I have been playing and creating MUDs for the past 11 years and I have always been annoyed by one thing. You cannot take your client with you. I have great triggers, aliases and color settings on my home computer, but I'm unable to bring them over to a friend's house, or to an internet cafe. With this concern in mind, I set out to make MUDBrowser. It's a MUD Client that works on any computer because it is a web site that you go to.

The great part about MUDBrowser is that it uses Javascript technology so it works on every computer without installing additional software.

Over the past few weeks, I have been traveling around the United States, and MUDBrowser has allowed me to connect to the MUD I created, DeimosMUD, from remote places and foreign computers without any hassle.

If you would like to learn more about how MUDBrowser solves this portability problem. Visit http://www.mudbrowser.com and sign up for a Beta Invite at the bottom of the page.

Will this be opensource?

I'm not clear on something. These $100/month and $30/month packages. Who exactly is expected to pay this? The players or the MUD operators?

Oh, it costs money? So much for opensource.

Good luck with it, although there are already a number of Flash/Java MUD clients out there.

It looks like it's the MUD operator who's supposed to purchase the plan to allow players to connect to the MUD. That's the only sense I can make out of the "per game" and "unlimited players" notes. If it is per-game, then I think it's a little misleading to make this sound like something players can do to make their lives more convenient; it's something that the MUD provides to the player, like a custom client.

In any scenario, so much money seems a little steep for something that has been done for free already. :thinking: I'm curious to know how this turns out.

That's why I was asking. Even if it's the operators expected to pay, very few free MUDs could afford that in addition to their hosting costs. Some of that rivals advertising costs on the large popular indexing sites, some of whom offer java telnet service for free.

I think for it to even be considered worth it for anyone, this client should support MSP, and MXP. It'd be interesting to see that done. I've signed up for the beta at any rate. I'll post feedback (if any) here.

He's just going around to all the mudsites advertising his browser. As stated, $100 or even $30 for a game a month is more then WoW. Not many, if any, would be willing to pay for a program where they could just put mushclient to how they want it and then let players download that version of mushclient and put it on a flash drive to take it somewhere (if they wanted too).

It's just something that shouldn't be paid for when you can get it for free.

Wow, I certainly wouldn't pay that kind of money for a client either as a player (unlimited characters maybe?) or as an operator (too many free clients already available) so I guess he won't be getting me as a customer. *shrug*

Good luck with that beta, Davion, I'll look forward to hearing what this turns out to be really about, hopefully it's MUCH more than what it seems like so far.

Msp yes, but mxp no. If it had something that other clients don't then it might be worth something, a feature rich non broken protocol and a set of C support libraries, multiple output windows that i can send various information to in a simple fashion like in the MIP protocol. Then i might be would be inclined to pay an upfront one off payment to have use of it, as long as the client was either free or offered on a subscription basis where there was profit sharing between the mud owner and the writer of the software.

IMO as i have stated elsewhere on this subject, there is potential in this but there needs to be lot more thought put into it to deliver a complete package which is targeted towards the right audience.

It just sounds odd to me… For $100 a month I could buy a fantastic new laptop, that's portable too….and a lot more useful seeing as I can put my favorite mudclient on it.

so Hmm, same price, make my mud playable via a website

or


3.4 GHz Core 2 Duo
4 GB RAM
NVIDIA 8700 M GT
Vista Ultimate SP 1
320 GB HD SATA II


Come to think of it, that'snot much of a decision, in fact the laptops $98 a month, not 100…

The funny thing is that the way this is set up, the decision isn't even in the player's hands like that…

I think only a dumbass would pay for something that is easily ready for free somewhere else….

With Vista pre-installed, I wouldn't call it fantastic.


The world is filled with dumbasses then. Many people pay for Windows when Linux is free. Both are OS's, but each has it's own advantages and disadvantages.

Vista pre-installed can mean uninstalling Vista and still getting a nice laptop. :wink:

As for Linux being free, well, I think that's a little different. Besides, relatively few people actually go out and buy Windows; they just know it as the thing that comes on the PCs they order online (and the price is "invisible" there). Also, relatively few people know about Linux. Finally, in the case of Linux vs. Windows, it is the person who will use it who makes the decision. For this browser-based program, it seems to be the MUD operator who pays, even though they have no idea whether or not players will actually use it. It's kind of like paying to open up a port that people might or might not connect to, and that doesn't affect who can play your game, and gives some (IMO marginal at best) benefits to some people, maybe, if they (maybe) connect via the browser client.

Windows != Linux. In fact Linux is not at all suitable for a business environment. a.) Several programs don't run on it. Many of these programs are the only or best of their type due to being in semi-obscure fields. Also most (yes I know there's RHEL) linux distributions don't come with any kind of support. I as an individual may not mind having no support but as a business owner I certainly do because I can't afford to spend my time helping every employee I'd have that wasn't familiar with linux. And really, Vista's not great, but depending on the uses it is indeed better than XP in some ways. It's not perfect, it does indeed remind me of beta software, but it frankly isn't even close to Windows ME.

Err… umm… well, I don't have the energy to write much about this now, but suffice it to say that blanket statements like this run an extremely high risk of being completely wrong. I have been personally at several companies who run Linux, and know of countless more.

Try telling that to Redhat, Novel, Sun, IBM, Oracal and a great many other companies who specialize in delivering Linux to business, not only in the server room, but on the desktop as well.



No Linux distribution comes with support. When you purchase RHEL your not buying Linux, your buying a few redhat add ons and a support package. Not that your stuck with 1 vendor for support either. There are a lot of companies that deliver support services for Linux, they do it cheaper and more efficient then Microsoft can for its own products as well.

we use linux at work. enough said. :(

Been inside many data centers lately? The place I worked for for 5 years ran the entire company on a bed of Solaris and Oracle for the critical functions that were tied to SAP. The heart of the entire company. Windows was only used mainly for the internal desktop environment. Linux is definitely not equal to Windows. It's vastly superior in every conceivable technical way, and the business software that truly matters tends to be written to run on some form of it.