Two-boxing with 2 PC's and a KVM switch

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Michael Lyons" <Linmukai@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:t4ednQhClusswNTfRVn-iw@comcast.com:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Xiphos" <xiphos@rahul.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.games.everquest
> Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 7:21 PM
> Subject: Re: Two-boxing with 2 PC's and a KVM switch
>
>
>> Michael Lyons writes:
>>
>>> Hmmmm, I want to look into this. Will be off work tomorrow until
>>> next
>> Friday
>>> night. Woo-hoo!!
>>>
>>> So, could you tell me what anaglyph glasses are and where I can read
>>> about/purchase them on the Web?
>>
>> Google's probably the best place to look, really. It's amazing how
>> many questions can be answered by checking Google. Anaglyph is what
>> the red-blue filter method of 3D imaging is called.
>
> I often do use Google and many times search either the Web or Google
> groups for information and sites I seek. However, since we were
> discussing these here and you seemed to know quite a bit about them,
> it seemed reasonable to ask for more detailed info right here.
>
> Basically, I could opt to never post or ask anything here or anywhere
> else for that matter and simply search Google. But I like talking with
> people about things of mutual interest. I am neither lazy nor stupid
> but I guess I am somewhat sociable. Like many of you I imagine, I have
> been using the Internet for longer than the "Web" has existed.
>
> Oh, and I do visit dictionary.com as well from time to time.
>
> Sorry if I seem cranky here but I can see referring someone to Google
> when you either do not know the answer to their question or for
> whatever reasons simply prefer not to answer it. However, if you do
> know the answer and you intend to provide it, I really do not
> understand telling someone they should Google for it. I interpret that
> as mild annoyance that I failed to look it up myself and a pointer to
> do so next time. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong. Ha! ha! Now,
> that's a silly thing to say on a newsgroup isn't it? Here of all
> places on earth one can always depend upon being corrected if they are
> wrong.

I don't get it. You asked where you might read more about the product,
and he told you. He recommended Google with a quick plug in case you
weren't already familiar with it. There are a lot of different levels of
knowledge here and no reason to make too many assumptions when you can
simply and briefly accommodate everyone at once.

Whereas your preference may have been for the poster to answer your
questions here, I didn't see their response as insulting at all.

--
Rumble
"Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing."
-- Benjamin Franklin
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Rumbledor" <Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns962862BD14E0CRumbledorhotmailcom@216.148.227.77...
> "Michael Lyons" <Linmukai@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:t4ednQhClusswNTfRVn-iw@comcast.com:
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Xiphos" <xiphos@rahul.net>
>> Newsgroups: alt.games.everquest
>> Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 7:21 PM
>> Subject: Re: Two-boxing with 2 PC's and a KVM switch
>>
>>
>>> Michael Lyons writes:
>>>
>>>> Hmmmm, I want to look into this. Will be off work tomorrow until
>>>> next
>>> Friday
>>>> night. Woo-hoo!!
>>>>
>>>> So, could you tell me what anaglyph glasses are and where I can read
>>>> about/purchase them on the Web?
>>>
>>> Google's probably the best place to look, really. It's amazing how
>>> many questions can be answered by checking Google. Anaglyph is what
>>> the red-blue filter method of 3D imaging is called.
>>
>> I often do use Google and many times search either the Web or Google
>> groups for information and sites I seek. However, since we were
>> discussing these here and you seemed to know quite a bit about them,
>> it seemed reasonable to ask for more detailed info right here.
>>
>> Basically, I could opt to never post or ask anything here or anywhere
>> else for that matter and simply search Google. But I like talking with
>> people about things of mutual interest. I am neither lazy nor stupid
>> but I guess I am somewhat sociable. Like many of you I imagine, I have
>> been using the Internet for longer than the "Web" has existed.
>>
>> Oh, and I do visit dictionary.com as well from time to time.
>>
>> Sorry if I seem cranky here but I can see referring someone to Google
>> when you either do not know the answer to their question or for
>> whatever reasons simply prefer not to answer it. However, if you do
>> know the answer and you intend to provide it, I really do not
>> understand telling someone they should Google for it. I interpret that
>> as mild annoyance that I failed to look it up myself and a pointer to
>> do so next time. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong. Ha! ha! Now,
>> that's a silly thing to say on a newsgroup isn't it? Here of all
>> places on earth one can always depend upon being corrected if they are
>> wrong.
>
> I don't get it. You asked where you might read more about the product,
> and he told you. He recommended Google with a quick plug in case you
> weren't already familiar with it. There are a lot of different levels of
> knowledge here and no reason to make too many assumptions when you can
> simply and briefly accommodate everyone at once.
>
> Whereas your preference may have been for the poster to answer your
> questions here, I didn't see their response as insulting at all.

You're right. I'm sorry. I was forgetting that at one point I had asked
about finding further sources of info and was thinking somebody who knew
about it or had made a purchase would be able to provide specific info from
their experience. But maybe that was the guy's intent and I was jumping the
gun, so to the person who provided the above quoted answer, please accept my
apology for jumping to conclusions when in fact you were nice enough to
explain a good deal about this for me and anyone else interested.

I love your Ben Franklin quote by the way. That is the best one I think I've
seen in quite some time. :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Impmon <impmon@digi.mon> wrote in
news:hhah41h67tdrtvs0iaj37esshk073882ga@4ax.com:

> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:37:16 -0500, "Michael Lyons"
> <Linmukai@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Hmmmm, I want to look into this. Will be off work tomorrow until next
>>Friday night. Woo-hoo!!
>>
>>So, could you tell me what anaglyph glasses are and where I can read
>>about/purchase them on the Web?
>
> Any standard red/blue glasses will work. You may have one already
> from an old 3D movie, comic books, some Nintendo games, etc.
>
>>Is the special Nvidia driver you refer to below in another post
>>something that makes some kind of difference in the display on a
>>standard CRT monitor or does this driver require some kind of special
>>hardware or glasses that you wear?
>
> The added driver just adds the 3D support to any NVidia cards. It has
> the ability to sue 3D move, it just need to driver to add the feature
> and make it work with many 3D games.
>
> I have done as told in other post and while the worlkd is mostly
> red/blue rather than the usual full color, it does have 3D effect that
> almost makes you want to keep using the red/blue glasses.
>
> I only saw the option for red/blue glasses, no other 3D mode at this
> time with the current video driver. I do wish they would use the LCD
> shutter glasses so I can get the 3D effect but in full color. And I'm
> begining to think it won't happen as LCD monitor are becoming more
> popular. LCD monitor and LCD glasses wouldn't work together well
> (ever wear polarized sunglasses? You'd notice you can see the LCD
> display only if you're viewing it at a certain angle or it's all
> black)

Another issue with attempting to use an LCD monitor for this is the
persistance of the pixels is significantly higher than on a standard CRT
monitor. It may be low enough now that it would not be an issue, not
sure.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons

On Steamfont in <Insanity Plea>
Graeme, 28 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage
Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner
 

user

Splendid
Dec 26, 2003
3,944
0
22,780
0
Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

In article <rkqi41dnut47vsl97k1gelbinlda6vdl8t@4ax.com>,
seeq@nospam.co.uk says...
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:32:04 GMT, Rumbledor <Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Nowhere near as high end as we might expect"? That's funny. :p
>
> Heh. Your point is well taken...but still, I do not consider my system to be leading-edge
> in March 2005. Powerful, yes. Leading-edge? No.

That's like owning a 2004 Porsche 911 Turbo and telling the masses he
doesn't consider it a high end car. "Its 2005 don't ya know."

I'll tell you a secret... ALL of last years supercars will still blow
away 99.9% of this years fleet. Yep all those 2005 Toyotas, Hondas,
Fords, & Chevy's are not faster than 2004 911s, nevermind 911 turbos.
The same is true for that $500 Dell PCI-Ex16 machine...Beleive it or not
it would be a serious downgrade for you. ;)


> I'm at 800MHz FSB; 1.066GHz FSB systems are available for not all that much more than you
> would pay for an 800MHz FSB system. My memory is DDR2 400; DDR2 533 is again the
> leading-edge.
> I have a 3.0GHz HT Northwood; you can get a 3.0GHz HT Prescott if you want
> to cough up the bucks (and cool the thing with a Trane central a/c coil). I have 8x AGP
> Pro; PCI-E x16 is available even on $500 Dell workstations.

/sigh

We're looking at single digits in actual performance improvments there.
Probably small single digits.

> I won't contrast my system against those with AMD CPUs, because I'm not very knowledgeable
> about such things. But I believe I am correct in saying that there are readily-available
> AMD systems out there that can whoop my system's arse like Gorenaire on a naked monk
> making a corpse run to Karnor's Castle.

Sure. 2nd place is the first loser. =)

> I suppose that what I was trying to say, was that the OP could probably run 2 instances of
> EQ on a mid-range system. Shame that I started bragging and forgot to make my point. :->

A midrange system being a generic Pentium 4 2.0GHz system with 1GB of
RAM and a half decent video card... even an nvidia geforce ti4600 would
be more than adequate for 2xEQ. I'm sure people out there do it with
even less.

PS I didn't find it germane to include brands, makes, and model numbers
of the cooling fans and motherboard screws. Rest assured that it will
need both though. ;)

(PPS Just poking a little fun, don't take it personally.)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Seeq Endestroi <seeq@nospam.co.uk> wrote in
news:rkqi41dnut47vsl97k1gelbinlda6vdl8t@4ax.com:

> On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:32:04 GMT, Rumbledor
> <Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"Nowhere near as high end as we might expect"? That's funny. :p
>
> Heh. Your point is well taken...but still, I do not consider my
> system to be leading-edge in March 2005. Powerful, yes.
> Leading-edge? No.
>
> I'm at 800MHz FSB; 1.066GHz FSB systems are available for not all that
> much more than you would pay for an 800MHz FSB system. My memory is
> DDR2 400; DDR2 533 is again the leading-edge. I have a 3.0GHz HT
> Northwood; you can get a 3.0GHz HT Prescott if you want to cough up
> the bucks (and cool the thing with a Trane central a/c coil). I have
> 8x AGP Pro; PCI-E x16 is available even on $500 Dell workstations.
>
> I won't contrast my system against those with AMD CPUs, because I'm
> not very knowledgeable about such things. But I believe I am correct
> in saying that there are readily-available AMD systems out there that
> can whoop my system's arse like Gorenaire on a naked monk making a
> corpse run to Karnor's Castle.
>
> I suppose that what I was trying to say, was that the OP could
> probably run 2 instances of EQ on a mid-range system. Shame that I
> started bragging and forgot to make my point. :->
>

I have tried 2 boxing on my system, but did not go so far as to crank
down everything. It was usable for bringing in a cleric for a rez, but
not for actually playing. I have an AMD XP 3200+ with 1GB of dual
channel DDR3200 memory and an ATi 9800 Pro with 128MB or DDR. I would
consider my system a midrange system...

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons

On Steamfont in <Insanity Plea>
Graeme, 28 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage
Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

"Graeme Faelban" <RichardRapier@netscape.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:Xns96287615F4759richardrapiernetscap@130.133.1.4...
>
> I have tried 2 boxing on my system, but did not go so far as to crank
> down everything. It was usable for bringing in a cleric for a rez, but
> not for actually playing. I have an AMD XP 3200+ with 1GB of dual
> channel DDR3200 memory and an ATi 9800 Pro with 128MB or DDR. I would
> consider my system a midrange system...
>

I too have an AMD Athlon XP 3200+ with 1 GB RAM as my main computer, and run
3 instances of EQ on it, two of them without sound and luclin models, and
they are all very playable.
The "max framerate" setting is important for the performance (I think).


I 4-box, and people always ask if I have 4 computers.

No, I have 2 computers, a dedicated machine for the enchanter and all others
on the same machine.

/NZ
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS