Jump to content

Cheith

Member
  • Content Count

    150
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cheith

  • Rank
    Novark Citizen

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Fair enough - no life was certainly a bad choice of words. To me the multiple accounts is what it is. There is almost nothing you can realistically do about it so you may as well accept it. I was also, I guess badly, trying to make the point that not that many people are in a position to do this so it really isn't that big of an issue.
  2. This is true in pretty much every MMO - the more accounts you have the more you can do IF you have no life. The one thing is, though, that most people with money don't have time so it is not a big issue if it is a time sink - which it would be unless you have 20 computers. At that point if they are that well off they could hire 20 people for the same result. Frankly there is only so much you can actually do.
  3. Hmm, this will mess up those who have a bunch of territories claimed under sub-orgs because it was cheaper - and of course you could claim a lot more territories this way. I have to wonder if this is about the mining changes as if they don't do this one could have a lot of territories to auto mine on fairly easily.
  4. If planetary underground mining is not removed all that will happen is the auto-miners will auto-mine away and the miners will find other plots to manually mine. Voila new devices added and no lag reduction. It will be an amazingly 'interesting' decision.
  5. While I understand what you are saying this is still a perfectly acceptable investment strategy if you like taking big gambles. It is how, if you get one right, you make outrageous amounts of money.
  6. Huh? I think I'll stop this now as we have officially reached a strange place that I have no desire to go to.
  7. That is one of the wildest and likely deliberate misunderstanding of software architecture I have ever seen. I don't even know what to do with that, it is beyond comprehension why you would compare the two. There is exactly 100% no way to compare them - it is like not even close. If you are doing that type of comparison then if an ethernet card in a PC would not work in the same network as an ethernet card in a Linux server then you would have a point. As far as I can tell I can hook a Windows PC up to a Linux server without any issues - again maybe a relevant comparison. Dev tools
  8. Still not sure why you think MS has to build their tools to work on Linux or generate Linux compatible software. They don't have a monopoly on dev tools and there are plenty of other tools out there. Also, if I remember correctly, Linux is most definitely an option in their Azure cloud offering (yep it is - just checked).
  9. Are you really quoting an article from 2000? Seriously? You do know that no one makes you buy a PC or Windows, right? You can go right ahead and purchase something else. Also most sane software development companies are in this to make money and have the right to only publish for the platforms they think will be profitable. Maybe. just maybe, this is business doing business? Have you ever considered that MS don't do much Linux stuff because they just won't make enough money? Also there are a whole slew of Linux developers who are anti-MS so why would they buy it anyway!
  10. I get that - and if that was the case when the die was cast I would agree - but when this all went down Microsoft were far from the juggernaut they are now. This was all long before the EU got involved or anyone started suing anyone. It could have been very different but we got what we got. Of course if this had turned out differently IBM might have stayed the monopoly they were and your desktop OS would have been something else. The one thing it would never have been was Unix or any variant thereof. You could herd cats more easily than get the Unix (aka hardware) vendors at the time to agree
  11. Never said that - I said the reason the others lost was incompetence. Microsoft are evil, always thought so, but so are Apple, IBM and Google. The rest are inconsequential.
  12. It is also poor design choices - Apple being a hardware company does not favor third party hardware anything and thus has pretty mediocre hardware for the price point (and yet you talk monopoly - Apple made its bed). Unix (back in the day) had horrible UI, vendor specific architectures and was generally not seriously considered as a desktop OS - again Unix vendors shot themselves in the foot. We will not even talk about IBM and OS/2 and the mess they ended up making of that. MS was handed it all pretty much on a plate and no one else has really recovered. Apple is still a
  13. Fair enough, not a lot I would disagree with. I must admit, though, I have not seen much in the player base comments that is particularly reflective or helpful. Most are opinions of the game they would like to see or think they were promised (depending on who it is). Plus, of course, the hostility and pettiness that comes with feeling that one is not getting what one feels is necessary - which of course heads the comment straight to the circular filing drawer. Not been around long enough with DU to know if NQ have been here over and over again. In the end, though, I ten
  14. There is new and new - seen this all before - nothing new, nothing original. 'Old players' always think they know what will 'save' the game they thought they bought. Understandable but not unusual or original or different. They may or may not be right, but time is unlikely to tell us as their wishes are unlikely to be fulfilled. Of course NQ should understand why people leave - but these forums are not the place you learn. Too disorganized, too piecemeal and too small a set of loud voices. If they read why people leave they still may do nothing about it as it is not in their future
×
×
  • Create New...