Yeah, that is a great idea. Because games are made for admins, not players.
Boycotting 1.6 is one of the most worthless ideas I've seen come out of this list. Joshua -----Original Message----- From: Erik van den Berg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 9:37 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... nice email, but you are wasting your time, valve is not listening at all. Actually, imho should we all boycot cs 1.6 until valve is taking the 'admin community' seriously. ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 6:30 PM Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > No I haven't switched maps yes. I ran 24/7 dust cause its easy to get filled > up on a new server. Ill try switching them up to maybe storm and see what I > come up with. Although there is not much comparison to do. Everyone knows > x.1d is a worthless dog in performance. I think I will be sticking with the > x.0c patched version. > > I hope valve is listening becuase they haven't said much. As they can see > 99.999% of the admins that operate their product want to revert back to > 3.1.1.0c. I think if valve took a pole and asked which would you rather us > do, keep developing and doing bug fixes on top of x.1 or would you rather us > dump that development tree and restart all work on x.0c. I think we all know > what the put come would be. > > VALVe, No one want x..1. Release a a x.0d that the ONLY difference is the > fix for this exploit and we will all be happy leave you alone. No one cares > about bug fixes unless it's a major exploit. CPU usage is 100% more > important to us then fixing a flash bug or the likes. > > Jeremy > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Steven > Hartland > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 11:18 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > Are you comparing map to map as from our figures this makes > things vary hugely? I've seen a 16 player use 16% full and 50+% > depending on the map in 3.1.1.1d. > > Steve / K > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 4:25 PM > Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > > Well you must carry the magic stick because you are the ONLY one. I have a > > brand new Dual MP 2400 w/ FreeBSD sitting here running only 2 CS server. > > Exact same specs, both running 24/7 dust with 20 max player. No mods what > so > > ever. Just a straight stripped down CS server. And when they are both > maxed > > out the x.0c averages 20% usage of one cpu while the x.1d averages 33%. > > There is Nothing else and I really mean nothing running on this box other > > then these CS server and these numbers are very steady. Now at 12 players > > each the performance is a whole lot closer like off by a few % but not at > 20 > > players. > > > > Jeremy > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
