Desperatly seeking TB!!!!!!!

[Extreme_One]

The Blasphemer - PLEASE PLEASE stop working on StuffPlug for a short while and get Web2Messenger back online.

This is a UNIQUE service which nobody else has been able to better or even match.

No offence but StuffPlug is NOT UNIQUE - IMHO it's just another Messenger hacker.
Sure it has some clever features but nothing as groundbreaking as the Web2Messenger service.

You had potential to make this project really work - I can see quite some earning potential for you and any backers if things were done correctly.

Why oh why is this going to waste?

Even if we had some news like - "yeah we're working behind the scenes..." or "nope we'll never resurrect this dead horse" it'd be something.
Waiting in limbo is really annoying.

Even if the old PHP BOTs were back online that would be something.


Come on!!! Please give us something!

[Dhaya]

+1

[theblasp]

Alright, here's the deal. With the current architecture, the bots time-out because the SQL queries for keeping track of user status and messages and the likes just take too long. Fixing this would mean totally rewriting it, as we'd have to create a totally different architecture. Andrew doesn't have enough C/C++ experience to do this, and I don't have the time, nor do I feel that I could justify the time spent on it.
Contrary to what you believe, we've tried different approaches to earning something with W2M (even if it'd just be the hosting costs), but had no luck whatsoever. StuffPlug, on the other hand, is earning me much more than a normal part-time job.
Apart from that I feel there is no challenge behind coding a new Web2Messenger Bot Platform. It's basically a lot of typing and error-catching, with no research whatsoever. With StuffPlug I am doing research all the time, and this is what I enjoy most about programming.
I also feel that your argument about Web2Messenger being unique is faux, when it was still running clones and similar services were popping up like mushrooms, and made it appear like there was nothing unique about W2M. Even though I did, and do still, feel that W2M was coded much more elegantly, and that the features were much more sophisticated and less-error prone than competitors, visitors did not seem to see a difference.

I cant speak for Andrew, as I haven't discussed W2M with him recently, but I don't see myself re-coding W2M anytime soon. Mainly because I don't enjoy coding it, and I don't see a point. Besides, although you feel that StuffPlug is 'just another messenger hacker', I feel that I am constantly introducing new unique features, and I enjoy the research that goes into it.
If I have a holiday, and feel like spending some time trying to write a new W2M Platform, I might do so, but not in the near future, sorry.

[Aziraphale]

As with a lot of systems, all of our (I'm here too, by the way - hi! It's not just run by TB ) stuff worked (originally, at least) when we only had a couple of thousand users, but as we had more and more people using W2M all the routines (be they database queries or otherwise) took longer and longer to execute, leading to the evil high server load of doom that brought the site down so many times, and eventually causing the bot connections to time out while running queries and such, as TB said.  When I originally conceived W2M and we designed the database I never envisioned having over 10,000 users, so I didn't consider what sort of architecture would be required for that scale of system - in retrospect I was a little foolish, perhaps.

I'd like to get it back up, but I don't have the relevant programming experience (PHP won't cut it, here, unless you have ten or so spare servers lying around - if C++ code was running too slowly, PHP code is going to run even slower - PHP is designed to be fast to write applications in, not fast to then RUN those applications).  The best I could do would be C# or VB.NET, neither of which particularly enjoy being run on Linux servers, and neither language I know particularly well (but both are easier [faster] to learn than C++).  So basically it's a time problem for me as well.

Plus, as TB said, W2M really doesn't bring in any money to even pay for itself.  The adverts were bringing in something like 20% of what TB was spending on the server.

[Extreme_One]

Well thanks for replying guys.
I'm sorry I didn't include you Az in my original plea - I was unaware as to how much programming input you had and wrongly assumed it was all TBs doing.

I'm really sorry to hear that this project has died.

How about altering it slightly so as only to capture enough info about users to provide us with our beautiful sig images. The ability to include our Messenger satus and messenger Personal Message in our sigs was cool!
Even if were limited to being cached at 30minute intervals it would still be cool - enough to satisfy most of us without the web-sent messaging facility.

Or would that still stress the servers too much too?


just an idea....

[FireStorm]

Just an idea : why don't you just share the source code if you don't intend to work on it anytime soon? People who have some time and want this project to come back could try to improve it... Anyway I'd be willing to help, I'd love to use my sig again.

[Extreme_One]

...or share the code which would give us the basic capabilities to allow us to host one bot for 2 or 3 clients (or even just for me!) on our own server.

[rudi]

would be great indeed..

and sorry to hear w2m is dead :/

[PayableOnDeath]

quote Extreme_One
...or share the code which would give us the basic capabilities to allow us to host one bot for 2 or 3 clients (or even just for me!) on our own server.
/quote

I second that, i would really need to use it on is a couple of msn accounts, so should beable to run it my server with out too many problems, even if there was a small fee for it i would still go for it

[the andyman]

...or share the code which would give us the basic capabilities to allow us to host one bot for 2 or 3 clients (or even just for me!) on our own server.

I second that, i would really need to use it on is a couple of msn accounts, so should beable to run it my server with out too many problems, even if there was a small fee for it i would still go for it

I agree too, it would be great if you could just make the PHP version open source or available for a small fee/donation. That way you would be making money whilst not actually needing to pay for your servers. It's obviously a popular "service" and lots of people have servers or hosting which they would be able to run the PHP version on just for themselves so if you could make it into an easy-to-install product, maybe with an admin panel to change any settings and help run it, then you could make a lot of money out of it and make a lot of users happy.

[Extreme_One]

...
I also feel that your argument about Web2Messenger being unique is faux, when it was still running clones and similar services were popping up like mushrooms, and made it appear like there was nothing unique about W2M. Even though I did, and do still, feel that W2M was coded much more elegantly, and that the features were much more sophisticated and less-error prone than competitors, visitors did not seem to see a difference...

That's so 'faux' (to coin a phrase)

Web2messenger was unique - it captured (and provided us with) information  that the 'clones' seemed unable to.

If this was just another same old, same old service then fair enough we'd have all gone and utilised one of the clones.
Thing is that none of the (so called) clones are able to do the things that your service was able to provide.

I'm gutted that this project has died.
I really wish that one of the 'clones' would take the mantle and provide the same functionality but so far I'm still waiting...

What you do RE: Messenger hacking on the other hand, I have A LOT of choices for, and (no offence) I personally haven't chosen your route (I appreciate that lots of other people have chosen your solution  - and I'm glad that you're efforts aren't in vain) - but I fail to see why Stuff''n'Plug is SO superior compared to the competition, whereas it's bloody obvious where Web2Messenger was better than the competition.

[Nowan190]

Hi guys,

I'm sad to ear that Web2Messenger won't probably work again. First time I came on this site I found the idea great, but well ... it still was in BETA. That's the reason why I created one of the actual clones. Yea, as TB said ... this service wasn't unique. Actually, there are :

• WebDP
  Which is requires an invitation
• Bencastricum
  Which only provides a status image
• ToutMessenger

I also got problems with my service, ToutMessenger, due to the increasing number of users I also had to rewrite the script. I'm running a PHP script too, and I'm afraid ToutMessenger won't stand up to thousands of users. But well ATM, everything goes well (except the display pictures which should be back soon). Each user has an xml feed (see example), a default sig (see example), and a contact page (see example). We're workin' on some more features such as DotClear and phpBB plug-ins, ...

[Extreme_One]

...

• ToutMessenger

I also got problems with my service, ToutMessenger, due to the increasing number of users I also had to rewrite the script. I'm running a PHP script too, and I'm afraid ToutMessenger won't stand up to thousands of users. But well ATM, everything goes well (except the display pictures which should be back soon). Each user has an xml feed (see example), a default sig (see example), and a contact page (see example). We're workin' on some more features such as DotClear and phpBB plug-ins, ...

Would you be willing to make your code available for those of us that wish to host their own?

[mfragola]

Come on guys give as an update.
The idea posted above is, in my opinion, an excelent one.
You could either turn into open source if you don't feel like updating the codes or, as we know there will be people willing to buy it, sell it. I would buy it myself if I were into programming.

If you don't think it's a good idea, then at least put the good old php bots back online but with less functionality, just for those of us who miss the signatures..

And TB, I'm a StuffPlug user, I've always been, but I also feel it is not something original nowadays and it's just "the one I choose" among all the Messenger plugins available..
I think StuffPlug's success might be based on how reliable it is.. I mean, it has always been around and it's been always one of those programs that come full of new features and won't harm your computer. But, as for today, most features included in the latest version of SP can be found aywhere. You just choose it cause you've always had, and you know it will always be updated and safe. Web2Messenger was, in my opinion, an a lot more original and useful tool, which I'd like to see back.

Thanks

[Beau]

Aww, c'mon guys!

Release a hosted edition for us

Or at the very least, give us an update