Re: Why use olc?

From: Phillip A. Ames (kirk47@JUNO.COM)
Date: 10/03/98

On Sat, 3 Oct 1998 04:07:08 -0600 Jourge Fuzz Bush
<modem-burn@GEOCITIES.COM> writes:
>okay, I don't know about you but I would rather work in a windows 95
>environment for 40 and then upload and run ANOTHER version of the mud
>a testport and check rather than conjure up a 200 dollar internet bill
>and looking at a meere 2 color shell for 40 hours. And yes I have used
>olc, and I still say its not worth it for windows 95 users. Also I
>say on average the mud editor is faster and less strain on your eyes.
>but you do what ever you want. What u read was my opinion I didn't say
>had to use it. And more than just visualize rooms, mobs, obj, at the
>same time in windows 95 you have lists visible most of time rather
>having to go back and forth between mobs, objs, vnums in olc and on
>peices of paper you wrote on.
>and a reboot takes a mere few seconds. it's not like a full system
>Besides the matter olc takes quite a while to put in under win95
>considering that there is no patch programs that work properly and its
>quite a long patch.

Gnu-Win32's cdk.exe has a patch program that works 99% beautifully on my
comp(Win '98, worked on '95 as well).  Check out


Phillip Ames    | Satisfaction is not guaranteed. | -Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #19
ICQ: 8778335    | AOL IM: Grathol

You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST