>> Even though it's not as good, I'm afraid tintin is far above tinyfugue.
>
>Umm, what does this MEAN exactly?
The number of people using tintin is far greater than the number of people using
tf. The docs for tf are hard to follow, and it's not exactly user-friendly.
>Bsides, I find the telnet/tinyfugue method runs much faster.
>So does everyone else who's had opportunity to compare that I've spoken to.
Yes, its by far the best solution I've found so far. Tf running on my ISP's
machine, using up their memory and CPU to do all the work, while I use a nice 32
bit Windows telnet app to access the shell. Tf has a high speed link to the
mud, and reacts quickly even if I don't see it until a second or 2 later... :-)
Ron
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST