I do like the "appliance" idea for the non-techie parents, but they should morph it slightly to be chromecast-like for wireless (connect to the on-board wireless once for setup of your existing wireless). It should not be it's own wireless network, since that then breaks all of your existing internet connection stuff. The connections could be limited to LAN only or something.
@Linc it could, but I'm just basing it off what they stated
You simply plug it in and Mineblock creates its own wi-fi network. Parents simple connect to it and add it as a server for up to eight different players to enjoy.
I... don't get it. If you are playing Minecraft in your own world, no one else on the Internet has access to it unless you share it via LAN. This thing would basically take your world off your computer onto a LAN that only you or other people in your house (those with access to your LAN) have access to. Then, as most machines do not have the ability to connect to multiple WANs, you have to take your machine off the Internet to play on your world.
I don't see what this thing would do that the actual Minecraft client on any PC can't do already. Create a new world, share it on your LAN, done.
This guy is troubleshooting the wrong problem. This guy allowed his son to connect to a server where the son could build and (the server) allowed some Internet jerk to come on and burn the build down. The article does not describe why the son was on that particular server. If it was because his friends were on that server, this new device does not help. There are so many servers out there already setup to not allow what happened to happen. Matter of fact, there are servers out there set up to allow exactly what happened to happen and it sounds like this was one of those servers.
This all doesn't even address that Minecraft gets updated on an almost weekly basis. There would need to be some sort of method of updating Minecraft which would add to the complexity that this devise is supposed to remove.
Also consider you could get a $5 /mo Minecraft server on a reliable host with a Whitelist and support to help you upgrade. $60 /year would trump this device many times over.
Your points are valid @BobbyDigi, but you forget one thing about most parents...
Doesn't matter what the Mineblock does. All he has to do is convince it'll keep their little Janes and Johnnies safe from the nasty cyberbullies and you have a blockbuster in the making.
Pun intended.
1
midga"There's so much hot dog in Rome" ~digi(> ^.(> O_o)>Icrontian
@AlexDeGruven said:
It's very likely that he opened the 25565 port on his router so his kid's friends could play with them, which also opens it to the world.
I find it unlikely the guy was technically inclined enough to setup a server (and further, develope a rasbery server box) but not utilize the built in whitelist. Granted this all started over a year ago when before some of the ease and security was built in, but the article describes him continuing down the path even though they exist now.
Unfortunately to me, it looks like he is simply a father who was not paying enough attention to his son's interactions on the Internet and now is either overcompensating trying to make it up to his son or worse, trying to make a Buck off of others who don't pay attention to their kid's activities...
[spoiler]but that's none of my business [/spoiler]
I think it's a neat idea that has potential to sell well. Not all parents are terrified of technology, they just CBA to learn it / apply it and would rather just have a nice plug and play system so their multiple kids can connect to a single world from their own computers without having to leave them on. That said, I do agree with digi-logicTM, but I won't deny there is a market for this. If I had 2+ kids in to minecraft, I'd maybe consider it.
I just run my server in a VM on my desktop downstairs. #1 and I can play in the living room together just fine. No open ports needed, no private networks needed.
As for the wifi connectivity gripes, I find it hard to believe that it won't have the option to plug it into your network. Then it would just act like a WiFi hot spot in addition to a Minecraft server. Bingo, you have your Minecraft appliance and you don't lose Internet connectivity. It would also make sense to do this so that the appliance could update the server. Don't know if it's actually doing that, but it would make the most sense.
Comments
I do like the "appliance" idea for the non-techie parents, but they should morph it slightly to be chromecast-like for wireless (connect to the on-board wireless once for setup of your existing wireless). It should not be it's own wireless network, since that then breaks all of your existing internet connection stuff. The connections could be limited to LAN only or something.
@Tushon Wouldn't it just pass thru a normal Internet connection too?
You could probably limit it to only accept connections from the local subdomain.
@Linc it could, but I'm just basing it off what they stated
I... don't get it. If you are playing Minecraft in your own world, no one else on the Internet has access to it unless you share it via LAN. This thing would basically take your world off your computer onto a LAN that only you or other people in your house (those with access to your LAN) have access to. Then, as most machines do not have the ability to connect to multiple WANs, you have to take your machine off the Internet to play on your world.
I don't see what this thing would do that the actual Minecraft client on any PC can't do already. Create a new world, share it on your LAN, done.
This guy is troubleshooting the wrong problem. This guy allowed his son to connect to a server where the son could build and (the server) allowed some Internet jerk to come on and burn the build down. The article does not describe why the son was on that particular server. If it was because his friends were on that server, this new device does not help. There are so many servers out there already setup to not allow what happened to happen. Matter of fact, there are servers out there set up to allow exactly what happened to happen and it sounds like this was one of those servers.
This all doesn't even address that Minecraft gets updated on an almost weekly basis. There would need to be some sort of method of updating Minecraft which would add to the complexity that this devise is supposed to remove.
Also consider you could get a $5 /mo Minecraft server on a reliable host with a Whitelist and support to help you upgrade. $60 /year would trump this device many times over.
Your points are valid @BobbyDigi, but you forget one thing about most parents...
Doesn't matter what the Mineblock does. All he has to do is convince it'll keep their little Janes and Johnnies safe from the nasty cyberbullies and you have a blockbuster in the making.
Pun intended.
dat watermark
It's very likely that he opened the 25565 port on his router so his kid's friends could play with them, which also opens it to the world.
Yeppers!
I find it unlikely the guy was technically inclined enough to setup a server (and further, develope a rasbery server box) but not utilize the built in whitelist. Granted this all started over a year ago when before some of the ease and security was built in, but the article describes him continuing down the path even though they exist now.
Unfortunately to me, it looks like he is simply a father who was not paying enough attention to his son's interactions on the Internet and now is either overcompensating trying to make it up to his son or worse, trying to make a Buck off of others who don't pay attention to their kid's activities...
[spoiler]but that's none of my business
[/spoiler]
I think it's a neat idea that has potential to sell well. Not all parents are terrified of technology, they just CBA to learn it / apply it and would rather just have a nice plug and play system so their multiple kids can connect to a single world from their own computers without having to leave them on. That said, I do agree with digi-logicTM, but I won't deny there is a market for this. If I had 2+ kids in to minecraft, I'd maybe consider it.
I just run my server in a VM on my desktop downstairs. #1 and I can play in the living room together just fine. No open ports needed, no private networks needed.
As for the wifi connectivity gripes, I find it hard to believe that it won't have the option to plug it into your network. Then it would just act like a WiFi hot spot in addition to a Minecraft server. Bingo, you have your Minecraft appliance and you don't lose Internet connectivity. It would also make sense to do this so that the appliance could update the server. Don't know if it's actually doing that, but it would make the most sense.
Am I the only one who has a hard time believing that a raspberry pi can support 8 players?