Get the MQ binary (compiled) on this site

Clone39 · Post by **Clone39** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 10:39 pm

Alls Im going to say is that I belive that people shouldnt not have access to MQ soley based on weather or not they can afford to purchase VS6

With so much people having VS6 (legal or illegal), if one can't take the time to look for it or ask for it to a friend, then they don't even deserve to use MQ. I have a kid and an unemployed wife to take care of, every month i try to find some money to pay for EQ, and still i have VS6 LEGALLY OWNED. Your statement is crap and you should really be ashamed of yourself for not respecting the devs decision NOT TO make MQ in binary format.

With all the people arguing against you distributing it in binary, I really thought you would've find enough intelligence inside your thick skull to realize that what you are doing is plainly wrong. You at least should've asked the devs before doing something as immature as that.

Clone39

BTW this is not a flame but merely my own opinion. It might be interpreted as a flame but it's not. You make your own choice.

auth · Post by **auth** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 11:14 pm

geez - just sick that kitty on the link clone (your pic), that'll definitely scare em :)...

I think the only reason he hangs around mq is to see ap50's picture myself.

But i've stated it on the FH boards my thoughts and feelings (in a rather strong, perhaps flaming, manner) - I really think that since the ziacle knows all, he should take the current source, mod his own copy, and not have to download ours again, see how far that gets him.. it's the GPL loophole, and it's just ridiculous that he doesn't have enough respect to listen to the wishes of the devs... or use source's idea on patch days :)

Zerix · Post by **Zerix** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 12:37 am

Dam Im startin to get pissed, which is rare for me

First, I DID NOT START THIS THREAD. Nor would I post a link to a binary on the MQ forms. If you dont belive me, look at my account creation date. I created this account AFTER I saw the post by OxySlave with the link to my site.

Just a question.. But are you a dev? Would seem to me they are the ones to dictate how MQ should or shouldn't be distributed.

They lost that right when they made it opensource, or more precisely, when they released the source code for it. Even without the license aggreement, making the source publically available voids all righs on distrubition. It's like saying that a famous cook could release a receipe for everyone to use, then get pissed when someone added a different ingredent and served it in a restruant!. SOURCE IS NOT INTELECTUAL PROPERITY (Calafornia supreme court in 1992)

it can be distributed like this under the current licence (unless he doesn't include access to the source)

Sorry I havent done this yet, but after I finish this post I'll add a link to the source on my site.

Then give away VS6.

So its ok to hurt microsoft by piriting their software, but its not ok to release a binary of an OPENSOURCE project? Ohh I see, of course its ok, after all, hurting microsoft doesnt effect you.

1) Want to make people a bit more responsible using the program.

I tested this theory, offered my nine year old brother 10 bucks if he could compile MQ without errors. After I showed him what file to open, and gave him the insctuctions from the FH FAQ, he was able to compile it. Granted he had no idea how to use it, or even what it was for, but he compiled it!

Does that magically make him responsible? No, it only shows that he can follow simple directions.

i agree, if you want to disrespect a dev, do it to microsoft, not to the ones who help you

This says more about your character and ideals then I ever could so Im not going to try.

But imagine if I followed your views of "As long as its hurting someone else that doesnt matter to me"...

what i like is the warp command you added to the binary that anyone can use, then we'll see thousands of people warping around when a web crawler hits your site with the binary, that's really responsible to even add custom cmds to it before distribution, i mean, who won't love you for that...

wow this really pissed me off. If you have to come up with lies to support your agrument, your too stupid to be doing anything at all with MQ.

THE ONLY BINARY ON MY WEBSITE CAME DIRECTALY FROM THE SOURCE FILE FOMR THE DOWNLOAD LINK ON THE MQ HOME PAGE.

I dont know if it has warp in it or not, but I HAVE NOT MODIFIED THE SOURCE IN ANY WAY. Its a stright compile, that I update after a patch.

oooooooo do that source, it sounds fun, i'd like to see it, i swear it'd be the best thing ever... but do it on patch days, and warn everyone in the mq community except zerix, and let him compile that one and distribute it... yea yea .. that's what i'll dream about tonight.

MORON!!! just think about what what you said?? Where the hell do you think I get the source code to compile MQ, the same god dam place you do, from the MQ release file on the MQ site. Please put in these random commands and watch your worst fears come ture.

With all the people arguing against you distributing it in binary, I really thought you would've find enough intelligence inside your thick skull to realize that what you are doing is plainly wrong. You at least should've asked the devs before doing something as immature as that..

To quote Terry Goodkind "The only soverign that rule you is reason"
The more you all make pointless and illogical arguements, the more I reaffirm my own.

auth · Post by **auth** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 12:49 am

Thanx, will make a new compile and put it on site next to my other one.

Rhavin/Sprite pm me if you dont want it on my site and I'll take it down

that quote is from http://forever-hacking.net/forums/index ... =511&st=15 - the forum with warp. You CLEARLY state that you will add it to your source that you distribute.

wow this really pissed me off. If you have to come up with lies to support your agrument, your too stupid to be doing anything at all with MQ.

that isn't a lie, it's a quote from that warp forum. btw, I'm too stupid to do nething with MQ? I think that a few people here will contest you on that, I know much more about this project than you ever have, and I understand it, unlike you. You just compile like your 9 yr old family member... I have contributed quite a few hours on patch days to help get stuff going, can ask anyone, or look around on these boards, which im sure you haven't. Before you tell me what I know and don't know, just remember that those who judge will be judged.

Reaffirming your own values through other people's quotes is a good way to tell that you're in denial. I know it's legal what you're doing, it just pisses me off you have no respect for the people who help make this possible.

Hell, i don't care if you own 2000 shares of microsoft and you distribute all windows os's, with full service packs, office 2003, and a full blown install of everquest with a keygen for gamecards... you're right, it doesnt affect me greatly, why would I care. I mean look at sony, MQ has a small userbase atm, it doesn't affect them greatly, so they don't care as long as you don't take away the fun of the people who give them profits. You start to take huge sums of profits away, they will put money into stopping you. Just the same as MS will prosecute if they find you distribute their products. You distributing MS products doesn't affect me, go ahead. You screwing with MQ affects me, and the people whom I 'care' about. It takes time out of my life, other MQ dev lives, MQ user lives, and even my fiance's life, because I get to sit around trying to fix what you do. You are treading on hallowed grounds, as you have put that directly into the MQ community, not just FH...

Zerix · Post by **Zerix** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 1:16 am

Lol I bet Auth is making this same post on the FH boards as we speak, Ill respond to it there toom

But he actually kinda hung himself.

Yes I did make the post of

Thanx, will make a new compile and put it on site next to my other one.

Rhavin/Sprite pm me if you dont want it on my site and I'll take it down

And guess what? one of the above named people PMed me and asked that I not post it on my site. It never was posted EVER AT ANY TIME.

So Auth, is caliming stuff without actually testing it out, he never actually checked to see if my version of MQ has warp in it.

I have contributed quite a few hours on patch days to help get stuff going, can ask anyone, or look around on these boards, which im sure you haven't. Before you tell me what I know and don't know, just remember that those who judge will be judged.

First, how do you know how much time Ive spent working on MQ or how experianced I am at programming? Are you basing my knowladge about MQ soly of the fact that Im posting a binary aginst your wishes?

Second,
"Thoes who judge will be judged"
lol WTF does this mean? Are you saying that you have never judged someone lol. Everyone judges and gets judged, most of us learn this around the age of three, or at the very least once we start school.

Of cource we judge, it human nature and is the reason why goverments, lawn, social structures, and society exist.

auth · Post by **auth** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 1:40 am

why would i download something i am against, i am only going by what you said... anyway, judging someone's stupidity is not something that should be done around a developer's page, because there are lots of stuff that can be overlooked, everyone is important from the readme to the offsets, to the structs, to the internal functions.... you're right, i don't know you, but by the way you updated the eqgame.exe on 11/6 when there wasn't even a new exe released on 11/6 i guess i judged you prematurely. that 11/6 'patch' was serverside only... but plazmic is right, exe's are outdated hours after they're posted around here... either way - im working on that free compiler now.

Plazmic · Post by **Plazmic** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 10:25 am

First, I DID NOT START THIS THREAD. Nor would I post a link to a binary on the MQ forms. If you dont belive me, look at my account creation date. I created this account AFTER I saw the post by OxySlave with the link to my site.

No, it was created by a new account with 2 total posts (both this thread)... how odd...

But Im not going to remove the link

I know this wouldn't stick in court, but you seem to claim ownership for the original post...

SOURCE IS NOT INTELECTUAL PROPERITY (Calafornia supreme court in 1992)

Alcohol is illegal in the US (US Constitiution, Article XVIII in 1919)
See, I can quote old legal rules also ;)

Amadeus · Post by **Amadeus** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 10:30 am

It just amazes me that you cannot see the reasoning for not releasing pre compiled versions of MQ. However, once SOE comes down hard on the project because a lot of idiots have it that shouldn't, then maybe you'll understand. I'm just astonished that you cannot see the benefits of auto-thinning the MQ user base by forcing users to have a compiler and a brain.

driftinsupra · Post by **driftinsupra** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 2:23 pm

I can see one really good reason to not post the binary that you are completely ignoring.

THE MQ DEVS DONT WANT YOU TOO

Sure its legal for you to do so but you should have some respect for the wishes of the people who have spent hours upon hours just so you can give it away to whomever you please.

auth · Post by **auth** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 3:00 pm

Okay okay okay - grab a drink, a bag of chips, and take a deep breath before reading this post by Zerix on the FH boards dealing with MQ custom INI...

Hmm I think I was able to get this to work, but a friend is having trouble.

Might someone take the time to post a guide on exactly what code to insert where, and the exact format of building the ini file?

I had to remove the HAHA's, it was too childish, but it is interesting.

I know this isn't a place for flaming, but he called me "MORON!!!" so I think this is fair game.

If you can't get custom ini working, then you have NO excuse for distributing mq compiled, you don't even halfway know what program YOU are using...

And the test for any random moron to compile MQ - hell I guess it worked, because even you can click a few buttons and end up with an exe... but you did have to work harder than the guy that just downloaded an exe, so I do commend you for at least knowing how to do that... just my two cents.

insanitywiz · Post by **insanitywiz** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 4:33 pm

MQ was toasted by SOE once before because it was too easy to get and use, and the no bianaries rule has been the only thing slowing it's growth to try and prevent it from happening again.

It's not elitism, it's protection you schmuck.

Bah, just DDOS his site into the ground.

Yes, I know it's not a nice, or legal, thing to do. I'm not particularly concerned about that though, I'm not a nice person and I don't always follow the rules.

insanitywiz · Post by **insanitywiz** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 4:47 pm

On a completely un-related note, his site gives me lots of toll free phone numbers to play with while I'm bored.

auth · Post by **auth** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 4:54 pm

I have posted an alternative solution to the point that he made about having to buy MSVC++ to use mq - you can now get it to work via command line compiler, i will post a guide later. Once it is posted, plazmic, l124rd, or dkaa, can we get his link off of this site, please?

It seems like a very viable solution, and it will reduce the amount of profit MS makes (which is always good):). Or if you don't think it's a viable solution, then I am open to other suggestions, or i can drop it altogether - it will still require some form of knowledge to compile that way.

TI994a · Post by **TI994a** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 5:44 pm

Admittedly, I know very little about C or C++. But there may be another solution to the problem...

The idea is relatively simple. Make it so MQ will only run on the machine it was compiled on. Sounds kinda out there I know, but it's pretty doable.

First, you'd write a very tiny app that will uniquely id your machine hardware, and do a small encryption hash to produce a small text file output. Distribute this with the MQ source. Second, you'd have to copy the string text produced from the first part into a specific part of the source code for MQ, which would be modified to recreate the machine id hash, and compare with the hardcoded machine id in the binary. If they don't match, MQ shuts down.

For those of us who use MQ, it would be a small hassle very worth doing if it kept SOE attention away from MQ becoming widespread.

- TI

auth · Post by **auth** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 5:57 pm

Sounds kinda out there I know - yea, it does, heh..

the problem isn't that the program is widespread source only - it will become widespread when released binary on an alternate site. i think my solution will be very viable to the situation, will get a guide made up before i sleep again... look for it tonight about 12amest

Get the MQ binary (compiled) on this site

And now for a little bit of fun

Another possible solution