• 0

    posted a message on WoW Matrix?
    Quote from MoonWitch
    LINK!

    /cast Google (Rank 1337)

    http://blizzcon.norganna.org/main.php/v/blizzcon2008/Faces/Blizzcon2008UIGroupLabeled.jpg.html

    :cool:
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on WoW Matrix?
    Quote from OrionShock
    ...a general move to make wow-addons more like production software.

    Production software like [insert Payware] or production software like Linux where I can pull _much_ more data that took way longer to develop from quite big server farms entirely for free?
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on WoW Matrix?
    Well in the end it's not some twisted evil(tm) that turns people towards WoWMatrix but the simple fact that it is a superior product to the Curse Client, at least from a "I don't care how it works if only it works!" point of view.

    You can discuss it until doomsday (when curse.com dies) or you could try to come up with a solution to the problem and stop whining about the symptom!

    Seriously! WoWMAtrix downloads mods from locations that YOU decided to put them there - if you want to change that you'll have to make 'em private I fear since WoWMatrix is not much different to a browser it is only:
    - not ad pestered
    - easy to use
    - more efficient than downloading + installing mods & updates manually

    Btw. I don't use it and I'm not going to use WoWMatrix anytime soon, but if things remain like now (everyone and their mother whining about something that simply downloads addons from sites that host addons and a "Curse Updater" that wants me to pay for like a few MB/year and then isn't even Open Source and exclusively works with curse.com) I guess I'll have to look for alternatives - be it customized scrips that work like WoWMatrix or something else...
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on I have a dream
    But the traffic overhead even if it would be enormous is on the USER side! Hell, even if I transfer 300 kb/mod instead of 100kb it would still hurt addon sites less than transferring a zipped 80kb file + webpage.

    Tracking is _not_ cost intensive (ask the guys at piratebay...) and could even be done decentralized via DHT.

    However if you've already even talked to the BT-Devs themselves and ditched the idea, maybe it's better for us as well too look for other alternatives instead of trying to force people down the torrent-road...

    What about small "patches" to existing addons instead of always downloading the whole thing?
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on WoW Matrix?
    Of course, but something like 1 month without an update on any of these famous mods and just a link to "whenwowmatrixgoesdownupdatesareback.com" on every download location would maybe at least send a strong signal... I'm not sure which but it would be strong for sure! :D
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on WoW Matrix?
    Well basically they are just automating the process of downloading addon files via a client instead of a browser... as they aren't hosting anything but their site + client (and not your addons) you maybe should better remove your addons from where they download it which would mean noone can get them - also not a real solution I hope.

    Edit: @ckknight that was...
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on WoW Matrix?
    The biggest problem is just that they leech bandwidth from major addon sites and don't credit the author (who is often credited inside the mod but anyway...) right?

    I guess it's just the logical step after WAU kinda "failed" for most people that used it and that don't see CC as a valid alternative (I feel so too but that's a different matter...).

    I guess the biggest question is still: Where from do we get such enourmous amounts of traffic? I think P2P-techniques will have to be considered sooner or later but if you don't do something against this problem, the symptom of "WoWMatrix" would always have been invented sooner or later... after all it works just like WUU only that the devs don't care that much for the addon hosting sites!

    Btw. there are ways to overcome this bandwidth issues, but the addon hosting sites would then see a huge drop of not only bandwidth but also visitors - and since clicks mean money I fear it will stay the way it's now for (maybe too) long...
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on WoW UI Updater (Win/OSX/Linux, supports multiple sites), 1.6 thread
    Quote from Ydrisselle
    Sukrim, do you really want to make a second WoWMatrix? Authors already hate the first one...

    Well, Curse.com is similar to that, only that authors upload their addons manually there...
    What would speak against pulling Addons from Curse OR BitTorrent (tracked via PirateBay or DHT) to not waste much bandwidth from Curse? WUU would still get + update the same addons but just not download them only from Curse/wherever but also from other WUU-Users instead - the addons themselves would of course be the exact same releases as on the numerous sites...

    WoWMatrix looks more like a "Let's pull all popular Addons from everywhere automatically to our server and host them" approach - btw. why would authors hate that?
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on WoW UI Updater (Win/OSX/Linux, supports multiple sites), 1.6 thread
    Would it help you if you could pull the files from elsewhere like Rapidshare and the like?
    One could kinda mirror curse there...

    Set up a DHT and let WUU upload every mod that can't be found there to Rapidshare (if the user wants to). If you include stuff like MD5 checks I guess this would be a really safe way to do this and would only download mods a few times (until someone uploads it on RS) from curse itself.

    The downside would be the rather long waiting time before a DL on Rapidshare's end - so you might wanna use a different hoster like bluehost.to...

    Anyway, there are numerous ways to keep Curse from too many leeching and not Ad-viewing clients, maybe try to be a bit creative on that end (what would speak against libtorrent for example?)
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on Babble-Mount-2.2 missing from Standalone libraries?
    Typo:

    ["Black War Steed"] = "Schwarzes Shlachtross",

    should be

    ["Black War Steed"] = "Schwarzes Schlachtross", (Added a "C")
    Posted in: Libraries
  • 0

    posted a message on Block Harry Potter Spam Please!
    Harry will kill Ron while Hermione does some nasty things to Hagrid!

    scnr
    Posted in: Addon Ideas
  • 0

    posted a message on Omen - Bug Reports and Suggestions
    Hm suggestion:
    Add a "pre-aggro-warning" option.


    Tank: 10k Threat, 500 TPS
    Me: 9k Threat 1000 TPS


    Warning (Sound, Splashscreen, SCT, whatever): "Whoa, little fella! Careful, if it stays like this, you'll be in serious trouble within 4 seconds!"


    Of course this can and will be a bit inaccurate, depending on your "how many seconds to calculate your TPS"-setting but I think this could still be very helpful.
    Posted in: Raid AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Official Threat-1.0 error reporting and discussion thread
    Quote from Antiarc »

    Malkom: What is your locale, and what are the translations for "Seethe" (http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=41520) and "Imp" (the warlock pet)? Those errors mean that there's no translation for those strings in the Babble library.


    *wants spells in tha armory...*

    Seethe means something like "to cook"

    Possible translation (UNTESTED): "sieden"

    http://www.wowguru.com/db/spells/seethe-id41520/ <-- no translations for this spell -.-' I'll try to find a murloc in westfall...
    Posted in: Libraries
  • 0

    posted a message on FuBar_ThreatFu - light-weight front-end for Threat-1.0 (and its KLHTM support)
    Quote from British »

    Would it be too much bloat to have 2 threat lists at any given time ?
    Obviously it would be global and target... but maybe it then could only show one list when there is only one target (but not when there has been other targets since last reset, as the global threat would be different than the target when it is the *last* target... if that ever makes sense ^^).


    It already works that way... (I guess) :P

    Quote from Adirelle »

    Quote from Gunahylia »

    for the version query it reported everyone as "[name] pretends to use KLHTM [version]", even if they only had KTM installed.


    What's wrong with this behavior ? Could you elaborate please ?


    The don't "pretend to use KTM 19.18" they _use_ KTM 19.18 and only KTM 19.18...

    Perhaps a check if they use Threat 1.0 - if yes, they "pretend to use", if no: "[name] has KHHTM [version]"

    Quote from Gandharva »

    Quote from Sukrim »

    Not everyone has the same target, which "targetdata" should TTKTM send? Your target? MT-target? The target most people have as current target?


    Of course my target. Because it's my threat that's getting sent.


    Well, your threat would be much lower than everyone else's, since you send thret for only one mob. Suddenly you draw aggro, but you (from KTM view) had only 40% threat... Kinda irritating for KTM users. I like the current approach more...

    Quote from FlareCDE »

    Apparently quite a few people want it disabled, they don't want it enabling, ever. It will enable automatically when needed, after a one time activation. That's how I read it.


    Why do they want to disable this feature? If they don't want to RECEIVE KTM data - I can understand that... Why don't they want to SEND their data if someone in their party/raid uses only KTM?
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on FuBar_ThreatFu - light-weight front-end for Threat-1.0 (and its KLHTM support)
    Quote from Gandharva »

    Quote from Cal »

    This would likely just lead to confusion and your threat would show completely out of place on their meters. While your threat would be correct, in the global context it would be messed up.


    But when they ask, I could tell them why and also they all see that these numbers are more accurate than their KTM values.


    Not everyone has the same target, which "targetdata" should TTKTM send? Your target? MT-target? The target most people have as current target?

    No, the only thing I dislike is the "If you want to send your data to KTM, enable it!" thing... I don't think this would be too hard to implement to work automatically.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.