Perrie Juran Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Canoro Philipp wrote: there are a lot of people that have never seen shadows, or local lights, or transparent water, and they cant go beyond 64 meters without the viewer crashing. they would probably pay for a chance to see SL the way the others see it, for at least an hour, maybe just to take pictures, or to go to a beautiful art sim, maybe for just an event. if some people will pay the price ocasionally, instead of paying to use it all the time, im sure they can afford 2.50 a week to give themselves that treat. On a Seven Inch Screen? I guess I'm going to need to check out closer what a few of my friends do on their devices. I know a couple of them will play some games occasionally to kill a little time. I do see that Daniel has started a survey, Will You Be Using SL Go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theresa Tennyson Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Perrie Juran wrote: Canoro Philipp wrote: there are a lot of people that have never seen shadows, or local lights, or transparent water, and they cant go beyond 64 meters without the viewer crashing. they would probably pay for a chance to see SL the way the others see it, for at least an hour, maybe just to take pictures, or to go to a beautiful art sim, maybe for just an event. if some people will pay the price ocasionally, instead of paying to use it all the time, im sure they can afford 2.50 a week to give themselves that treat. On a Seven Inch Screen? I guess I'm going to need to check out closer what a few of my friends do on their devices. I know a couple of them will play some games occasionally to kill a little time. I do see that Daniel has started a survey, Will You Be Using SL Go? How exactly did "Seven Inches" (probably the minimum tablet screen size currently on the market) become this thread's concept of all tablet screen sizes? It would be like a burglar alarm salesman telling a prospective customer who was thinking of getting a guard dog instead something like "Dogs? They're little yappy things that would fit in a shoebox." Some are, mind you, but some aren't. Speaking for myself, I'm as promising a customer for Geritol as anyone. I grudgingly use a cell phone which I got for $9.95 and is dumb as a post. Tucked away in the back of my office is my non-SL computer: a Pentium 200 running DR-DOS 6.0 (it's a Pentium only because my 486 blew its drive controller a few years ago and VESA Local Bus cards aren't falling off of trees anymore.) However, I acknowledge that other people have different lifestyles and technology profiles than I do. and I personally have had situations recently where something like SL Go would have been exactly what I needed, even at the current price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Good point on the Seven Inches. (I'll refrain from some bragging jokes here) This survey put Tablet penetration in the U.S. at about 35%. That's a number that would make it hard for anyone to ignore that market. I know tablets are generally seven to thirteen inches. I didn't see a break down by size. Personally I don't see many people whipping out thirteen inches in public. Mostly it's more like seven or eight inches. Before it died I did occasionally run SL on a T-21 Thinkpad with a fourteen inch screen. Based on that yes I'd consider SL on a 12 or 13 inch screen viable but not a killer experience no matter how good it ran. But to each their own on that. If someone is happy squinting at SL on a smaller screen, all the more power to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Theresa Tennyson wrote: How exactly did "Seven Inches" (probably the minimum tablet screen size currently on the market) become this thread's concept of all tablet screen sizes? I am maybe responsible for the "seven inches" figure, which I used because that's the size of my Nexus 7 (one of the market leaders). In fact, as I discovered while researching what I wanted to buy, the market leaders are predominantly 7" models. This is supported, I think, by looking at the Amazon Best Sellers: Best Computer Tablets (Amazon.Co.UK results here), which seem to be dominated by items with 7" or 8.9" screeens. Unless you particularly want to use your tablet for watching movies (in which case, a 10" screen seems to be the smallest recommended size to consider) rather than playing the tablet versions of most games, reading ebooks or accessing the internet, then a 7" screen is perfectly adequate (certainly I find it so). In general, to my mind, people buying tablets tend to be particularly interested in how convenient and easy their tablet is to carry around, in which case a smaller screen is a recommendation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObviousAltIsObvious Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 these newer devices are using much smaller pixels than typical PC monitors have, moslty because of strange old PC standards that encouraged lower pixel density. we tend to use tablet screens closer to our eyes too, so the smaller screen isn't quite the disadvange it would be on a device with a keyboard sticking out the front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 That's a very good point. But I'd still say I think the advice I picked up while deciding what sort of tablet to buy, "if you want to use it to watch full movies rather than YouTube clips, you'll probably want a 10" screen", seems sound, at least based on my experiments with trying to watch movies on my Nexus 7. Maybe, though, that's the wrong comparison, since movies are designed for huge screens in the first place, and I should be comparing it with watching TV shows on a tablet. I don't know. Certainly, though, at this point I'm thinking "I'll pay $2.50 an hour to be able to experience SL with top level graphics at all, on my low spec desktop" seems a more compelling reason than "I'll pay $2.50 an hour to experience SL with top level graphics on my tablet, rather than wait till I get home to experience them on my desktop," particularly if you already have the option of experiencing SL with reasonable graphics on your tablet anyway, because it's an Android and you can use Lumiya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 ObviousAltIsObvious wrote: these newer devices are using much smaller pixels than typical PC monitors have, moslty because of strange old PC standards that encouraged lower pixel density. we tend to use tablet screens closer to our eyes too, so the smaller screen isn't quite the disadvange it would be on a device with a keyboard sticking out the front. I should dig out the link but I'm being lazy right now. 16 did a great write up on why the default settings for Camera and the way CastRay works are the way they are now. The aspect ratios of the Monitors when SL was being developed 'forced' it. I'm not even sure if wide screen monitors were available then. This may also be a contributing factor to the original 'oversizing' of Ava's and Builds. I'm not sure about that but it is a thought that has crossed my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canoro Philipp Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 OnLive has been very flexible since the beginning, providing the same stream to desktops, tablets, TVs, and all kind of devices, providing the users with enough controls to play complex games in all those devices. if the project goes out of beta, we may be able to use Second Life in our desktops with full graphics advantage for the hours we need, and if OnLive release that stream to TVs, we may be able to use SL in our big screen TVs. if SL Go was somehow free, that could be the end of lag and the end of people not having enough computer specs to run SL as it is designed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo Yardley Posted March 7, 2014 Author Share Posted March 7, 2014 Canoro Philipp wrote: OnLive has been very flexible since the beginning, providing the same stream to desktops, tablets, TVs, and all kind of devices, providing the users with enough controls to play complex games in all those devices. if the project goes out of beta, we may be able to use Second Life in our desktops with full graphics advantage for the hours we need, and if OnLive release that stream to TVs, we may be able to use SL in our big screen TVs. if the Onlive desktop software was somehow free, that could be the end of lag and the end of people not having enough computer specs to run SL. The package I received already allowed me to run SL on the tv with OnLive, but I don't have a tv. It will never be free, but I do hope it will get cheaper, I guess it depends on how many people will be using it and perhaps if LL can make a nice deal for us, for instance give all premium members a few hours free a month. We did an interview with the OnLive people here; http://draxfiles.com/2014/03/07/show-9-sl-go/ And here are a few of the points that were made; http://joyardley.wordpress.com/2014/03/06/slgo-qa/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 That's pretty much what I'm saying. It seems to me, if they can get the pricing right, this a product that's going to be much more attractive to people with desktops or laptops that can't handle SL at higher end graphics settings than it is to people who simply want to use tablets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Innula Zenovka wrote: That's pretty much what I'm saying. It seems to me, if they can get the pricing right, this a product that's going to be much more attractive to people with desktops or laptops that can't handle SL at higher end graphics settings than it is to people who simply want to use tablets. Break it down this way: If you only use SL five hours per week, you are still spending $50 per month at the 10 hour rate, or $600 a year. You are halfway there to the price on a very nice Computer. Will someone who uses SL less than that really want to cough up the money for it? It would be really interesting to look at the actual time per user stats in SL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 People don't always behave rationally when they make purchasing decisions, though, otherwise everyone would pay off their credit cards in full by the end of the month if they possibly could (and approach their bank for a loan if they couldn't) and all SL premium members would pay annually rather than quarterly or monthly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillon Levenque Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 Innula Zenovka wrote: That's pretty much what I'm saying. It seems to me, if they can get the pricing right, this a product that's going to be much more attractive to people with desktops or laptops that can't handle SL at higher end graphics settings than it is to people who simply want to use tablets. Or to people who travel now and then and would consider paying extra for the ability to get a high-level SL experience even while using the travelling laptop. I'd certainly at least consider it. Right now I can run Singularity at low-to-mid settings and get by but everything takes much longer to rez. If I could pay a fee in exchange for a few hours of high quality SL time I'd do it, especially since it would be a rare thing for me: I don't travel much. Of course, that isn't going to do much for OnLive, but if there are a lot of people like me it might add up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfee Yaffle Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 I know I'm just repeating others here, but if this is about getting SL on a ancient computer; I have a 4 year old ASUS laptop that has ran SL just fine for all-day periods since I first bought it. You can get a decent SL-friendly desktop or laptop for under $400 ($200 if you really look hard) off sites like amazon, tiger direct, newegg, and even ebay. You may sometimes have to build it from a kit, or assemble each piece at a time, but you can still get a whole pre-built PC that cheap as well. back in 2009 my laptop was $700 and I'm sure thats dropped since then. Its rediculous to pay a monthly fee to access something everybody else on the planet can access for free. If its about being mobile; get 'Lumiya' for android or 'pocket metaverse' for IOS. Those two viewers perform greatly. This is the whole reason I don't use 'mobile grid client' for android. Why let people nickel and dime you like this? Lumiya is under a 1 time payment to own, and I see it worthwhile because its built from the ground up for different architecture, and its creator is only asking for that one initial purchase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 Innula Zenovka wrote: People don't always behave rationally when they make purchasing decisions, though, otherwise everyone would pay off their credit cards in full by the end of the month if they possibly could (and approach their bank for a loan if they couldn't) and all SL premium members would pay annually rather than quarterly or monthly. This is true. Also there are probably a lot of people in SL who are just living from pay check to paycheck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebaekai Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 It's always been mobile though. Remember Lumiya, anyone? Thats been on the market for a couple of years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo Yardley Posted April 3, 2014 Author Share Posted April 3, 2014 They've listened and lowered the prices and offered a pretty reasonable subscription option; Monthly unlimited usage subscription plan for $9.95US/£6.95UK. No commitment – cancel anytime. Reduced hourly rates – only $1US/£0.70UK per hour (the free 20-minute trial remains in effect). Expanded international support: now 36 countries http://joyardley.wordpress.com/2014/04/03/slgo-will-cost-9-95-a-month-with-unlimited-usage/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssmiles Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 I would recommend people find another way to go mobile and not pay for it. My concern is, once folks start paying for this, LL is going to find a way to charge everyone, mobile device or not. I would think Linden Labs makes enough money off of uploads, premium memberships, land sales, ect... apparently they don't see it that way. Greedy b*stards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo Yardley Posted June 30, 2014 Author Share Posted June 30, 2014 This is not a Linden Lab(no s) product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madjim Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 Jo Yardley wrote: This is not a Linden Lab(no s) product. No, but it's promoted and approved by Linden Lab and its Cheerleaders. Father "it makes many people sick, especially females" Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiramanell Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 Jo Yardley wrote: Second Life goes mobile! http://joyardley.wordpress.com/2014/03/05/slgo/ Hmm, $10 for 1 month, or $25 for 10 hours?! Whatever shall I do?! ;P Seriously, staying online 24/7, for the entire month, I'd pay about $30 for *that* (like 3x as much as regular SL). But the latter for just less than half day?! Thanks, but no thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now