1  |   Order by index

Jan 5, 2001, 2:28pm

What The Hell Why Are We Waiting So Long For 3.1 When The People Who Do
Stuff For Aw Get it(That's fair we do stuff to We pay to be a Citizen and
keep them running),But O Feedback's WHO Cares ask them not to send them and
then just delete them if they come Like Why Do We Have To Wait So Long.Cause
When They Release It(If They Ever Do),Then They'll Still Have
Feedback's.Like Just Make A NG For Feedback's Then U Don't Have To look At
Them*HehEHEh*,WE WANT 3.1 And U Should Make a better one For People WHO have
To Use 2.2 ooo Like IS This the Only Reason That Your Not Letting Us Get 3.1
Or Will we Get It When there's A 20.9 Like Make A Rule:NO
FEEDBACK'S*lol*.If You Are Reading This Part Then Thank You.. Yours
Stupidly Agent Fox Mulder


begin 666 Jaryn Michael Clouatre.vcf
M0D5'24XZ5D-!4D0-"E9%4E-)3TXZ,BXQ#0I..D-L;W5A=')E.TIA<GEN.TUI
M8VAA96P-"D9..DIA<GEN($UI8VAA96P at 0VQO=6%T<F4-"DY)0TM.04U%.D]Z
M>0T*3U)'.D8N02Y4.VUY(&AO=7-E#0I4251,13I/=VYE< at T*0412.U=/4DLZ
M.VUY(&)A<V5M96YT.TUY($AO=7-E($]N($UY($-O;7!U=&5R.U!R:6YC92!!
M;&)E<G0[4V%S:V%T8VAE=V%N.W,V=B P8C([0V%N861A#0I,04)%3#M73U)+
M.T5.0T]$24Y'/5%53U1%1"U04DE.5$%"3$4Z;7D at 8F%S96UE;G0],$0],$%-
M>2!(;W5S92!/;B!->2!#;VUP=71E<CTP1#TP05!R:6YC92!!;&)E<G0L(%-A
M<VMA=&-H97=A;B!S-CT-"G8 at ,&(R/3!$/3!!0V%N861A#0I!1%([2$]-13H[
M.SM0<FEN8V4 at 06QB97)T.U-A<VMA=&-H97=A;CMS-G8 at ,&(R.T-A;F%D80T*
M3$%"14P[2$]-13M%3D-/1$E.1SU154]4140M4%))3E1!0DQ%.E!R:6YC92!!
M;&)E<G0L(%-A<VMA=&-H97=A;B!S-G8 at ,&(R/3!$/3!!0V%N861A#0I8+5=!
M0BU'14Y$15(Z, at T*55),.FAT=' Z+R]!9V5N=$UO;&1E<BYC;VT-"E523#IH
M='1P.B\O06=E;G1M;VQD97(N8V]M#0I"1$%9.C(P,# Q,C(P#0I%34%)3#M0
M4D5&.TE.5$523D54.FIA<GEN8T!H;VUE+F-O;0T*14U!24P[24Y415).150Z
M4&5N9W5I;F)O>38V0&AO=&UA:6PN8V]M#0I2158Z,C P,3 Q,#54,38R-C0T
..6 at T*14Y$.E9#05)$#0H`
`
end

Jan 5, 2001, 2:50pm

ok, you try to program something like activeworlds....


[View Quote]

Jan 5, 2001, 4:48pm

Well said.

Grims



[View Quote]

Jan 5, 2001, 6:03pm

what kind of lame argument is that?

When you can't x, that doesn't mean you are not allowed to comment on
someone else doing x. (substitute something for x... for example,
programming)

Rolu

[View Quote]

Jan 5, 2001, 6:16pm

What i am saying is... Even if you are a very good programmer, Activeworlds
would be VERY hard to make... So, we really cant complain.


Joeman

[View Quote]

Jan 5, 2001, 6:47pm

God, let me try to figure this mumble out..
[View Quote] You just explained it. :) They dedicate hours into AW, and AWCOM gives them
a little thing back. :) Plus, they know more about how AW is run than people
like you and me. :)

>(That's fair we do stuff to We pay to be a Citizen and
> keep them running),But O Feedback's WHO Cares ask them not to send them
and
> then just delete them if they come Like Why Do We Have To Wait So Long.

I didn't get a word of this, learn some grammar, punctuation, and some
spelling and I'll try to respond to this next time. :)

>Cause
> When They Release It(If They Ever Do),Then They'll Still Have
> Feedback's. Like Just Make A NG For Feedback's Then U Don't Have To look
At
> Them*HehEHEh*

They DO have a newsgroup for 3.1, it's called Beta. :) Usually, the people
who have a lot to say when they are beta testing the new program post there,
even though when something is in beta, ALL of us should be posting our
comments there. *stares* They ARE going to release it into beta for anyone
to test, but it has to be EXTREMELY buggy right now if they are doing a
closed beta testing, where only a few people are testing 3.1 :)

YOU selfish little kid just want to get the newest and latest toy like every
other spoiled brat. And then, if they release it early, YOU'LL be the first
complaining about the 8,000 bugs and why your AW browser won't work.
Pathetic, and you probably haven't even ONCE posted in the beta newsgroup
(which i don't reccomend either, since you seem to have very little
knowledge on how AW is run in the big AND little scheme).

>,WE WANT 3.1

YOU want 3.1. :) The rest of us can wait until the cow comes home for all we
care. We're happy with a 3.0 and can live months later than the expected
release date for 3.1 if we had to. :)

>And U Should Make a better one For People WHO have
> To Use 2.2 ooo Like IS

They have made it better for people who are using 2.2, silly. :)

>This the Only Reason That Your Not Letting Us Get 3.1

There's a lot of reasonable explanations as to why we're not getting 3.1
yet. :) It's still being tested is one, we're really not all that smart
technically is 2, it's not uncommon for a release to be delayed, after all,
it's only a PREDICTED date is 3. :) There's a handful of others. :)

> Or Will we Get It When there's A 20.9

Doubt AW will even last THAT long.

>Like Make A Rule:NO
> FEEDBACK'S*lol*.

That's the STUPIDEST thing AW could do (which, in some instances, they've
been stupid enough to do).

Do you want a REALLY buggy program that never works, including it's
features...OR, a tested, tried out, ready to go program that will work 99%
of the time like 3.0 and 2.2? :) Your loss if you pressure AWCOM too much is
my thinking. :)

If You Are Reading This Part Then Thank You.. Yours
> Stupidly Agent Fox Mulder

I can agree with the "Yours Stupidly".
>
>
>

Jan 5, 2001, 7:40pm

[View Quote] Why not? If we feel the need to complain, there is something to complain
about. Whether or not it is very hard to do what you are complaining about
doesn't matter. People like Mr Use A Capital Everywhere down here probably
don't really know what they are talking about, but I do think you may
complain if someone does something wrong in your opinion. Whether your
complaint is valid or not is something else, of course.

Rolu

[View Quote]

Jan 5, 2001, 7:48pm

[View Quote] hm, something like "we pay for our citizenships, so we do something too, so
we should get the beta too", and "who cares about feedback", then something
incomprehensible, then "why do we have to wait so long"?

> At
>
> They DO have a newsgroup for 3.1, it's called Beta. :) Usually, the people
> who have a lot to say when they are beta testing the new program post
there,
> even though when something is in beta, ALL of us should be posting our
> comments there. *stares* They ARE going to release it into beta for anyone
> to test, but it has to be EXTREMELY buggy right now if they are doing a
> closed beta testing, where only a few people are testing 3.1 :)

plus, a closed beta minimizes the risk of a very buggy client becoming
available for everyone, and the mess that would give.

> YOU selfish little kid just want to get the newest and latest toy like
every
> other spoiled brat. And then, if they release it early, YOU'LL be the
first
> complaining about the 8,000 bugs and why your AW browser won't work.
> Pathetic, and you probably haven't even ONCE posted in the beta newsgroup
> (which i don't reccomend either, since you seem to have very little
> knowledge on how AW is run in the big AND little scheme).
>
>
> YOU want 3.1. :) The rest of us can wait until the cow comes home for all
we
> care. We're happy with a 3.0 and can live months later than the expected
> release date for 3.1 if we had to. :)

yup... we want a good, stable product.

>
>
> They have made it better for people who are using 2.2, silly. :)

although it would be even better when they'd adapt 3.0 or 3.1 so it works
without acceleration.

>
>
> There's a lot of reasonable explanations as to why we're not getting 3.1
> yet. :) It's still being tested is one, we're really not all that smart
> technically is 2, it's not uncommon for a release to be delayed, after
all,
> it's only a PREDICTED date is 3. :) There's a handful of others. :)

A release date only says "You won't get it before this date" :-)

>
>
> Doubt AW will even last THAT long.

who knows. Windows, for example, is already at about 100 times that.

>
>
> That's the STUPIDEST thing AW could do (which, in some instances, they've
> been stupid enough to do).
>
> Do you want a REALLY buggy program that never works, including it's
> features...OR, a tested, tried out, ready to go program that will work 99%
> of the time like 3.0 and 2.2? :) Your loss if you pressure AWCOM too much
is
> my thinking. :)

I think he just doesn't get the point of feedback...

>
> If You Are Reading This Part Then Thank You.. Yours
>
> I can agree with the "Yours Stupidly".
>
>

Jan 5, 2001, 10:54pm

HOw do we sign up forr beta testing??? And i want to know how whrn 3.2 or 4.0
come out


[View Quote] > What The Hell Why Are We Waiting So Long For 3.1 When The People Who Do
> Stuff For Aw Get it(That's fair we do stuff to We pay to be a Citizen and
> keep them running),But O Feedback's WHO Cares ask them not to send them and
> then just delete them if they come Like Why Do We Have To Wait So Long.Cause
> When They Release It(If They Ever Do),Then They'll Still Have
> Feedback's.Like Just Make A NG For Feedback's Then U Don't Have To look At
> Them*HehEHEh*,WE WANT 3.1 And U Should Make a better one For People WHO have
> To Use 2.2 ooo Like IS This the Only Reason That Your Not Letting Us Get 3.1
> Or Will we Get It When there's A 20.9 Like Make A Rule:NO
> FEEDBACK'S*lol*.If You Are Reading This Part Then Thank You.. Yours
> Stupidly Agent Fox Mulder

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 5, 2001, 11:17pm

God, you like to get ahead of yourself...I like how you think ahead and all,
but even us users need a time span where we can fully take in 3.1 before we
get to 3.2 :) I doubt the AWCOMers are even thinking of what to do yet
themselves. :)

In response to your question, YOU don't ask to become a beta tester, THEY
do. :) THEY being AWCOM. :) Closed beta has already begun and some of the
big techies and community biggies already have it. :) As for open beta, time
will only tell. :) We'll get to the point eventually where they'll open it
up to everyone and you can download it from their site to beta test (and it
better be for that reason :P) soon enough.

Nornny

[View Quote]

Jan 11, 2001, 11:40pm

adapt 3.1 so it works without acceleration? That would be tough but until
then theres the closest thing to it: 2.2 Build 305.

Jan 12, 2001, 10:09am

[View Quote] ....which makes it a mess working with two different versions. And 2.2 might
be close, but is not nearly close enough.

Rolu

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]

1  |   Order by index