[Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... - Printable Version -Shoutbox (https://shoutbox.menthix.net) +-- Forum: MsgHelp Archive (/forumdisplay.php?fid=58) +--- Forum: Messenger Plus! for Live Messenger (/forumdisplay.php?fid=4) +---- Forum: Scripting (/forumdisplay.php?fid=39) +----- Thread: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... (/showthread.php?tid=62472) [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by tbcat on 07-03-2006 at 11:50 PM
As many must already know the popular plugin stuffplug is going to release a new version for WLM 8 (now not as a plus plugin but as an independent program), however it was announced that both closed windows and open windows notifier will not be anymore... RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by DarkMe on 07-03-2006 at 11:55 PM
I think it already exists thay have released it. RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by tbcat on 07-04-2006 at 03:01 AM
Now I see there were many topics about this RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by DeatzoSeol on 07-04-2006 at 07:12 AM
Many Many many people ask for it. RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by tbcat on 07-04-2006 at 07:27 AM It worked its way... But I donīt want to make this topic a war between people who say it worked and people who donīt (that's why I asked for a "connection stablished/lost script" and not a "open/closed windows script" ^_^) RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by DeatzoSeol on 07-04-2006 at 07:44 AM
Yeah, i know it worked, it did work sometimes for me too - often enough to make it acceptably reliable to me. RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by icepick66 on 07-04-2006 at 01:00 PM
if 2 people had the same program, the program could send a silent message to the other persont that thay have opend the window, and if they other person has that program, itll disaplay it as a toast, saying... RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by tbcat on 07-04-2006 at 05:56 PM
But that's not the idea... even that script existed less than 1% of your contact list would have it RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by Thor on 07-04-2006 at 06:02 PM Anyway it's just not reliable. The feature can't be trusted, but if it was reliable I would have used it. RE: RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by CookieRevised on 07-04-2006 at 06:53 PM
quote:several reasons, but the main one would be that many people (the majority) will interpret the function of such a plugin/addon/script in the wrong way. And there is nothing more frustarting than explaning to people again and again how things work. So in the end, most developpers simply don't even want to talk about it anymore, let alone make something like that or make it public. quote:The time-outs for the sessions are somewhat known, but MS has changed them from time to time. Making something that will ignore everything after x minutes will not be good because: a) the timeout could actually be less than those x minutes for all you know (only those who are very familiar with the protocol know the timeout value; aka don't guess such stuff, research it). b) no end of session will be reported back after the x minutes, even if the end of session was caused by the contact itself You can argue that it would notify the user and it would always be accurate if you implemented your own time-out after x minutes. Although this is true, it would not be as usefull and accurate as when you actually use the real timeout. Not to mention that without knowing the real time-out, all you still do is guessing (but this time guessing what the time-out might be). quote:That message can also easly be disabled with many patches btw. quote:best way? Study the protocol and stick to it. Don't implement stuff which is guessed or which needs interpretations. quote:The subject of the topic is serious enough to debate about it. This is still and always will be a serious forum where in the first place support is given and thus where information needs to be posted as accurate as possible without the possebility of misconceptions. ------ To make what you want, start by studying the protocol. Info about the protocol or links to it (and sessions in particular) can be found on many messenger related sites. (PS: not many people can deal with the protocol. This means something: it isn't easy to get it right!! success...)... After that, study how packet sniffers work. RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by tbcat on 07-04-2006 at 08:17 PM
Ok, thanks for the info ^_^ RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by Brodiebaby2020 on 07-05-2006 at 11:14 AM I downloaded this.. and it keeps telling me people are opening convos with me but they are offline RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by rob_botch on 07-05-2006 at 11:21 AM
At the risk of sounding stupid, what is actually the point of knowing when a contact opens a window anyway? If they are going to talk, you'll see the message. Surely you can wait the few seconds between opening a window and typing a message? RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by Mushroom_Man on 07-05-2006 at 12:31 PM Personally, I'm more curious about when someone closes the window. As I remember, that also happened to be (a bit) more reliable. RE: RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by Brodiebaby2020 on 07-05-2006 at 04:23 PM
quote:I sometimes like to change my status if someone i can't be bothered with opens a convo with me.. lolol. :] RE: RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by MisterFreak on 07-05-2006 at 07:20 PM
quote: Well..that isn't my experience..it kept telling me that someone closed their window...almost after every message they send..and they didn't close it..i asked it many times. RE: [Request]What Stuffplug will not have anymore... by tbcat on 07-05-2006 at 07:56 PM
I found it useful to know when someone closed the windows (with a bit of practice it was easy to know when was real and when was a false alarm with as much as 90% of accurancy (in my case)) |