MageUK

Just because someone has a high post count doesn't mean they're responsible. ;) I'm assuming if they've been around for awhile and weren't responsible they'd be banned by now. If we thought all of the people with high post counts were responsible they'd all be on staff. ;)

Just because someone has a high post count doesn't mean they're responsible. ;) I agree with Kaphias - and the forum database is not accessible from the web server. Security, security, security. ;)

The old poses that you can see in the earlier sigs will remain. We will of course be accepting new poses once we've launched out. Just a quick update for you guys, because of the custom uploads thing I'm recoding a lot of this and also optimising some of the other stuff. I'm working on this literally every day to try and get it sorted and I'm almost done with the front end that you guys will see. We will be having a moderation queue for the custom uploads. Cheers!

I think that depends on where you are in the country. I get 20MBits all the time, I can always get the full speed of my line, and the services has been so great I've had to call them once in about 18 months. Turns out what I called them about was actually scheduled maintenance as well and the connection was back up within 2 hours. I used to be with BT before that on ADSL, have never even looked back.

Sky are like their arch-nemesis lol. If you're already with them just mention that you've seen some adverts for Sky and they seem much cheaper than Virgin and you'll have deals flying at you left, right and centre. ;)

Everyone always seems to get confused about broadband speeds and I expect that's the way some of them want it. Virgin Media's service is as follows : "Size" is the name of the package as advertised by Virgin Media. Advertised Speed is the speed in the way that Virgin advertises it on their site, for example they say "2Mb" when really it should say "2MBit". The "Theoretical Max" will be in either KiloBYTES or MegaBYTES per second, NOT Kilo/MegaBITS. Bytes are what is used to display the downloads in stuff like Firefox and Internet Explorer which is why most people get confused with the speeds. Speedtest.net tests are measures in BITS not bytes, so if you're on the 2MBit package then you should be nearing 2000 (although Speedtests aren't really an accurate method of testing). Size : Medium Advertised Speed : "2Mb" = 2MBit Theoretical Max : 250KB/s Size : Large Advertised Speed : "10Mb" = 10MBit Theoretical Max : 1250KB/s = 1.25MB/s Size : Extra Large Advertised Speed : "20Mb" = 20MBit Theoretical Max : 2500KB/s = 2.50MB/s This is called Traffic Management and it's actually fully documented on Virgin Media's website. Fully depends on your distance from an ADSL provider. Virgin Media is just NTL with a new name and NTL owns the entire cable network (Blueyonder, Telewest, etc.). If you move ISP you're moving off cable and to ADSL. If the distance for ADSL is too great, you may find speeds are even worse for you there, and there's a much higher chance that Virgin Media will increase their capacity before the nearest ADSL exchange to you chooses to do some upgrades. See above, ADSL providers are all pretty much the same. The fact of the matter is that it all depends on distance. If you pay an ADSL provider for 8 mbps, and the fastest you can achieve is 2 mbps, that will be the situation across all ADSL providers. Cable can travel far longer distances and the speed you receive is based on the capacity your nearest exchange has, not your distance from it, so it's fairly simple for Virgin Media to add extra capacity. For a provider to increase your ADSL speed they would have to relay copper cables and all sorts to get any kind of speed boost, which costs far more. No. If you're receiving a slower speed than what you're paying for currently, your situation will be the same afterwards. Unfortunately even if you pay for a higher pack, all you are paying for is the network allowing you to use more bandwidth, if you can, you're not paying for priority over other Virgin Media users. This means that buying the top package will just cost you more money, and you'll see no increase in speed whatsoever. The best thing you can do is to get onto Virgin Media and try to get them to increase the capacity in your area, there's not really any other way. -------------- In the top post, you said you're getting 250kbps, do you mean 250KB/s? If so that's what speed you should be getting with your package. If you mean 250KBit/s then that's the equivalent of 31.25KB/s which is only an eighth of what you should be getting. If you are getting 250KB/s then your complaints are pretty much void since you're getting 100% of the service you should be, if this is the case and you want faster then you need to pay for a higher package.

The only way it could possibly help is if it was getting so hot in the case that the CPU was throttling itself. Unlikely. :?

Somehow I don't think Jagex will be specifically plotting to sabotage your hopes of getting HD. You could update your Java version though which might aid compatibility a little... I'm trapped at 1.4.2 for the moment... Got a system admin that sits on their [bleep] a bit much about upgrades and other things. I can't even talk on IRC... :( ~D. V. Devnull You don't actually need to install any software whatsoever to talk on IRC, unless you have some physical internet website filtering system then there's no way you wouldn't be able to get on IRC. As they say, where there's a will, there's a way.

Somehow I don't think Jagex will be specifically plotting to sabotage your hopes of getting HD. You could update your Java version though which might aid compatibility a little...

Sure - we'll take HD poses, we aren't asking you retake any you may have done previously in HD but if you want to take a few new ones then sure go ahead. :) We're still working on getting this running and possibly adding custom poses - bear with us.

We're going to have to make a poll on whether or not users want custom upload poses, if that's the case I'd rather get that ready for release than release sooner and tack that bit on later.

Devnull if you suggest moving around parts of the signatures at this stage then it's possible that I'll kill everyone who has posted in this topic. :D

Yeah the transparency could be a problem I guess. The former, we won't be doing, that would massively decrease our user base for these. You could make the generator auto transparent a certain color, like a standard windows paint shade of pink. I suppose, it would be nice if everyone just submitted images with transparency though. Are you for or against this idea of custom poses? I can't seem to work it out.

Yeah the transparency could be a problem I guess. The former, we won't be doing, that would massively decrease our user base for these.

I think you misunderstood the point of my post. I wasn't expressing my concerns or stating that I found it difficult to actually perform any of the tasks I mentioned, I was simply stating what needed to be done to implement this feature. Current poses are 122 x 108. All of the stuff in the "User Upload" section is very easy. Your renaming solution in the processing section doesn't really solve the problem I stated. You only allow one pose per RSN? Some people like to use different sigs on different sites, so they would be stuck with exactly the same pose, hence the random naming. Are signatures moderated now? No. That's correct. But in this case we would actually be hosting the image so it can easily look like we might have the pose they upload in our own gallery when in fact it's just them abusing the system. I'll be talking more with the administrative team about that.

Custom poses are possible however it will delay the release time. User Upload Must be checked for file size. Must be checked for correct MIME types. Must be checked for image dimensions (If they're incorrect do we resize? Again, adding more processing). To make this easier later we also need them all in the same format, again, do we only accept PNG or do we convert other formats? Processing After we've decided the image that we have is actually usable what do we do with it? We can't simply store it in a folder as it might be named the same as another image, so we're going to have to create a random name for these. Once a random name is created what do we do with it? How do we relate the user to that image? We can't simply store the username in a database along with the pose name because that will become a problem if they try and create multiple sigs. The only way we can do this is to add it into the resulting URL. That also causes the problem of people being able to use other peoples' poses in their sigs as they can simply copy the URLs and change the RuneScape name. Unless we create some kind of database where a pose can only be used with one RuneScape name. Moderating Now, once the image is stored and we decide to do whatever we need with it in the processing section we have to moderate the image. There will always be a minority who spoil it for the majority if we allow the images to go by and be uploaded un-moderated, so there needs to be some kind of queue until the image has been checked that it's suitable. The only real way we can distinguish between what has been checked and what hasn't (unless we manually move the image files between two "checked" and "unchecked" folders after they're been OKed), is to bring a database into play to mark which images are okay to use and which aren't. As I said, if you guys really want custom poses it's going to significantly delay the release of the signatures, but it's up to you.

Since we lost the dynamic signature topic originally here's a new one to start over. We're still at the same stage as the last post in the previous topic as we're waiting for the code to be verified by a few more people before it goes live. As far as it stands these are pretty much ready to go, we just have a few more things to do. We'll get them sorted out as quickly as possible. [hide=P2P] [/hide] [hide=F2P] [/hide] We're also going to be working on creating the HTML interface for which to create these through the site.

Host is now back up and running.

What exactly are you looking for? Just his amsg and away script?

GTFO Mac Fanboy. Hahaha, so true, but made me laugh. To quote an "If Operating Systems ran the airlines" post I read a few weeks ago :

Please don't get the client and protocol confused. These are mIRC scripts, not IRC. These scripts look like they weren't written by him, he probably has a client addon pack, just ask him where he got that and download the same one instead.

No, as has been said, reducing your resolution would make it artificially larger but also worse quality. And the messages in your chat box on your first image make you look like a moron, which is probably why someone has already reported this post.

I'm aware of that but installing a 13 year old operating system and getting it online was a bit of fun anyway. :lol:

I can tell you from their picture that they are running at least Windows XP, if it ain't a Mac or Linux. Otherwise, it wouldn't boot just simply due to lack of mobo drivers and ability to handle things like New Java Versions and/or ActiveX Objects like what would be needed to read through to the hardware layers. :( Also, it doesn't really matter what they are using the computer for. Today's OS'es are RAM HOGS. The more RAM, the better. :P ~Mr. D. V. Devnull Do you have a source for this information, or did you just make it up? Wherever you got it - I think I just proved you wrong.

It was a Creative Zen Vision : M actually, but yeah, they're good. :P Very good video/audio quality and excellent battery life. Heard the new slim high capicity ones aren't as good though.