[MUD-Dev] Web vs. Java client(?)

Joshua Judson Rosen rozzin at geekspace.com
Sat Nov 8 01:26:23 CET 2003

On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 02:57:20PM -0500, Jeff Fuller wrote:
> Eric Merritt said:

>> 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.

> You are much more likely to get people to download a plug-in for
> their current browser then you are to get them to choose a new
> browser. Allow people to stay within their comfort level and your
> more likely to gain acceptance.

Er..., let's back up a bit: what's the point of this thread? What do
you want, a single cross-platform codebase?

We're talking about minimising download-hassle for the users?

Why don't you just put everything needed into native executables?
There are plenty of cross-platform graphics- and networking-toolkits
and languages from which the toolkits can be used--Qt, wxWindows,
GTK+, and Tk are all cross-platform toolkits; there's OpenGL for
3-D, if you want that; Python, Perl, C++, and Java all have options
to produce native executables. Why can't you just pick one of those
languages, pair it with one of those toolkits, write your client,
publish a set of single-download native executables, and be done
with it?

"Complexity is the hallmark of stupidity" --Erik Naggum
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu

More information about the mud-dev-archive mailing list