Fwd: Re: [MUD-Dev] Web vs. Java client

Eric Merritt cyberlync at yahoo.com
Thu Nov 6 09:09:35 CET 2003

--- Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes wrote:

> Well, thanks, but unfortunately, that's just trading one
> big-download client with shifting capabilities for another: now
> the user's required to download Mozilla, rather than the Java
> plug-in for their browser of choice.  Great, if you're one of the
> 5 people in the world who actively use Mozilla, but the people who
> don't like installing software are going to be even less happy
> with installing a new web browser to play a game, than installing
> the Java plug-in.

Currently mozilla holds about 2% of the browsers
markent. Considering that there are (at the last count I could find)
459,000,000 people who use the internet this means about 9,180,000
people use mozilla. I would suspect that in the mud community this
number would be much higher. In any case, its slightly bigger the 5.

As for downloading software, The java vm that sun is currenly
offering is around 14 megs, the current download mozilla.org is
offering for windows is around 11 megs. So the mozilla download is
much smaller. I am not sure if the above previously mentioned apps
will work with it, but Mozilla Firebird is actually around six megs
to download.

Considering that java based applets are a pain in the butt to
develope and an even bigger pain to maintain, I personally would
choose the mozilla option. As for what people would prefer to
download, you can't be sure of that unless you do a market survey. I
personally would thing that downloading and installing a browser
would have much less of a fear factor for the general public then
downloading and installing the java vm.

In any case, its your project, choose your tools and have fun with
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu

More information about the mud-dev-archive mailing list