather indicate buggyness than quality-programming ;-)

> Then there are pages I don't have an updates for, but I
>still change the "last modified" date up top.

Ok, that's another way to keep updates recognizable then.
Does that mean you have to criticize every other way??

Why do you always have to mix your message with arrogance and sarcasm?
Maybe you could be a bit more *con*structive...

--
Cubic
ICQ - 18557607
cubic at mediaport.org
http://welcome.to/cubic

Jan 29, 1999, 5:05am

[View Quote] In that case you wouldn't notice when new things have been added to the
list.
Version numbers on the opposite, are recognizable.
Unless of course you release a new version every day...

And maybe using the date as 'version#' *is* indeed a better idea.
But the way dean and eep bring it, it's not an idea but more like forcing
there opinion through.

--
Cubic
ICQ - 18557607
cubic at mediaport.org
http://welcome.to/cubic

[View Quote]

1  2  3  |   Order by index