There is a new beta version of wintin.net available for download at www.wintin.org

The main additions are MCCP(Mud Client Compression Protocol) and MM chat capabilities....

ENjoy,
Splork

Wintin95, alive and kicking
http://www.rasbora.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/download.htm

telnet forever.

Yet another new version of our favorite client, wintin.net at www.wintin.org

The main addition is phase one of MXP:-)

Get off those telnets and give it a whirl:-)

lol

if the text display wasn't forever slow on any Wintin variant, it would be a good competetion to good old JMC, but i've yet to seed anything with the text JMC posesses.

Yup wintin blows for one reason, text display is slow and on higher resolutions it even causes it to look like it flashes on screen. Otherwise it's great but with those to aspects it's not very usable imo.

At 1920x1200 it is extremely noticable.

I'm stuck with jmc - but I like jmc so no biggie.

I noticed a slight lag in .Net's first beta but it was removed rather quickly and text display seems rather quick to me. I wonder if anyone has done speed tests recently, the last ones I can find are almost four years old.
They didnt even include the old wintin95-which I found quite odd for such a popular client.

I have heard from several people that JMC is supposed to be the fastest client out there but I definately disagree when someone says text speed makes wintin.net unplayable, especially with the amount of people using .Net atm is relatively large for a new client.:-)

This is making me quite interested in testing the speeds of the most popular mud clients.

Actually the newer versions of wintin.net are fast as hell. I run mine at 1900x1440 res with no speed problems at all. It's about 2x as fast as JMC at least imo. The scripting completely owns JMC -- which is a shame because I love JMC so much. But, I forced myelf to use wintin.net for the features and now I don't think I could really go back to JMC at all. The only problem with wintin.net (*newest version*) that I've seen, is the actual GUI can get distorted and glitch out if you drag other windows over it, in which case i just shrink it down and re-maximise it and it's fine. I also use Windows Server 2003 though, and that may have had some effect on why my wintin.net runs so great :) since .net is an integrel feature of server 2003 OS (at least I would think this for some reason unbenownst to me). I also have had tons of scripting practice with this interface over the last few months so if anyone has questions or would like to share toss me a tell.

And a nice screenshot for you too !

http://photobucket.com/albums/y59/myteluze/?action=view&current=477db163.jpg

Version 1.09 just came out two days ago and the performance was increased even more. Speed tests of this version have shown it to be right in line with the fastest client and is far and above the fastest when it comes to trigger handling(which I feel is as important as text display).

I agree, earlier versions weren't the quickest, but give 1.09 a shot and I'm pretty sure if you can handle a client change(which I think is sometimes harder than changing games), you would give it a try.

Here is a cool screen shot, with a spell and mob pinger window-can click and recast or check if mob is dead or alive, etc. The bottom panels count how long spells are lasting-when they will fall,and the tabbed screens are filtered text for channels, web site pages, etc,

http://wintin.org/Portals/0/screen10.JPG

The major additions in the new version are increased performance/speed, personalizing mxp settings such as setting color, etc to hyperlinks, actions can be triuggered using mxp variables set by the mud, and phase two of mxp which includes full support for non-optional elements of the MXP specification.

Enjoy,
Splork

this is horse shit. wintin.net will never be as fast as jmc because its running on the .net virtual machine you are hallucinating.

the functionality provided with the .net framework does make it worthwhile however.

the speed difference will become insignificant when you upgrade from your pentium 166 with 16megs ram

[color=blue]You gotta love razorbum, because you can always count on himt o be wrong.

Also Myte why the hell do you use windows server 2003?[/color]

uh the speed difference is clearly noticable on high end machines. doesnt mean its not fast, but definitely significant.

gotta love malthros. always runs his mouth about shit he clearly knows nothing about.

Rather then "My cock is bigger then yours" fighting back and forth, how about some proof to back up these statements.

AdamG

Kamij $.02

why waste time going and trying to research bullshit when i can speak from personal experience? what kind of bullshit credit am i going to obtain from providing such proof?

Any credit at all would be of benifit to you.

People would be alot more likely to agree with your statements if you have some sort of proof backing them up. It seems apperent from the constant pissing matches you get in that you give a shit if people think your right or not.

AdamG

Kamij $.02

[color=blue]From running new(except for zmud) version of mushclient, jmc, wintin, zmud (5.55 or something, havent tried the newer versions for along time), and raw telnet, on an AMD 2800 1gig ram w/cable modem connection and 10-30ms link to Arctic, the speed I've seen of the clients over goes like this(fastest to slowest):

raw telnet (no suprise), mushclinet, wintin, jmc, zmud.

The new zmud is supposedly very fast, but I haven't tried it yet, never really liked the newer zmud setups, and 6.12 or whatever nearly killed my pc so i stay away form it if i can. There are other clinets I haven't tested, but the above is the order of respose I got. I don't know why mushclient was faster, because before I updated my PC it was worse than even the old, old zmud versions.[/color]

Malthros, are you on internet2? Because if you're not 10-30 ms link is like, nearly impossible.

Ah, how I miss living on campus and being able to get [i]angry[/i] when my Counter-Strike ping went above 13ms... *sigh*

[color=blue]Depends on whether or not I'm in my house, or a computer lab Myte. In the labs, yes, and it's about a 10-20ms link (can also download from major websites at like 2megs a second), from my house, which is about a 5 minute walk from the computer lab, it's 40-100ms, and that's on a cable modem shared with 3 other people. At my parent's place I used to get 10-40ms to arctic all the time(and is where I did the clinet tests from, avg ping was exactly 30ms).[/color]

Benchmark Tests in this instance are too specific to be useful to everyone.

For example, things that might influence speed but change person to person:

do you use ansi?
how many triggers do you have defined?
do you use ansi triggers?
how well are your triggers written?
what sort of link to Arctic do you have?

I'd be more interested to see some sort of a baseline test proposed with normal tic timer triggers, in addition to some sort of pk triggers, highlights, etc that was all cross platform capable to go into the other clients as well. Then connect all of the clients up to a local telnet server that simply echo'd out a few large ansi-colored clan battles.

That would be a much more useful metric.

#info
################################# INFORMATION ##################################
CONFIGURATIONS 15 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
ALIASES 39 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
ACTIONS 78 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
SUBSTITUTIONS 769 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
VARIABLES 10 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
HIGHLIGHTS 831 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
ANTISUBSTITUTIONS 0 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
FUNCTIONS 0 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
PATHS 0 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
PATHDIRS 6 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
TICKERS 0 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
MACROS 0 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
PROMPTS 0 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
TABS 0 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
CLASSES 0 IGNORE OFF MESSAGE ON DEBUG OFF
################################################################################

ANSI can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.

Wintin.NET definitely exhibits that strange screen flashing behavior on my system. After looking at it a little closer, it looks like the problem is actually that the prompt takes a minute to show back up (confirmed with a AVI analysis of Wintin in action).

I have a feeling it stems from the underlying use of PuTTY. There is probably a control character that has to be recieved before the text is dropped into the window.

The other really big problem with Wintin.NET in terms of speed is the large amount of unmanaged code used in the .dlls. The entire functionality of PuTTY is in an unmanaged dll being called from managed code, this translates into a large performance drop. Each time you call from managed to unmanaged you are losing speed in the transition. Plus, do we really need the overhead of dealing with all of those esoteric terminal types, builtin SSH support, etc.?

Now really, we're talking about a text based game here, does it really matter if we're losing 5ms here or there? For PvE it doesnt really, but for PvP it might.

If I were going to write a fast C# mud client, I'd keep the majority of the code in straight C#, especially the code that is called every single time a byte is recieved from the mud.

I anticipate version 1.09 being moved to "full release" sometime this week. Once this occurs, I will post the results of tests that were conducted using the Mushclient Benchmark tests. Version 1.09 included a major rewrite of how text was displayed. So, if anyone is testing the last full release-its pretty much pointless since performance was noticeably improved in the last 2 betas.

The next major version focuses on the allowing and saving of multiple sessions at once.

Anyways, good thread...

i.e., You dunno whatchou're talkin' about.

Like I said, it only really matters for PvP.

i.e., Suck my cock, cradle my balls.

It matters for PvE also, for instance
when i am at school computer, and i flee stab * mob in balifor, he never tries to stab me ... my link is too fast, the ms i get in the room, i'm stabbing him
... but when i'm at home, about 50% of the time i reenter room he attempts/lands a backstab on me ... becuz right after reenering i see the ms's of lag before my stab goes thru ....
i.e. braid my perineal hairs.

The main additions for the 2.0+ version are:

Main features are:
- 256 colour support
- multiple sessions
- C# and VB.Net scripting

Here are some benchmark tests completed with version 1.13 using the Mushclient benchmarks at
http://www.gammon.com.au/mushclient/benchmarks.htm

We need to run them again since we can now create scripts using C# and VB.NET because a couple of the test results for wintin would be much faster such as the incremental one...

display the file http://www.gammon.com.au/mushclient/termcap
Mushclient: 0.4 secs
Wintin: 0.5 secs
Zmud: 1.7 secs

display the file http://www.gammon.com.au/mushclient/high.txt
Mushclient: 0.7 secs
Wintin: 0.7 secs
Zmud: 2.3 secs

display the file http://www.gammon.com.au/mushclient/high.txt in Arial font
Wintin doesn't support proportional fonts.

display the file http://www.gammon.com.au/mushclient/high.txt with 10
specified non-matching triggers
Mushclient 1.0 secs
Wintin: 0.7 secs
Zmud: 2.3 secs

display the file http://www.gammon.com.au/mushclient/high.txt with 5
additional triggers matching a, b, c, d e that set a variable when matched
Mushclient: 16 secs
Wintin 1.6 secs
Zmud: 2.8 secs

run a script that increments a variable from 1 to 1,000,000
Mushclient: 3 secs
Wintin: 28 secs
Zmud 75 secs

display the file http://www.gammon.com.au/mushclient/mxplog.txt with no
triggers
Mushclient: 3.6 secs
Wintin: 5 secs

test environment:
client machine: AMD 2.2GHz, Windows XP
host: intel based Linux
10 Mbit/sec LAN