Talk:MUD client

History

"wintin isn't really notable enough, the other clients noted in History are/were either first of their kinds, or very widely used. Feel free to prove me wrong" -well missing two points 1. It is notable that there are free/open source MUD clients for Windows. 2. The fact the zMud is the last entry makes the whole thing sound like an advert for zMUD. Maybe the whole thing should be re-done on features rather than programs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.234.10 (talk • contribs)

1 is taken care of by the large listing at the bottom of the article.

2 is due to the fact that that is the "History" section and there hasn't really been any overly notable client releases since. Perhaps Portal, but even that is very debateable.

At any rate, WinTin is a nice enough client, but it's not all that notable. The link you have in the listing section is more than enough in my eyes.

--Phorteetoo 04:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Italic text==Fastest Client==

There are no independant third parties doing testing, the people doing the benchmarking are the people who write the clients. Obviously they all want their client to test the best. When an independant third party starts benchmarking clients this should be updated.

Freeware is not Free Software or Open Source

It's not, and this is why.

All the clients in the Freeware list are released under the GNU General Public License so I'm changing the title of that section to Free Software.

"Fastest Client"

e? What exactly? I keep seeing that term being used. It's vague. What exactly does that mean? Fastest response time to and from the server? Dispalys text the fastest? Logs on fastest? Program is the fastest locally on the users machine because it doesn't have bloated cod 24.125.75.83 01:05, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

There were many tests such as raw speed, colours, colours in a proportional font, Non-matching triggers, and more. [1] --Zeno McDohl 04:17, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Those tests are bogus, say very little about performance under real conditions, are hard to reproduce, and are 3 years old. These tests were also conducted by the authors of the clients themselves and not by a third party. Another issue is that mushclient doesn't support the full VT100 protocol which would give it a speed advantage compared to Zmud, which does.

For fun I tried to reproduce the test with TinTin++ running in an rxvt terminal on Cygwin. It was completing test 4 (parsing high.txt with matching triggers) in 0.42 seconds using a 1700 mghz cpu running windows xp. So much for these clients being fast.

Besides, speed is of almost zero importance when data is generally send and parsed every 0.25 seconds with a max data size of 5KB. It's great for advertising a commercial program of course. --217.19.28.128 11:31, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

On Cygwin? That's a linux emulator, what does it have to do with the fastest Windows client? Anyways, if I think about it, do we really need to claim what is the fastest client on Wikipedia? We aren't trying to advertise the clients. I'm going to remove the "fastest Windows client" statement I made. --Zeno McDohl 16:21, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Mud Client Support Table

I added some initial tables, one for the OS, second one for server/client protocols, and maybe someone feels like adding a 3rd table with scripting capabilities. I'd suggest listing clients in alphabetic order and leaving a field blank if you have no idea.

While in theory every client can be run on every platform, it's probably best to only list the platforms the client developer provides working binaries/installers/builds for. --Scandum 13:56, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Most Popular Clients?

'Two of the most popular clients for Microsoft Windows are zMUD and Portal, both of which are commercial programs.'

zMUD is undoubtably the most popular MU* client, but Portal? I spend a lot of time on MUDs, and Portal is one of those fringe clients I occasionally run across. I'd nominate MUSHclient (but, being an avid MC user, I am probably biased), or Ashvar's Legacy (AL) for the runner up spot, but since zMUD is so dominant is a second mention justified? If there's no response to this within the next week or so, I'll go ahead and change it to 'The most popular client for Microsoft Windows is zMUD, which is a commercial program.'

Yes, zMUD should be up there in the most popular. I've never even heard of AL. I agree with Portal not being that popular. What about GMud? For it's free use, simple program, and small size, I think it's pretty popular. And yeah, I'm also a MC user, but I can't say it's the most popular. --Zeno McDohl 03:30, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of GMud, I see the link in the article is pointing to a somewhat unknown server and not to the client the vast majority of mudders know as GMud... but I'm honestly unsure of where to point it other than a direct download link. Anyone know if there is even an official page? -Phorteetoo 19:56, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

GMud hasn't had an offical page for years, if at all. If you need a download link, I'm sure I could find one. --Zeno McDohl 22:10, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm a little confused about the GMud naming. I know of two different clients that can be referred to as GMud: *GMud, a low end Windows client, and *gMUDix, a Gnome/Windows client. Not sure about features on that one, as I've never used it. As for its popularity, I wouldn't say that it (Windows-only GMud, that is) is popular, but that could be because the MUD I play requires either obscene reflexes or a powerful client - having both does help though :).

Err, no, G-MUD is not the Gmud was talking about. This is what I am talking about. [2] --Zeno McDohl

And a few months later I remember this discussion. Oops. Anyways, dug up the readme from GMud and it lists [3] as the official place to get it. It has a few others, but GMud is there... but due to it being an FTP repository, I suppose it'd need to be a direct download link to the client (gmd3219b.zip). I think GMud should be represented on the list, as it is fairly popular, but am unsure about the wiki-etiquette for direct download FTP links. Any thoughts? -Phorteetoo 09:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. --Zeno McDohl 13:06, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

It's also just occured to me that we should probably list the most popular Mac clients, and the most popular *nix clients as well. I believe Rapscallion to be the most commonly used client on the Mac, but what about *nix? I know a lot of people using Tinyfugue, a few people using Xpertmud, one or two using MC with Wine, but does Tintin++ still have a big enough following to take this spot?

In fact why even bother to list popular clients? A full list of all clients should be fine. We don't need to bother with finding out which ones are popular. --Zeno McDohl 16:21, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

TinTin++ has the most derivatives with Zmud still using chunks of tintin code, conceptual it's the most popular client like diku is the most popular server. While tintin was once the most used *nix client it took quite a fall when development stalled and the website went down for half a decade. Regarding Zmud, I'd rather see something about Zmud's history than a mention it's the most popular client. --Scandum 11:01, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me - a paragraph about zMUD, mentioning its Tintin Windows port heritage and mentioning somewhere about the usage is perfectly encyclopaedic and relevant.

So, how does this sound? NB: I hate this wiki markup.

Following on from Tintin's success, Mike Potter (also known as Zugg) was keen to produce a Windows port of the client. In 1995, zMUD reaced v1.0 and began to be distributed. Initially, it was licensed as freeware, but Zugg realised that he could make a profit from sales of the client, and thus Zugg Software was formed, selling zMUD v4.0 as shareware. After this commercial release, zMUD quickly escalated into the most commonly used commercial MUD client, and occupies this position today.

Sam Pointon 10:56, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Link to "dforces" mud client

Discussion previously conducted here and here.

"Most of the items listed on that page are as notable as the one I listed, yet you complain only about mine. Thus, I find your point moot." I agree wholeheartedly, that some of the other links may also be inappriopriate. But this does not make your contribution any more acceptable. You still haven't discussed any of my objections, so I'm feeling obliged to delete the link again. If you feel that I've done something wrong, you may request for editor assistance to help you resolve our dispute.

"Heres the answer to your question about wintin - You seem to have a link to it yourself, as you support it wholeheartedly. So, you delete mine, I delete yours. I didn't start this, you did." Uhm, I believe you are mistaken here. You have deleted the link to WinTin on Oct 2, almost a week before I started (see the edit summary), so you cannot claim that I support it in any way. Also, bear in mind that such "he did this, so I did this" arguments don't really move the discussion to resolution. --Krótki 08:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

One of the main benefits of DF Client is the SSH support for mud administrators. At the same time it allows the admin to use the same client to connect to the mud with most features of other available clients. No other client does this, or rather, none specify it as a selling point. If you believe this isn't noteworthy, we're going to be doing a lot of undo's.

I'm mistaken in my point with wintin - Looks like copy and paste didn't take all the content from notepad. So, I'll drop that and say I'm wrong. --Dforces

You have just said that the uniqueness of the DForces client is not in the features, but in the fact that they are its selling point. Since you admitted that it's features are not thelmselves unique, I don't think that meets criteria for notability. Moreso, if it was notable then it would gain more support, and right now you are the only supporter of this client on Wikipedia (this is your only activity here). This also brings the suspicion of conflict of interest, which breaks the rule of neutral point of view. You still haven't given any response in this topic. And you have been adding links to it on various not related articles (f.e. here or here), which categorises as linkspamming. If it wasn't enough, you keep adding your link to the Free software section, to which your client doesn't belong to - that is misleading at best, and mischievous at worst.

That's why I'm keeping deleting the link - because you have not given reliable EXTERNAL (that is - not by a person having a conflict of interest) references confirming the client's notability.

I also consider the whole List of clients section subject to delete because Wikipedia is not a collection of external links.

On a side note, please sign your answers by adding ~~~~ at the end of your response. --Krótki 08:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Your argument doesn't make much sense -- There are no clients with unique features. You've also seem to have misinterpreted my words -- "Selling point" doesn't necessarily mean it costs money. As for adding links to those other sections, they are not links to the client. Well, I've helped you out and deleted the entire section. Dforces 11:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

This solution seems reasonable to me, thanks. Just to clarify: My reason for opposition against adding the link to the "Free software" section was not because I thought this MUD client costs money, but becuase its source code is not freely available, and that does not meet the definition of free software. --Krótki 08:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

First MUD Client

I suspect I wrote the first MUD client. It was in 1988, called Ripper and ran on the Atari ST. It was for the Micronet MUD called Shades. It's mentioned in Indra Sinha's book 'Cybergypsies'. 82.10.226.69 (talk) 18:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Redirection for TinTin++ from TinTin disambiguation page links here with little detail on TinTin++

I should declare that I have made code contributions to the current incarnation of the TinTin++ client and am a moderator of the official forum for it.

Is it reasonable that a disambiguation page link does not actually give much about the specific subject of the disambiguation on the landing page? Whilst it would be inappropriate for me to make a TinTin++ article could we at least get a link to the TinTin++ project site? SlySven (talk) 11:59, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

 Not done There's plenty of information about TinTin++ and its predecessors on this page. If you feel TinTin++ can meet the general notability guideline, feel free to try and write an article. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 21:33, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Add license to the table?

I came to this page to find free software MUD clients, but the article doesn't mention licenses. I think this info would be useful and should be included, as it is the case in many other software lists on Wikipedia. Apparently there used to be a list of free software and proprietary clients, but it was dropped for some reason. Could the license info be added again? --Drummyfish (talk) 22:13, 24 June 2019 (UTC)