Mark and Ryan, its your move

[SteveH5]

AIM+ still isn't struggling but they would destroy the competition if 3.0 ever came out.

I have never understood the argument that AIM+ 3.0 is better then deadaim (or anything else for that matter). It’s not a real program, it was never released, correct me if I'm wrong but has anyone seen it other then Mark or Ryan? Did they ever release a feature list? Of course an imaginary program is going to be better then DeadAIM because it’s as good as you want to think it is.

Its kind of like saying "DeadAIM 5.2 is way better then Aimutation"

Well what the hell am I basing that on?

[Anthony]

The real reason AIM+ 3 never saw the light of day was because DeadAIM 3 beat it to the punch, it was released a few days before the expected release of AIM+ 3 and Ryan paniced, because it had features he had no idea how to implement.

AIM+ 3.0 had a promised feature set. There was and still is no question over what AIM+ had inside it. How you can say that JDennis was able to program better then Ryan blows my mind. I'm sure Jim would admit to not being able to program as well as Ryan (If not in public then at least behind "closed doors" to certain people). Ryan works for a high profile company as a programer, with what I'm sure is a lot of money every year (If you visit the forums often you would know the company and the position but for privacy reasons I'm not posting it here). Jim on the other hand (and I should hope no one takes offence) af far as I know doesn't even come close to that ability to program.

Whether Ryan has grown as a programmer today and is capable of implementing such features I don't know...

Quite the political statement.

Stop bashing DeadAIM, AIMutation and other mods because what they do is far beyond what AIM+ does, in technical terms...

First of all I have never bashed any of those programs, and if I have I stopped a long time ago. Telling people the flaws I have found I see as being very diffrent.

...AIM+ is childs play compared to the other mods.

Actually... Not true at all. If you can come up with a decent reason why it is true then feel free to post it .

As far as making AOL take notice of AIM+ you're again in denial, there's no reason for AOL to want to collaborate with yet another 3rd party developer to work on AIM, the DeadAIM authors have now filled that vacancy.

Just because you take notice doesn't mean you would/can do anything about it. It would be a huge slap in the face if AIM+ got off life support (IF it can even be that (I don't see many football players on life support making a big deal in the game )) and started besting (sp) AOL/JDennis.

[Axilla]

How you can say that JDennis was able to program better then Ryan blows my mind. I'm sure Jim would admit to not being able to program as well as Ryan (If not in public then at least behind "closed doors" to certain people). Ryan works for a high profile company as a programer, with what I'm sure is a lot of money every year (If you visit the forums often you would know the company and the position but for privacy reasons I'm not posting it here). Jim on the other hand (and I should hope no one takes offence) af far as I know doesn't even come close to that ability to program.

Is Ryan's company bigger than AOL?

And really, what has he done that is so special? Give me a month to learn programming and I bet I could make something that takes away an ad and writes html from a window to a new file.

[foobaroo]

AIM+ 3.0 had a promised feature set. There was and still is no question over what AIM+ had inside it

Really, what was this feature set?

How you can say that JDennis was able to program better then Ryan blows my mind

You must not know much about programming. AIM+ is whats called a "loader", easy as pie to do, also, everything AIM+ does programatically uses standard API, DeadAIM and AIMutation authors reverse engineered an AIM OCM file to make their own, far more advanced programming knowledge is required. They both also use internal AIM functions which are reverse engineered, just look at DeadAIM and AIMutation in a disassembler for all the proof you need of this.

Actually... Not true at all. If you can come up with a decent reason why it is true then feel free to post it

Read above.

First of all I have never bashed any of those programs, and if I have I stopped a long time ago. Telling people the flaws I have found I see as being very diffrent.

I wasn't replying directly to you so apologies if you thought I was. DeadAIM, while admitedly at version 4 does have a few bugs but only because of the advanced nature of the techniques used for aliasing as an example. AIMutation still hasn't reached version 1.0 so enough said there.

[foobaroo]

And really, what has he done that is so special? Give me a month to learn programming and I bet I could make something that takes away an ad and writes html from a window to a new file.

With words anyone can climb the highest mountains and cross the deepest valleys, I challenge you to do what you just said, and not in visual basic or delphi, in the same programming language AIM+, DeadAIM and AIMutation are written, C++

[Anthony]

foobaroo... You'r just throwing dirt at people...

Like your request that I tell you the features... I'm sure you know that A. I don't know them, B. They were pulled from all spots by Ryan for pretty odvious reason, and C. I wouldn't tell you even if I did know for reason B

You talk about how the program are made to do what they do... I don't consider tearing your way through to be the better way to program. Also it is a lot more legal to do it the way Ryan did.

Then you talk about version numbers... Are you really trying to tell me that because a program is at a higher version number it is better? If so I'll release a program, add one feature over 7 days, be at a "legit" version 7.0, and have the best program. That's actually pretty awesome. I think I might do it .

[foobaroo]

foobaroo... You'r just throwing dirt at people...

Show me where I'm throwing dirt.

A. I don't know them

You're contradicting yourself, in earlier posts you say there's a promised feature set yet you don't even know what the feature set is. Truth is noone knows, thats why noone can say.

I don't consider tearing your way through to be the better way to program. Also it is a lot more legal to do it the way Ryan did

Tearing your way through? It's using internal functions like you would your own, it's not "tearing" through anything. As far as your concern of legality goes, AOL don't seem to have a problem with it seeing they've partnered with DeadAIM and also, the end user breaks the AIM EULA by using such programs, not the authors.

Then you talk about version numbers...

If you're going to be silly about it be my guest, but my point being, generally, a version number is indicative of where a program is at in its life cycle.

I have no problem with people standing up for friends, but your backing of Ryan and AIM+ is blind, you make claims left, right and center about Ryan and AIM+ yet you nor your friend have been able to back these claims up, I on the other hand have provided you with information you can confirm for yourself.

[DADINK13]

A. I don't know them

You're contradicting yourself, in earlier posts you say there's a promised feature set yet you don't even know what the feature set is. Truth is noone knows, thats why noone can say.

No, there was a promised feature set. Unfortunatly, it had been removed from the website and the forums since. I'll try to look for them when I have the time too.


Others who remember can agree with me.

[Anthony]

A. I don't know them

You're contradicting yourself, in earlier posts you say there's a promised feature set yet you don't even know what the feature set is. Truth is noone knows, thats why noone can say.

Um... right... Just because I don't know what they were doesn't mean their was none. I don't make it a point to remeber things that are not going to happen.

I don't consider tearing your way through to be the better way to program. Also it is a lot more legal to do it the way Ryan did

As far as your concern of legality goes, AOL don't seem to have a problem with it seeing they've partnered with DeadAIM and also, the end user breaks the AIM EULA by using such programs, not the authors.

Just because a company that can sue another company partners with them does not mean they didn't break the law. It simply means they are not going to press charges.

Then you talk about version numbers...

If you're going to be silly about it be my guest, but my point being, generally, a version number is indicative of where a program is at in its life cycle.

Yet still has very little to do with one program to another program, even if they are being made to do the same thing.

I have no problem with people standing up for friends, but your backing of Ryan and AIM+ is blind, you make claims left, right and center about Ryan and AIM+ yet you nor your friend have been able to back these claims up, I on the other hand have provided you with information you can confirm for yourself.

Your infomation has been very vague, and really has proved nothing. In fact glancing over your post it was just your thoughts on the matter. There are no facts.

[DADINK13]

It's about time you said that. I was going to say that a long time ago, but I figured I'd let somebody else have the big mouth for a change..

[harra]

Let me use this little example that many people may be familiar with......Linux.....

SCO is claiming that components of the Linux Kernal was "stolen" from SCO and they own the proprietary rights to that code and therefore royalties are owed to SCO for every Kernal that was part of a package sold and/or downloaded.

Companies like HP, IBM, RedHat, etc are debating their claims, but it his highly speculated that if SCO does have a valid claim, they will just get bought out by one of the other giant companies. In this case, the opposite may happen. AOL believes that JDennis has a feature set they feel will enhance the AIM experience. If they attempt to sue them for reverse engineering components of the AIM Client, the code will be lost and then they will have to invest the development cycles to create the features themselves. They could very easily pay JDennis and involve them in a "partnership" and get what they want cheaper.

[foobaroo]

Um... right... Just because I don't know what they were doesn't mean their was none. I don't make it a point to remeber things that are not going to happen.

You made a claim and didn't back it up, don't make it unless you can back it up is all I'm saying.

Your infomation has been very vague, and really has proved nothing. In fact glancing over your post it was just your thoughts on the matter. There are no facts.

Lets see now,

Um... AIM+ 3.0 would have more features then DeadAIM...

You replied to that with reference to a non existant feature set that was so impressive you couldn't remember....I provided you with an accurate technical insight, though brief, in to the inner workings of AIM+ and other mods and how they differ, which you can verify yourself, but ofcourse, being the loyal friend you are, you came up with your "tearing through" explaination.

It's very simple to put an end to any speculation, have your tight buddy Ryan read this thread and reply to it, if he's the highly skilled and highly paid programmer you make him out to be he shouldn't hesitate in replying to my statements.

[foobaroo]

Let me use this little example that many people may be familiar with......Linux.....

SCO is claiming that components of the Linux Kernal was "stolen" from SCO and they own the proprietary rights to that code and therefore royalties are owed to SCO for every Kernal that was part of a package sold and/or downloaded.

Companies like HP, IBM, RedHat, etc are debating their claims, but it his highly speculated that if SCO does have a valid claim, they will just get bought out by one of the other giant companies. In this case, the opposite may happen. AOL believes that JDennis has a feature set they feel will enhance the AIM experience. If they attempt to sue them for reverse engineering components of the AIM Client, the code will be lost and then they will have to invest the development cycles to create the features themselves. They could very easily pay JDennis and involve them in a "partnership" and get what they want cheaper.

It's not illegal to reverse engineer software, so your thought of AOL suing anyone for reverse engineering is not accurate. As far as losing any code DeadAIM may have, AOL could have their own AIM programming team write the features DeadAIM has in a week, it's much easier to do when you have the source code to AIM. The only reason AOL would want DeadAIM is for its user base, it's BIG, so by aquiring DeadAIM they automatically aquire loyal and more importantly, willing to pay customers.

[Anthony]

Um... right... Just because I don't know what they were doesn't mean their was none. I don't make it a point to remeber things that are not going to happen.

You made a claim and didn't back it up, don't make it unless you can back it up is all I'm saying.

I had no reason to remember it. Once again I didn't expect to be quized a year later.

Your infomation has been very vague, and really has proved nothing. In fact glancing over your post it was just your thoughts on the matter. There are no facts.

Lets see now,

Um... AIM+ 3.0 would have more features then DeadAIM...

You replied to that with reference to a non existant feature set that was so impressive you couldn't remember....

Okay... Let me make this clear and simple. I wouldn't tell you :hint: even if I did know what the feature set was :hint:. All traces of it were not destroyed by accident I assure you.

I provided you with an accurate technical insight, though brief, in to the inner workings of AIM+ and other mods and how they differ...

Great... Another person who has seen Ryan's code. It's a wonder the code at least in pieces has not been posted across the internet.

...but ofcourse, being the loyal friend you are, you came up with your "tearing through" explaination.

Changing people's work with out their permision... It sure isn't as clean as the way Ryan did it.

if he's the highly skilled and highly paid programmer you make him out to be he shouldn't hesitate in replying to my statements.

Your own statement says exactly why he won't reply to this thread... highly paid, and highly skilled... He is not developing the program anymore... Why should he have to visit the forums there is Mark, and many other able people to answer questions?

[foobaroo]

I had no reason to remember it. Once again I didn't expect to be quized a year later.

Yet you still made the claim that AIM+ 3 would put to shame all others, what are you basing that on if you don't remember?

Changing people's work with out their permision... It sure isn't as clean as the way Ryan did it.

You should aquire some programming knowledge before making such statements or at least claim ignorance on any such matters as you're grabbing at straws here. What the other mods do is not changing anyone's work.

Your own statement says exactly why he won't reply to this thread...

Uh, no, that's your statement buddy, don't try and pass the buck. Mark and the others aren't the program authors, they are not qualified to reply to any questions of technical nature. You again slip and slide through my arguments with hot air.