I've seen them built both ways and I prefer independent switching of each floor.

I don't see how it creates nightmares either? Logistically all switches are remotely managed from your main mechanical/server room. You only actually ever see the things to run new cabling or replace a faulty unit.

Cost-wise its cheaper to go with repeaters... sometimes. logistically its a very very minor annoyance and provides better performance across the building.

Additionally offloading a portion of the switching task to an on-floor switch can be the difference between installing say, 5 $1500 switches and a $3000 router or 1 $500 repeater, a $20000 router, and nearly tripling the total length of your line runs, just to get the same performance(sometimes a little better on the $20k router, I'll admit, but mostly negligible) You do the math.

Now admittedly I've only dealt with smallish buildings in the 2-10 story range, but the method of switching I've seen used seems like it should scale proportionally, with the cost of the router skyrocketing as you go further, but more slowly than just using repeaters or racks of switches in the rats nest rooms I've seen far too many of.

Also, Typical =/= best. Most of these network topologys you're familiar with were designed when equipment just wasn't up to the task of doing the job I describe without going into exorbitant cost(I.E. it would have meant a $10k switch on each floor) Nowadays it is.

Most modern switches have multiple pass throughs or repeaters built right in, and you need the switch to wire the floor anyways, how is this adding complexity? Its done in hardware.

I actually enjoyed the blackberry holsters that did it though back when I had one.

I wish there was something similar for android phones, but I don't want it doing it on its own, without the holster.

Yes, but this is a case of government trying to fix itself.

The point he was making is that there will be public outcry about this from some corners, and those people are retarded.

and the EVEN BIGGER correlation between all wow related development up to WotLK and Diablo 2 and the lack thereof for Cataclysm and MoP. No wonder WoW jumped the shark.

My original point stands, the correlation is apparently just to diablo 2 staff instead of everquest ^_^.

Holy crapnuggets though the correlation between Diablo 2 and WoW.

I may have just been perpetuating something wrong that was told to me by someone who paid way more attention to that stuff than I do years ago. If I am, my apologies.

Especially when workstations are so cheap these days. On bulk purchases you can get quad core workstations with dual displays for under $500 fully provisioned...

I should also mention that the best players often didn't follow the cookie cutter builds. They were smart enough to tailor their builds to their own play style. This became next to impossible in Cata due to reduced options and is now entirely a situational list of abilities.

I admit the tailoring wasn't as possible on some classes, the paladin being one of them, but the stupid "balancing" has gotten rid of fun things, like the old Holy Mage priest build that could do shocking amounts of damage, good hybrid bear tanks/dps, Hybrid tanks of any sort really... you can't swap specs mid fight and you can't spec for both so that you can fill an off tank role and still DPS because off tank isn't needed for all of the fight.

As I've mentioned previously, they're removed the majority of the fun for high-end players. The loss of subs has taken the largest toll on this group of players. There are servers that used to have top 10 world guilds that can barely finish clearing content now.

11 buttons IS 6 buttons + cooldowns for a ret pally.

Wings, and at least 2 more dps cooldowns that I can think of get you down to 8 normal use buttons immediately and I'm certain there are two more 30 sec+ damage cooldown abilities on that 11 button list. Buttons that you use every second fight are not normal rotation buttons.

Shit, I can get up to 11 buttons that I used every other fight on a Vanilla hunter off the top of my head. I'm sure there were more.

You haven't been PLAYING WoW for quite some time. Cataclysm and MoP SIGNIFICANTLY reduced all complexity in WoW.

I 100% agree on your points about WoW, except for the TBC thing. The changes in Wrath were side-swaps for other things and there was some simplification in the talent trees etc. that I didn't like. TBC was the same amount of complexity as wrath for number crunchers.

The only problem with my 100% agreement is you can't be a current hardcore raider. Every class plays the same and uses a total of 6 buttons max with the exception of healers and cooldowns. Shit lights on cooldown all over the place and its become whack a mole for the flashy button and when nothing is flashing whack one of two other buttons. Its entirely artificial complexity in most cases and if the flashy buttons aren't the ones being wacked due to some theorycrafting blizzard just instantly nerfs whatever IS being whacked or buffs the flashy button.

I actually like the new box because I can more easily grab attachments and copy/paste from other emails without the compose tying up the whole screen. All that really did was make it more like outlook et al.

*/made/ WoW so good.

Its been nothing but downhill since TBC. Diablo 3 was a continuation of a lack of understanding of who they're actually selling to. MoP took WoW down the Diablo 3 route too.

People actually LIKE complexity in the stats and make game characteristics. Even if sometimes the devs feel like its an illusion of choice, leave the choice in. I liked everything about Diablo 3 except the terrible terrible skill system and the horrid itemization. Items are slowly being fixed, but the horrid skill system will take a lot more.

People may have ended up only using 3-5 skills in Diablo II most of the time, but most liked having different things to try out on the fly, being able to use ALL of your skills like a swiss army knife than being handed a swiss army knife and then being told "Ok... now using any more than 4 things is dangerous! So its locked up so you can't do that."

The warcraft I referred to was world of warcraft. I also explained that one... most of the lead devs and half the dev team were actually everquest devs.

It has been a little over a year since I gave up on firefox, maybe I will try it again. My main problem is a lack of impetus to do so, Chrome works great for everything I actually need it to do.

Its called opening all pages of interest while on the search etc page then sifting through them. Shit, I've got 6 slashdot stories sitting open right now.

This isn't an ID10-T error, its how I function, and how a LOT of people I know function. Its how I've done it since the advent of tabbed browsing. It is, in fact, WHY tabbed browsing is awesome.