MUD-Dev
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: [MUD-Dev] World Persistence, flat files v/s DB v/s ??
On Wed, 25 Mar 1998, Vadim Tkachenko wrote:
> > 1.0.2 is very out of date, though (and in general was buggy).
>
> The reason I mentioned it here is that the big companies still have the
> JDK 1.0.2 their APPROVED implementation, however stupid that sounds...
Not that stupid. My company does virtual conferencing over the internet
using Java applets. The only version of Java that's guaranteed to work
on most people's browsers is 1.0.2. Even Netscape/I.E. 4 don't do perfect
1.1, let alone Netscape 3. So we don't really have much choice. however
much we'd prefer a more up-to-date java. Of course, all this is moot
if you're running a java server or if you can get the people using your
client to fix their browser or run the client as a java application.
Jo
- Thread context:
- Re: [MUD-Dev] World Persistence, flat files v/s DB v/s ??, (continued)
- Re: [MUD-Dev] World Persistence, flat files v/s DB v/s ??,
Jon A. Lambert jlsysinc#ix,netcom.com, Sun 22 Mar 1998, 21:10 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] World Persistence, flat files v/s DB v/s ??,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Mon 23 Mar 1998, 06:54 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] World Persistence, flat files v/s DB v/s ??,
J C Lawrence claw#under,engr.sgi.com, Mon 23 Mar 1998, 21:42 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] World Persistence, flat files v/s DB v/s ??,
Vadim Tkachenko vt#freehold,crocodile.org, Wed 25 Mar 1998, 05:28 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]