Which would be great if they ran at the speed as offline native apps, and didn't require an account.
The offline apps are still needed, until people can edit levels and gs2 without owning a server online.
I haven't used it in a while, but when I first did, it was far more limited than the PC version, and was very unresponsive. The online tools bite because they require a good internet connection, and for full speed, a PowerPC Mac. Offline editing is a huge necessity. I used to do it when I wasn't able to connect (I have a very slow internet connection at school).
We need offline tools.
Benefits of online tools: Updates for all platforms at once
Benefits of offline tools: No need for a connection, account, or server ownership.

So few people own a server and are able to make use of the online tools, which pale in comparison to the speed and features of the offline tools.

Even on an Intel Mac with the new Intel version of Graal, the tools are very unresponsive.

Can you define 'unresponsive' in this case?

I had suspected as much. Now imagine if you were on a slow network. It's even worse.
The scripted stuff is a cheap way out of the problem: let the scripters make it for free, and then we can say we're done with it.
The way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if there's an iPhone level editor before a Mac one (and yes, there would be no sense in that).

Unresponsive = Click a button, wait 10 seconds for any response. Or place a tile, wait 20 seconds for it to appear. And that happened on a decent connection as well.
Whereas offline: click a button and it's doe in an instant, or with the windows rc, it's just as quick as the server can respond.


For example, as a Mac user with both a fast PPC machine and a new Intel machine, who also knows gs2 and some objc and cocoa, you'd think I'd make a great tester for the Intel machine and RC. But because I don't own a server, I can't.

That's what's wrong with the system

When you hit a key, it takes like a third of a second to show up, if you type too fast, they can actually get out of order somehow, etc.

Strikes me to be a possible problem with the Intel client, I've never experienced letters going out of order or anything. I'll see if Stefan can investigate it further.

Well, it is not like the private servers could not just embed any of a dozen other open source scripting language.

The intel client is the same a the PPC, just running it through Rosetta emulation, which was greatly improved in Leopard. There shouldn't be any noticeable differences. Often, it will take a PPC program a bit longer to start up, but after that, it pretty much runs at full speed. For example, my version of photoshop is older, and runs on PPC. Rosetta makes it work on my macbook, but it takes longer to start up than on my G4 (1.4ghz). On the other hand, it can run the same filter over a large image faster than the ppc machine (it is a faster processor after all).
Now, I'm willing to bet that your iBook has a slower processor, slower gfx card, and less memory than my MacBook.
It should run a lot slower for you than me. Unless there's really something wrong with the Mac client (which I also suspect).

There's something more here. Again, I'd be the perfect candidate to test it. I do have a 1.4ghz ppc machine, as well as the 2ghz core 2 duo. Again, the problem with the whole system is that I can't, just because I don't own a server anymore.

Text-related responsiveness has always been slow for me in GUI's, and I'm on a PC :/

No, they actually compiled an Intel version which does not have to use emulation. It is far faster than the PPC client, even on a PPC system.

its because they don't want to release the servers code i suppose....

Yeah, but people don't have access to that :(
I'd love to test the universal client. Although I wouldn't be able to test any of the so called development tools.

Send Stefan a PM ... I was the first to try it out, and I think he let a few others, but he may let you if you ask nicely ^^

:frown: I did, PM wasn't answered