You are currently in the Blog Archive. All content within this area is Read-Only and cannot be modified. Active Blogs can be found here.

Join the Discussion on SL Enterprise

by Honored Resident Blue Linden on ‎11-04-2009 09:06 AM

Talk with us about the news of SL Enterprise, the behind-the-firewall solution for Second Life.

Comments
by Advisor Medhue Simoni on ‎11-06-2009 11:23 AM

Here's my last words on the subject. First, lets simplify things to clear up any confusion. Corporations and Government go hand in hand. Especially, in todays world, which is why Goldman Sach gets free money and you sit in a shack and eat tv dinners. This Work Marketplace is a way for the corporations to monetize us. Right now, we are in a freemarket, anarchistic environment. Much like many small businesses in the world, we do our own books and the definition of income can get complicated. Within a corporate system, it is cut and dried, and they may even take the money first and then let you beg for some of it back during tax time. I'm not screaming "Conspiracy", just that this is an evolving solution to this Corp/Gov problem. Do some reading on the origin of corporations and their relationship to direct taxation. So this Work Marketplace, to me, looks like a way to usher in their form of monetary control. Of course this is not something that will happen overnight. See, governments need every1 to work for a corporation. You see this in every single legislation passed. They all force people into a corporate entity. Why do you think its so hard to get private health insurance?

Sorry but I don't need be part of a corporation to make money. Nor do I need their controls. Ultimately, this is just an attempt and it will fail. Oh, I can see this affecting certain markets but overall, it will have little impact on SL or the business that goes on in it. People like freedom and will always gravitate toward it. I see this also in the products I make. The more I restrict the customers freedom of using it, the less popular it will be. Example "no mod". Plus, I think the SL community's IQ is a bit higher than the average joe, lol.

The sad part, the disturbing part, is that LL seems to keep playing this corporate dance game. Over and over now we all suffer because of these corporate demands. Obviously, LL is spending alot of their time and efforts into them and completely negletting its core audience. If anything, SL shows that we don't fricken need the corporations, or their money. Just look at the charts. Catering to these entities did not create solid, steady growth. It set SL into a chaotic mess. Now we have core issues that are years old, and still not being dealt with, but hey now we got SLE. I guess all the problems are worth it, right?

by Honored Resident Magggnnus Woodget on ‎11-06-2009 12:12 PM

Every client seriously considering SLE will need to know what the costs are following the first year.

Mo Hax is posting on twitter that each following year will be $55.000,- as well - which I can't quite believe.

I read this from the Q&A

"Q: Cost of yearly contract?
A: For renewal pricing, contact Linden Lab.  $55K provides one year of licensing of Second Life Enterprise for up to 100 accounts."

as meaning that the first 55.000,- include the licensing fee, costs after first year on request only for now.

by Member Meade Paravane on ‎11-06-2009 01:06 PM

Mo Hax is posting on twitter that each following year will be $55.000,- as well - which I can't quite believe.

I read this from the Q&A

"Q: Cost of yearly contract?
A: For renewal pricing, contact Linden Lab.  $55K provides one year of licensing of Second Life Enterprise for up to 100 accounts."

as meaning that the first 55.000,- include the licensing fee, costs after first year on request only for now.

It's 55k for just 100 accounts? So they sell (for some limited value of the word 'sell') you all the gear for up to 700-800 people but you can only use 100?

Some clarifications would be great here, LL!

by Honored Member Shockwave Yareach on ‎11-06-2009 02:26 PM

So the costs to the companies for a solution-in-a-box is 55,000$ PER YEAR??!!

As a one time cost, it's acceptable - it's the price of one IT person.  But to pay the same thing over and over again for nothing?  Nope, can imagine anyone signing such an agreement.  An annual license fee of about 1000$ would move more product than the super-priced renewal.  At these prices, LL had better fly people to businesses to install and setup gear, and replace the servers/drives when they fail.

by Member Nany Kayo on ‎11-06-2009 02:47 PM
SLEnterprise purchasers sign a license agreement that prohibits them from distributing or selling content - including to SL - that has been downloaded, modified, or created on their SLEnterprise installation.


I don't understand this either.


I think this limitation is going to be a deal breaker for many potential customers.  The SLEnterprise platform is reduced to little more than a fancy teleconference tool if you can't sell anything you create on it.

by Member Nany Kayo on ‎11-06-2009 02:55 PM

I would like to discuss the prohibition against selling content created on SL Enterprise pretty soon.  I'm in discussion with potential funding orgs who are evaluating the product.  Legal entanglements over content creation will present a serious deterrent to adopting this platform.

by Contributor Ceera Murakami on ‎11-06-2009 03:03 PM

As a one-shot fee, $55K USD marginally justifiable. As an annual fee, it's impossible to justify. That is my professional opinion, as someone who works in the Corporate world maintaining hundreds of servers worldwide, and who probably has more years professional work experience than any of the individuals on the server administration staff at LL.

Consider that as about $15,000 USD for the pair of 8-core servers. (Retail price for a pretty tricked-out set of actual IBM 8-core servers with 4 large drives each, as a 2 x 2 drive RAID array, better power supply than LL is offering, and lots of RAM).

Then add $8,000 USD for the setup fees that LL would have charged to set that up on the main grid.

Then add in just over $28,000 for what LL normally collects for tier on eight Class 5 private sims... That comes out to $51,320 USD that would normally get paid to LL to buy, set up and run eight sims on that server pair. So I guess, in their minds, that $55K USD is "reasonable" as a Corporate stand-alone product, with hardware included.

But if I rent 8 Class 5 Private Islands from LL on the main grid, THEY provide the collocation center, THEY pay the power bills and building maintenance there, THEY perform needed maintenance on the servers...

If one of my clients buys an SLE Bundle, and locks it away in their server room in Newark, Delaware, in a site that requires a company employee escort to enter the server room, and a clearance scheduled weeks in advance to do any work on the system, is LL going to fly a technician out to that site to rack the equipment and fire it up? Are they going to come out, in person, to fix a failed hard drive, on 24 x 7 call? Are they going to come out, in person, to install server code patches? No? So what DOES the client get for all those fees?

OK, you get the license to run the server on your own for a year. Is that really worth $40,000 USD (taking out the cost of the servers.) Not by comparison to many of the Corporate server software licensing agreements I have seen, for far more business-critical products.

And for the following year, on the main grid all LL would get is the $28K in annual tier on the 8 sims, which, again, they would be paying all the overhead for the collocation center, the power bills and building maintenance, and manpower to perform needed maintenance on the servers.

The owner of the SLE Bundle, who already paid for the servers and set them up at their own expense, and has been paying the overhead and staffing costs, gets... what? Access to downloaded server software patches, maybe? Well, how about 24 x 7 response on hardware failure support - but wouldn't THAT be coming from the hardware vendor that makes the servers? I might expect that kind of support for maybe $20K a year on 8 servers and the bundled software. IF that actually included the hardware support, and shipping RMA spare parts ASAP as needed, and incredibly good tech support.

Are there Corporate server products out there that have even higher licensing fees per year? Yes, certainly - for products that provide business-critical services to hundreds of thousands of users at the same instant, and with absolutely stellar customer support and technical support. But not for a non-expandable product that only can server 800 users at a time.

So what is that annual renewal fee again? I know no client of mine would look twice at this product without knowing that up front. And based on the analysis above, it should be well less than $28,000 USD a year, because you are GETTING far less than that same $28,000 per year would buy you on the main grid.

by Member Nany Kayo on ‎11-06-2009 04:11 PM

It's looking like an awful lot of strikes against this expensive product, isn't it.  For us, we need access for all ages, and we need to be able to verify eligibility for federally funded education, health care and social services.  It would be worth a lot to us to apply what we have already learned and developed through Second Life.  But the cost is very high, and if we are not even free to distribute artworks we create on the platform, it's probably not going to work for us.

Glad you brought that comment to our attention.  It is a disappointment, but better that than an embarassment for suggesting an expensive solution that will not work for us.

by Honored Member Ciaran Laval on ‎11-07-2009 03:04 AM

Nany.Kayo wrote:

It's looking like an awful lot of strikes against this expensive product, isn't it.  For us, we need access for all ages


I don't see why this is a problem, it's your grid, it's not connected to the main grid, you can allow anyone in.

As for selling content, why would a company want to sell content to other staff members? This is aimed at corporate use internally at this moment in time, not for people to setup their own public grid.

by Contributor Ceera Murakami on ‎11-07-2009 06:11 AM

Ciaran,

You've never worked for a company that has a "Company store"? A place where employees can buy shirts, coffee mugs, clocks and all manner of other stuff with the company logo on it? A place where employees can get a discount on merchandise created by the company and by other vendors the company contracts with?

There are LOTS of ways that corps sell things to their own employees, believe me.

The Corp I work for has 8 sims in SL, on the main grid. When they initially set them up for a company celebration, one prominent feature was, in fact, a store - where employees could get a hat, a flash drive, or several other real-world merchandise items, via links to the company store website, and paid for in US Dolars on that website. They also had in-world freebies like shirts with the company logo.

For the private grids, I could see them actually using the L$ system and in-grid purchases to distribute company-related merchandise. But one very easy way around the lack of in-grid cash sales is to link from prims in-grid to an e-commerce website.

The restriction on selling virtual content that is related to your private grid is very troubling, though. I just don't see how that benefits anyone, and it's a big negative for some potential clients.

From the discussions that I've had so far with the people who run our existing sims, I personally doubt they would bite on this new product, because it is priced too high, not expandable, and hass strange restrictions placed on its use. But the final decision on that won't lie with me.

by Member Rachel Darling on ‎11-07-2009 07:21 AM

Sitearm, sent you a PM on the SL Forums; not sure if you're checking there...I know they're hard to find :-D

by Member Nany Kayo on ‎11-07-2009 09:17 AM

Corporate and educational uses of virtual worlds overlap in many areas.  Both types of organizations create and sell products to the public.

by Member Toysoldier Thor on ‎11-07-2009 09:30 AM

I am surprised there is so much interest and discussion about this SLE.  This product will have marginal "niche" player success for only a few corporate entities that want to "play".  No serious larger corporation will take the SLE as a serious contender for a Collaboration tool in their environment - even if it was almost handed to them for free.

I know that statement might surprise some of you but the CAPITAL cost of this SLE solution in and of itself is not a shocking price IF it provided unique value that would address critical business needs and that no competing product/solution in that space did not have this functionality (or if it had industry leading mindshare / marketshare).  Although it has a sticker shock that might scare most of the small/medium customers away, larger business would take the cost IF it could meet their functionality and scale of business.

Example, our company paid a premium price to have redundant internal network Google Search Appliances (GSA).  Google charges a hefty fee for their appliances, BUT, they are leaders in the mindspace/marketspace for content search and a strong functional contender.

This is where the SLE fails IMHO.  SLE does not have the Value Proposition for most organizations (except those companies that like to play or see it as some kind of creative space) even at $0.

WHY?

Because for ANY larger organization (and this doesnt even have to be a fortune 500 company) the Capital Cost of the software/hardware to deploy this solution - even if LL wanted to give it to a customer at $100K - is only a SMALLLL fraction of the overall cost of deployment of ANY solution in a company.

Example of some costs that companies have to consider when deploying something new:

  • Staff Allocation to support it
  • Staff Allocation to administer it
  • Training of Support & Admin
  • Training of End Users on the product (huge cost)
  • Change / Migration / Creation of Business processes to integrate this into the business operations
  • Upgrade of end computing technologies (i.e. laptops desktops that especially for SLE will put huge loads on the graphics cards of older PCs)
  • Upgrade of common infrastructure to support addition loads (for SLE they already stated to consider 100kbps per user - well many corporate WAN networks are not scaled to support this kind of remote office load - i.e. a T1 @ 1.5mbps supporting an office of 30 with already 40% utilization - think about what 5 users going onto SLE at that office will do to that WAN link)
  • Culture shift / Transition inefficiencies (non-productivity while employees adopt something new)
  • Data Center costs: floor/rack space, power, etc.
  • Service disruption avoidance costs (i.e. high availability & disaster recovery planning if this solution becomes a critical business function).

I could go but I think you are all starting to see what I am trying to say.  LL could GIVE SLE away for FREE to a customer but if that customer cannot realize REAL HARD CRITICAL benefits from this product/solution, they will not engage.  FREE IS NOT FREE to a company.  When we go through the process of coming up with a solution to deliver our business's demands, we have to think of all these factors before making a decision if we want to engage on this solution.  I am telling you from experience that LL will only be selling the SLE to a very very small niche of unique situation customers.  Their product simply is not a serious contenter in this space compared to their competitors.

IF all a customer wants to do is have a cool place for a small portion of their staff to use these functions, I would think many would simply use the Main Grid and spend a substantially less amount just buy a few PRIVATE sims with restricted access (i.e. like companies like IBM already have done I believe). BUT AGAIN - only if they have a true need for this SLE type environment.

I suspect many companies that do have interest in SL are interested in having some form of access to the main grid for advertising, marketing, or interfacing with customers in a unique COOL way.  So, have SLE with no form of interface to the main grid (i.e. a Store Front that interfaces that company's SLE grid to the main grid) even further reduces the value proposition for SLE.  Personally, I joined SL in 2008 because I went to a RL IBM presentation whereby the IBM Presenter in his home in Colorado presented to the RL audience that showed up at an IMAX theatre and talked to all of us from his IBM Island.  That is how I discovered SL.  If he lived on his private SLE universe - missed opportunity.

Soooo, based on this... I am shocked that so many posters here are discussing or are concerned on how SL creators will be able to sell to this SLE customer base.  We are all discussing and even being worried about pennies in a penny jar.  SL Creators... your massive market will continue to be the main SL grid and its residents.  Dont loose sleep about opportunities potentially being missed from SLE customers.

by Honored Resident Dillon Beerbaum on ‎11-07-2009 10:36 AM

After some of these posts, I hardly have something comparibly intelligent to post.

All I have to say is, as mean as it sounds, I'm glad that there's a 99% negative post rate. LL gets a lot of bad talk, but if one thing deserved not to be brown-nosed, it's this moronic pet-project of theirs. It's one of many paths LL has been taking to feed their greed for cash with little to no effort.

Enterprise is a monumental failure, both in concept and execution, and you need to look no further than this blog post.

Some of you posters impress me It's good to hear not only the average player, but also those in corperate positions explain why it's simply a bad idea.

LL reported they've got 14 clients already. What - days after the announcement? It's quite obvious here that their only Enterprise clients are already familiar with SL (IBM for example) and felt obligated as "business partners" to try it out. That's called bias, and I'm willing to bet even the management there who approved this are scratching their heads at it's practicality.


If 14/14 clients renew this service after a year, my mind will be boggled. And if the number of Enterprise clients doubles by this time next year? Well, that's a bit of an impossibility.

Instead of desperately finding new ways to make money, why don't you focus your attention on the main grid. Deviations from that won't work. Make SL a more stable environment, and make it a cheaper environment to work in. THAT will get you respect. And if you've been reading these posts, and Googling your name, Linden Lab, you'll find that "respect" is not a thing a lot of people have for you.

by Honored Member Ciaran Laval on ‎11-07-2009 10:41 AM

Nany.Kayo wrote:

Corporate and educational uses of virtual worlds overlap in many areas.  Both types of organizations create and sell products to the public.

Yes but this is about internal communication, not public facing. However, I did envisage that this plan would allow people to share grids at some point, in which case selling content to each other would be an issue, so I do see a case for the concept now that I think about it some more.

by Honored Member Ciaran Laval on ‎11-07-2009 10:45 AM

Ceera.Murakami wrote:

Ciaran,

You've never worked for a company that has a "Company store"? A place where employees can buy shirts, coffee mugs, clocks and all manner of other stuff with the company logo on it? A place where employees can get a discount on merchandise created by the company and by other vendors the company contracts with?


Nope never worked for such a company, I get my merchandise for free but thanks for pointing this out because I can think of places where such a concept is feasible, it simply hadn't crossed my mind.

Ceera.Murakami wrote:


For the private grids, I could see them actually using the L$ system and in-grid purchases to distribute company-related merchandise. But one very easy way around the lack of in-grid cash sales is to link from prims in-grid to an e-commerce website.

The restriction on selling virtual content that is related to your private grid is very troubling, though. I just don't see how that benefits anyone, and it's a big negative for some potential clients.

From the discussions that I've had so far with the people who run our existing sims, I personally doubt they would bite on this new product, because it is priced too high, not expandable, and hass strange restrictions placed on its use. But the final decision on that won't lie with me.

I can definitely see where you're coming from. I read somewhere that it was suggested points will be used instead, i'm sure a corp could use a points make prizes system or allow people to buy points, I can see the use case you're talking about here and I do agree that it is a little troubling that sales are prohibited, seems a bit short sighted.

by Honored Resident Bristle Chesnokov on ‎11-07-2009 10:55 AM

i guess the 55k stop me right there. but over the last few days, i see it differently.  the 8-processor is what would be ideal with LL customers as they have it now. but what if someone would want a 2-process or 4-processor.  then that would be less.  i dont think anyone said with the price would be for a lesser system.

so i started with a 2-processor and ended with up $7200 (including computers, bandwidth, etc).  you buy it and sl maintain it.  not a bad deal.

there are two major problems with that then.  a region get filled up with 60 people. so i would have to see 100 people in a region before i believe that. also a region is too small for some applications. it would required a great deal more. but 60 people is ok and but i am not sure about. but for 60 people, you can have 4 regions in the same processor. maybe more. some applications have other requirements, but i want to stick with what sl has.

so the 55k is for the >1% of users and could be effective once you reach a certain size or a large amount of money. as long as the market place is kept out of the SLE, it should be ok.so that chart should be redrawn -- if the case of providers -- to show 1-processor, 2-processors, 4-processors, and 8-processors. anything over 8, will be probably be SLE advantage.

Message was edited by: Bristle Chesnokov

by Member Nany Kayo on ‎11-07-2009 10:58 AM

What would be the point of limiting the uses of this expensive platform to one kind of internal communication only?  What purpose can that serve other than to reduce the number of potential buyers?

The restriction on using SL Enterprise installations for commercial content creation needs a detailed explanation.  It could have very far reaching implications.  Does it imply that any idea or prototype developed on one of these behind-the-firewall platforms cannot ever be sold to anyone? Linden Lab should post the details of that portion of the license agreement and explain it.

by Honored Resident Sindy Tsure on ‎11-07-2009 11:22 AM
All I have to say is, as mean as it sounds, I'm glad that there's a 99% negative post rate. LL gets a lot of bad talk, but if one thing deserved not to be brown-nosed, it's this moronic pet-project of theirs. It's one of many paths LL has been taking to feed their greed for cash with little to no effort.

I don't see 99% of people against the product itself. It seems more like people think it's been positioned a bit (or maybe more than a bit) too high to get any real traction. Maybe it is just right, maybe it's too high, maybe they did this on purpose to limit the beta to 'serious' enterprises for now. Who knows? I sure don't and don't expect LL to tell me..

As somebody who's as vocal as anybody else here when I see LL doing things I think will hurt SL, I don't think it's a bad product. I do wish they'd have made a more entry-level version of it, though. US$55K isn't that big of a price tag for many companies but SLE is new, unproven and seems to be pretty details-free at the moment. I just don't see there being a stampede at that price, with so much uncertainty.

/me pokes LL. Hey!! More details, please! Your FAQ needs some polish, too. For the kind of cash we're talking about here, mistakes like the quotes below and letting rumors/speculation do their standard resident things really should not happen...

How many people can be in the Second Life Enterprise workspace at the same time?
As an 8-cluster system, the SL Enterprise Beta supports up to 800 concurrent users with an optimal maximum of 700 concurrent users. The best rule of thumb for bandwidth planning is 100 Kb/s per concurrent user.
Second Life Enterprise Beta supports up to 800 concurrent users with optimal performance at 400 concurrent users or less
by Member Nany Kayo on ‎11-07-2009 11:26 AM

We are looking at addressing the issues President Obama raises in this speech using a virtual world solution like SL Enterprise.

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/11/05/HP/A/25569/White+House+Tribal+Nations+Conference.aspx

One of those issues is extreme poverty, unemployment rates of 80%.  Commercial use of the platform is crucial.

by Member Blaze Nielsen on ‎11-07-2009 02:58 PM

I don't think we will see much corporate involvement in SL if my experience with Lindens is representative of their unprofessional staff. I was asked by a firm who manages large worldwide conferences for Microsoft to investigate SL as a possible resource. Possibly using it as an option for some of their regular 300+ person seminars. I enquired with Linden labs and received the name of a solution company that does not exist (misspelled by the Linden) and a url to a video that was not active. No response to my questions and no reply to the errors in information sent. I suggested to Microsoft as a result that perhaps they should consider Second Life in a few years, but not now.

by Member Toysoldier Thor on ‎11-07-2009 05:42 PM
Instead of desperately finding new ways to make money, why don't you focus your attention on the main grid. Deviations from that won't work. Make SL a more stable environment, and make it a cheaper environment to work in. THAT will get you respect. And if you've been reading these posts, and Googling your name, Linden Lab, you'll find that "respect" is not a thing a lot of people have for you.

Dillon,  you sorta beat me to the punch.

The problem that LL and the sr. management that is guiding them right now is that they are falling for the same critical and corporately dangerous practices that so many young and early successful start-ups have fallen for in the past - and paid dearly for.

Their early and clearly powerful success in bringing to market a SERVICE (SECONDLIFE) in one narrowly defined market segment has let the power get to their heads.  They believe that because of their amazing success in this non-commercial/casual/hobby/entertainment space, that their job is now done in accomplishing all they could in this space - AND - now its time to send the empire out to conquer new lands/markets with their amazing tool that worked so well in the market they became the leader in.

The problem is that - as so many of SL residents and merchants know, with all the success of the SL/XSTREET virtual worlds, they have huge battles still to win that were created from their success.

  • Creator Content Theft is rampant and LL has yet to effectively stop this dangerous progression
  • SL Land values are plumeting
  • Contrary to all LL's rosey filtered financials and stats, its generally believed that the SL economy is in a recession and because of the glut of FREEBIES from so many sources as well as dropped spending because of the RL recession, there is a clear drop in price of content sold in-world/xstreet.
  • Client Stability and in-world lag a big and growing problem
  • XSTREET functional improvements CONSTANTLY on the back-burner - no REAL improvements in Xstreet capabilities for neither Customer nor Merchant.  Even the Lindens in charge of the Xstreet unit admit that there is so much to do but woefully little development resources to accomplish the work that the Merchants and Customers have been screaming for on a weekly basis.
  • ... and I am sure the rest of you can come up with several other HOME FIRES that are burning with the current LL offerings.

BUT... LL feels that the current homefront of services being offered is good enough that they need to now divert some of their precious focus, $, resources to go after new markets where they CLEARLY will not be the leader in.  Markets that are already very crowded and where their SLE product with gaiin very little traction as for most of this customer base - SLE is not an effective fit.  If they don't listen to unbiased pragmatic opinions / advice from outside sources (as LL has historically ALWAYS proven not to listen to their customers and blindly forge ahead with what in in their minds/hearts), they will evetually realize that all their effort and cost spent on going after these new markets will have been wasted.  They made some sales but nothing to grow a business with. NOT STRATEGIC.

BUT.... and this is critical as this is where others before them have fallen to their demise... while they were trying unsuccessfully to expand their empire with their THINNED OUT resources and diverted focus on the new shiny new lands to explore and conquer in the distance... the home fires got out of control and the competing enemy was given time to go after THEM at the root of their success.  They were able to establish and woo SL client base away.

Mr. CEO of LL... if you want some advice... look at the history of NOVELL in the 90s.  You are heading down their historical path.

Novell in the 80's and into the early 90s quickly grew to be the #1 leader in Network software and LAN solutions (i.e. Netware).  NO ONE... NOT IBM... NOT MICROSOFT could penetrate their strangle-hold on this industry leading position.  Novell was focused and they dominated and the competition was forced to be compatiable with Novell's products.  They were so powerful in this space - they set many of the standards other followed.

UNTIL... Novell got greedy and thought it was time to enter into Microsoft's space of the Desktop OS and Desktop Office Automation product marketplace.  They wanted dominance of the desktop.  They had the money and the ego and they thought all was OK on their LAN Software market.  So they went out and bought WordPerfect Corporation and entered into a battle royal with Mircosoft in a market that Microsoft was a dominent leader.

I am sure you all know where this ended.... but basically Microsoft destroyed Novell in this market.  Novell ended up selling off WordPerfect for a firesale.  BUT more importantly, because their focus was so strong on enter this new market, they didnt realize and made critical lame mistakes that let Microsoft enter their market space on LAN Software.  Well, now Novell is only a historical footnote in the hostory of LAN Software.  Their once strong play in corporate messaging is only a bit player.  They dont have any play in the Office Automation space.  Their corporate share price is a ghost of the price it was once at in its glory days.

AND it all started when Novell decided to stop focusing on maintaining and expanding and improving the market they DOMINATED and greedily focused on market their egos wrongly believed they could conquor.

Read Novell's history LL staff... this is your future if you dont get back to focusing your resources on what you are good at and that needs major help now.  Solve the weaknesses of current SL and XSTREET. make this more powerful than it is now. THEN expand the SL main grid.  Maybe a Federation of grids where commercial/corporate would be very interested in playing in.

OK.... now i will get off my soapbox.

by Member Toysoldier Thor on ‎11-07-2009 09:58 PM

WOW... very well said.  I 100% agree.

Love the analogy Deltango!

by Honored Resident Kwame Oh on ‎11-08-2009 01:36 AM

Could not have put it better myself Deltango Vale,

"The sad irony is that the technological infrastructure of Second Life is not as important as the political economy that resides on that infrastructure. A radio - no matter how much effort went into its development - is just a radio. Far more important are the programs received on the radio. The value of a mobile phone is not the handset, but the services available on the handset. The technology to produce a DVD disc is amazing, but the value of the plastic disc is insignificant compared to the movie imprinted on the disc."

to go further, the ratings war is on with many new "radio Stations" desperate to capture the content creators, and all round community fellows who feel left behind and unloved, "well that was the spin put to me in recent outreach email from a new platform provider who shall remain nameless"

Maybe somewhere along the line as this evolution as social media evolved and became more connected to our social experiences Linden Lab seems to be missing the point, that the world today is seeking Transparency, Credibility and Community, and not sure if just a case of lets bury heads in sand and maybe it will all blow over, but the feelings of mistrust abound amongst the chattering classes and no where do we see any semblance of "speaking to the community" from the Labs, but a constant "speaking at".

I for instance, still await my answer regarding whether my companies created content will be sold to enterprise as out of box solution, and unfortunately have had not a peep back, so am erring on the conclusion, that yes it will.

Julius Sowu Marketing Director Virtually-Linked London

by Member Nany Kayo on ‎11-08-2009 08:38 AM

A ratings war implies close competition, and so far, there isn't any.  There is no other immersive 3D social networking medium with this level of international exposure.  When you change the channel here, you end up on Facebook or Twitter or sloshing in a sea of blogs.

by Member Deltango Vale on ‎11-08-2009 03:32 PM

I believe Linden Lab's core problem is not hubris, but a structural incompatibility between the nature of the company and the nature of its product.

Linden Lab is a Silicon Valley startup. The company's unique strength is its engineering skill with respect to building a 3D virtual world platform. Yet someone in the company had the genius to construct not simply a platform, but also a political economy with a sophisticated private property-rights structure that encouraged user-generated content. Thus, as anyone at McKinsey would tell you, Linden Lab sells two interwoven products: the platform and the political economy.

Because Linden Lab is engineering-centric, it understands one product (the platform) but not the other (the political economy). This is why, in my opinion, Linden Lab focuses on technology at the expense of policy. Having built Second Life, Linden Lab says, 'Right, now what can we do with this technology?" The answer is SL Enterprise.

The sad irony is that the technological infrastructure of Second Life is not as important as the political economy that resides on that infrastructure. A radio - no matter how much effort went into its development - is just a radio. Far more important are the programs received on the radio. The value of a mobile phone is not the handset, but the services available on the handset. The technology to produce a DVD disc is amazing, but the value of the plastic disc is insignificant compared to the movie imprinted on the disc.

In my opinion, Linden Lab is concentrating on radios and handsets and plastic discs. The company needs to wake up to the fact that the platform is not its core product. Linden Lab's core product is 'Jamestown', 'Bermuda' and 'Massachusetts Bay', which, because Linden Lab does not have an economic historian at Board level, is likely to end up being 'Roanoke Island'.

by Member Gooden Uggla on ‎11-09-2009 12:16 PM

Only if your payment processor's servers are also on your tribal land - UIGEA goes after the people and banks that process the payments, not the casinos themselves. Most bankers tend to want to avoid prison...

by Honored Resident Tesla Miles on ‎11-10-2009 03:00 AM

Hi,

I don't normally post in these forums, but I felt I needed to reply to this one:


A friend of mine who runs a medium size I.T firm was interested in my opinion about using SL Enterprise since I run a successful store in SL. He wanted to know whether it was worth paying $55,000 for the service, so I told him that based on Linden Lab's past record of how they treat loyal SL customers, don't expect anything special, because once they have your money, they don't really care after that as the company tends to have a short term rather than a long term vision, ie. they care for getting new customers but not about their existing ones.

I was just being honest, and as a long time user of SL, I'll tell the same thing to everyone else who asks my views about Linden Labs products.

Tesla.

by Honored Resident Sorina Garrigus on ‎11-10-2009 03:20 AM

Giving customers good customer service is so critical in any business to get them to come back again. Unfortunately Linden Labs for the most part has a monopoly on virtual worlds (not counting RPG games) so they feel they can get away with it. The thing is they would make more money if they were hanging on to the customer base. I see a lot of turn over of people deeply invested and just bailing because of poor or non response. All programs really should take a back burner until they get a grasp of the customer service issues.

by Honored Resident Sorina Garrigus on ‎11-10-2009 03:37 AM

Tribal lands are still subjected to federal laws (not state) so servers on tribal land wouldn't matter.  The unlawful interent gambling enforcement act is a law snuck in at the very end of an anti terrorism bill and is a federal law. Because as we all know terrorist love to play poker? I wrote an article back when in my magazine about how Osama Bin Laden is the one really responsible for gambling being banned in SL. Crazy but apparently Bush jr thought so. I believe hefty fines rather than prison as someone else mentioned are the penalty against US banks, credit card companies etc for processing. Even off shore servers wouldn't address the issue without excluding the US market. So much for land of the free. But skill games are allowed in SL and outside SL. So thats all we have at the momment. If Barney Frank makes headway changing or repealing the laws in question we will just have skill games. Even after depending on how it all goes down its not clear how that may or may not affect SL. Only legal gambling in some place are state sanctioned ones (lottery tickets) or of course everybodies favorite casino wallstreet.

by Member Adam Spark on ‎11-10-2009 12:04 PM

Nice functionality in SL Enterprise.


Shame it isn't added to the main grid instead, so that business can grow there instead of being segregated from the community at-large.

by Contributor Ceera Murakami on ‎11-11-2009 07:58 AM

Hummm. I have to say that I'm very disappointed with the "further information" provided in the FAQ's and the materials released to the Solutions Developers.

Want to know what it will cost, other than the up-front $55K USD cost? LL is not telling. The only way to find out is to approach them as a potential client and request a quote. They are refusing to reveal anything else about the pricing structure. WHY? The impression it gives is "if you have to ask, you can't afford it!". One of the Blogs reported on the incremental cost for more users, and a recent Blog post confirmed the figures, but that info is NOWHERE in LL's publicly available data.

The one thing they DID reveal on pricing was very disheartening. The $55K USD 2-server setup is capable of running 8 sims at once, with up to 100 people per sim. BUT... that price only licenses you for 100 accounts! That 3rd party Blog stated the "$55,000 as a one time up front cost on the appliance and software license for 100 avatars, plus an annual recurring fee based on the number of users licensed (starting at $175/user with discounts based on volume)". So what that $55K USD buys you is a license for only "100 seats". That pricing structure will make this product worthless for many Corps, and maybe even for the military. Why the restriction? For that much money, on a server that LL is NOT going to operate for the client, why restrict the number of accounts at all?

And they clearly state that the Permissions system is 100% worthless on these grids. They state that the admin for the grid can make any item on the grid full perms, or set any perms they like, no matter who created it. THAT is why they are trying to restrict any export of content imported into or created on those grids. Because LL failed to provide ANY IP protection for content creators in this product. Their FAQ says that "IP Protection on these grids should be based on contracts for terms of use.", or something like that. Essentially that the Content Seller should have a contract with each grid, spelling out the IP rights and restrictions. Now how in the world are we supposed to do that, if a Solutions Provider uses their proposed new "Marketplace", and any SLE grid owner can purchase content there at will, with no approval from the Solution Provider?

Until and unless I see better, more positive information, I am going to steer clear of this product solution, and will advise any potential clients not to go that route, unless it is strictly a "Money is no object, we don't care how much it costs!" situation.

As usual, if LL has a number of ways they could implement something, they choose one of the worst possible ways to do it.

by Honored Resident Kimo Junot on ‎11-11-2009 08:15 AM

After that OS sim fiasco last year and the fall out from it I just cant see how anyone in there right mind would even think about spending 5K on somthing like this..belive me...alot of us  in SL havent forgot what happend and what ALOT of us lost because of it

by Recognized Resident Maven Mosuke on ‎11-11-2009 11:41 AM

Just saw this on SL Enterpreneur Magazine:

Featured Editorial: Linden Labs SL Enterprise Solution Will Not Harm SL Residents
http://www.slentre.com/second-life-featured-editorial-linden-labs-sl-enterprise-solution-will-not-ha...

It makes the pitch that SL Enterprise and SL Work Marketplace are available for any merchant or developer INdirectly, if not directly:

“When you get past the hype it’s simple: SL Enterprise is aimed at LARGE COMPANIES with their own DATA CENTERS for their own MEETINGS in a 3D INTERNET environment to SAVE COSTS. Nevertheless, it provides huge OPPORTUNITIES for independent developers.”

“It’s confusing at first to get it: SLE is COMPLETELY separated from Public SL: You can’t get there – SLE -  from here – Public SL!”

by Honored Resident Tesla Miles on ‎11-11-2009 07:45 PM

“When you get past the hype it’s simple: SL Enterprise is aimed at LARGE COMPANIES with their own DATA CENTERS for their own MEETINGS in a 3D INTERNET environment to SAVE COSTS. Nevertheless, it provides huge OPPORTUNITIES for independent developers.”

Okay, I laughed when I read this


Large companies don't think about saving costs when it comes to meetings, small businesses do. Large corporations save much more by cutting generous bonus paychecks to employees.

I also doubt that it will provide 'huge' opportunities if the aim is to 'save costs' for the company.


LOL.

by Honored Resident Haruka Harris on ‎11-11-2009 08:01 PM

I know I need to be kinder but it astonishes me how clueless some people are about economics for large corporations with multiple office locations. Said another way, 55,000 Dollars is not a lot of money.

For example... Is 55,000 dollars a reasonable investment to reduce meeting costs for a company that has three or more offices and needs to get its people together regularly? Yes!!!

. TOTAL PER EMPLOYEE PER MEETING WITHOUT SL ENTERPRISE BETA: ~600 USD
  + AIR FARE ROUND TRIP: 270 USD
  + LODGING 2 NIGHTS: 300 USD
  + NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES PER DEPARTMENT MEETING: 25
  + NUMBER OF DEPARTMENTS: 5
  + NUMBER OF DEPARTMENT MEETINGS PER YEAR: 4
     TOTAL COST: 300,000 DOLLARS/YEAR
. TOTAL USING SL ENTERPRISE BETA: 55,000 DOLLARS/YEAR
. SAVINGS USING SL ENTERPRISE BETA: 250,000 DOLLARS/YEAR

by Member Sitearm Madonna on ‎11-11-2009 08:07 PM

@Maven: *blushes* thank you Maven!

by Honored Resident Tesla Miles on ‎11-11-2009 08:51 PM

Haruka.Harris wrote:

I know I need to be kinder but it astonishes me how clueless some people are about economics for large corporations with multiple office locations. Said another way, 55,000 Dollars is not a lot of money.


. SAVINGS USING SL ENTERPRISE BETA: 250,000 DOLLARS/YEAR

Which is peanuts to a large corporation.

Just out of curiosity, how much annual turnover do you think a large corporation has?

by Member Toysoldier Thor on ‎11-11-2009 09:32 PM

Yes Haruka, you are right... you should be kinder because you dont know when your logic "astonishes" others who think you might also be clueless how large corporations think and work.

So lets start looking at your logic:

Yeah your theoretical "technical mathematics" on the Cost/Benefit makes sense when you use the Cost of SLE vs the Potential Savings of "A SOLUTION" that would save travel costs from reducing face-to-face meeting costs.  BUT...

  1. You made an assumptions that large "Department Meeting" are a common quarterly occurance.  A lot of companies - large and small have trimmed a vast majority of these face-to-face meetings after the Dot-Com crash, 9-11 (a lot of companies rethought the true vsalue of many meetings that required air travel) and the recent recession and other past bad economic cycles.  So these large scheduled departmental meetings have drastically reduced or already been re-thought on how to communicate without fac-to-face - much less 4 times a year.
  2. You assumed in your posting that a company with 3 or more offices is a LARGE CORP?  That would not even be considered MEDIUM Sized.
  3. You converted the example of math from COST="SLE" vs. SAVING="A SOLUTION" to COST="SLE" vs. SAVING="SLE SOLUTION". Bad mistake on this math.  Why?  Because you assumed that only SLE can solve this "reduce meeting travel costs" problem.  In fact - and I already stated it previously in a post - there are a TONNNN of other collaboration solutions on the market, many of them with already established marketshare, that are either more realistic, more effective, cheaper, easier to implement/deploy, etc.  So your example is somewhat of a good sales pitch for any vendor that is selling a COLLABORATION solution to one of these companies, but it does not in ANY way prove that LL's SLE price point is reasonable.
  4. OK Haruka, this is the nail in your Cost/Benefit example coffin... You purely used the Cost of $55K as the Cost of collaboration vs. the savings that a business would realize if they bought SLE.  In other words, if someone believed your pitch, they should just write a cheque for $55K to LL and that is it for their costs and they should start watching the cost savings $ roll in?  You failed to take into account a boat-load of other assoicated costs that ANY business - especially a REAL LARGE CORP - would have to pay.  I already listed a small number of these costs in a previous posting, but implementation costs, support/admin costs, staffing, training, power/environmentals, DR preparations, etc.  I assume from your example that you must not have installed many systems in large companies.  So I will give you a real basic rule of thumb in IT solution design & operations "CAPITAL COSTS are 1/10 of TOTAL COSTS of any solution".  Also, the $ Cost of a vendor hw/sw solution is almost always a minor portion of the implementation costs of that hw/sw.
  5. You also assumed that face-to-face meetings have no value and can be removed.  Again, over the past 10 years many companies Large and Small have already known that reducing travel costs is an easy target to tighten belts.  Many of the face-to-face meetings that still occur are because of the critical requirement of being face-to-face.  THE ONLY technology solution that could put a dent into these kind of meetings are those that can best simulate REAL LIFE human interaction - i.e. more realistic, natural, and even portable Video Collaboration solutions.  And if you think the REAL players in the market dont know this... look at CISCO's more aggresive pitch to the customer base.  Ohh... and please dont respond my saying that SLE has the answer of more realistic human interfacing meetings by getting a pack of Virtual "TOONS" to meeting in a server.  Big deals will not be made because two "toon" meet virtually face to face in a sim in SLE.  ROFL!

Honestly Haruka, I could continue to pick at your example to prove how clueless some of us are, but I think I have gone far enough.

Toy

http://bit.ly/Toys-Merchant-Profile 

by Honored Resident Tesla Miles on ‎11-11-2009 10:10 PM

Face-to-face meetings also ensure that all attendees pay attention and are not checking their emails or watching Youtube.

by Honored Resident Haruka Harris on ‎11-11-2009 10:31 PM

ahroo?

AT&T:
~300,000 employees

Hewlett-Packard:
~300,000 employees

Nippon Telegraph & Telephone
~200,000 employees

IBM:
~400,000 employees

Nestle:
~300,000 employees

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.
~200,000 employees

Detutsche Post
~450,000 employees

und so weiter...

by Honored Resident Tesla Miles on ‎11-11-2009 11:36 PM

Haruka.Harris wrote:

ahroo?

AT&T:
~300,000 employees

Hewlett-Packard:
~300,000 employees

Nippon Telegraph & Telephone
~200,000 employees

IBM:
~400,000 employees

Nestle:
~300,000 employees

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.
~200,000 employees

Detutsche Post
~450,000 employees

und so weiter...

and those companies will adopt SLE because?

by Member Toysoldier Thor on ‎11-11-2009 11:54 PM

Haruka.Harris wrote:

ahroo?

AT&T:
~300,000 employees

Hewlett-Packard:
~300,000 employees

Nippon Telegraph & Telephone
~200,000 employees

IBM:
~400,000 employees

Nestle:
~300,000 employees

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.
~200,000 employees

Detutsche Post
~450,000 employees

und so weiter...

And these LARGE Fortune 500 companies are all much larger than 3 offices.

Again... this proves nothing.  It doesnt prove that a product - SLE - at even a price point of $0 will get any traction in any of these companies.  I am pretty confident - IT WONT.

Again... read my previous posts on why I think SLE is a bad waste of LL time.

Your example didnt prove anything.

by Contributor Ceera Murakami on ‎11-12-2009 06:53 AM

RE Haruka:

Or they could just use Lotus Sametime, Microsoft Netmeeting, or any one of a number of other existing business collaboration and meeting tools, which have no user limits and are available at a fraction of the cost, and run on much less expensive computers. No travel costs, no hotels, and back to work after the meeting, not back onto a long plane ride home.

The last big corp meeting I participated in had seven presenters and over 50,000 people listening to them talk and watching their PowerPoint presentations. Most people attended using a simple web browser. Others listened to the presentation on the phone, via a huge conference call. At the end of the meeting, they opened up for Q&A, and anyone of those 50,000 could submit questions, via e-mail, IM or phone, and get answers. SLE can't dream of doing that, and the web-based business software that we used cost a fraction of what SLE costs.

The last large team collaboration meeting I attended had 30 or so attendeed from all over the globe. We shared screens as needed to show presentations, and to show real-time efforts on server changes and problem diagnosis. The tools used? The phone, via a conference call, for the audio, and a web browser to access a net-based meeting.

You also neglected to consider the cost of SLE's server space in the computer room - rack space and power and Air conditioning are not free, but get allocated costs to each rack space. Or the cost of the employee who has to install and maintain those two servers, and coordinate their use and provisioning. And you neglected to mention the per-seat cost of SLE - $175 USD per year per account, or $17,500 a year minimum for the 100 accounts that come with the initial $55K price tag. A corp with 100,000 employees who wanted to make SLE available to all its employees would have to pay millions of dollars just for the account licenses, and only 800 at a time could use the SLE environment.

SLE is a niche-market product that will appeal only to a very limited subset of Corporate clients. Those trying to see it as a replacement for Corporate business meetings are looking at completely the wrong tool.

by Member Sitearm Madonna on ‎11-12-2009 07:41 AM

@Ceera; You make a good case. Adding to the discussion on the table here...

I don't think SLE is going to be used for ginormous corporate "pep up the troops" meetings. I think it is going to be used for small, sweaty, "grind out the project" work meetings with something like 5 to 15 people per meeting. The Company X Administrator of a company buying SLE is gonna be busy enabling meetings that will be held monthly, weekly, daily. SLE comes with 100 accounts - a cheap approach would be to use generic employee names at first to accomodate as many employees as needed. Over time as use grows, additional accounts are unlimited (and no, I do not think additional accounts will cost 550 USD apiece lol!). The only limit is concurrency which is 800.

I agree there are many good online meeting tools out there already. While it's still a bit mysterious why the ability to meet as avatars in interactive 3D adds something, the fact that it does add something is well documented by experience. I like to tease Amanda Linden about her case studies, which are basically, "OMG we used 3D Internet for a work meeting and it Worked!!" But, seriously, there are enough of them now posted with different, credible companies that SLE has a business case going in.

SLE having a business case means Public SL has (more of) a business case now also. Many companies WILL balk at $55K and the cleverer ones will realize, hey!, all those case studies were done on Public SL. Then they'll experiment using SL and decide whether to use it, and if so, whether to use SL or SLE. Public SL having more of a business case, while a separate issue from Public SL being our favorite place to meet, be creative, hold events, and design and give away (or sell) fun stuff with anonymity and autonomy, DOES benefit us by assuring the continued existence of Linden Lab. Never forget success breeds competition and Linden Lab will either have to stay ahead of the pack or fade graciously into the historical record of the development and evolution of 3D Internet platforms.

As long as I'm posting, a final point about why I say, "SLE Not Evil". The more I dig into the licensing terms the more I realize how diabolically clever... um, I mean, how sustainably savvy Linden Lab has positioned the SLE standalone product:
1. Company X can either create (or buy from SLM) all the extra custom content it wants on its copy of SLE on its data center site, BUT
2. Company X may neither distribute nor sell any of that content outside of Company X;
3. In fact, Company X may not even distribute or copy content from its Data Center A to its Data Center B, where A and B are physically separate data center site geograpical locations each with their own separate SLE license;
4. Instead Company X would have to create (or buy) a duplicate set of content for each data center site A, B, C...
4. If Company X were to try distributing or selling outside, its SLE License would be revoked. And Linden Lab would have full legal grounds (yikes) to go after Company X.

What this means effectively is that SL remains the Home Base for Creation of All Unrestrictedly Available SL Content. To sell SL content publicly, or to sell SL content to more than one licensee, the content HAS to be created first on Public SL. So all of us with accounts and skills on Public SL retain our competitive advantage of knowing how to do stuff here.

I know this is hard to get; it's hard for ME to get as I go through the material and listen to the questions and discussions at SL DEV.

Getting past the emotional reaction, more and more I see the "E" in SLE standing not just for Enterprise, but for Entrepreneur.

Cheers! : )
Site

by Honored Resident Tesla Miles on ‎11-12-2009 10:16 AM

Sitearm.Madonna wrote:

I think it is going to be used for small, sweaty, "grind out the project" work meetings with something like 5 to 15 people per meeting.

While it's still a bit mysterious why the ability to meet as avatars in interactive 3D adds something, the fact that it does add something is well documented by experience. I like to tease Amanda Linden about her case studies, which are basically, "OMG we used 3D Internet for a work meeting and it Worked!!" But, seriously, there are enough of them now posted with different, credible companies that SLE has a business case going in.

Hi Sitearm, thanks for your patient response (and btw, beautiful website you have, very informative.)

Maybe I'm not thinking outside the box, but with the SL virtual technology as it stands, I fail to see how it can complement the existing workflow in a large company

All the reasons, that I've seen, have described how great a virtual workplace is, but still, all the explanations still seem rather flaky and in essence, rather vague about the usefulness of the SLE solution to real world business practices. Although the early adopters of SLE beta have said many praises, I wonder how much of it is really just mutual back patting and for the purpose of joint marketing.

We have yet to be presented with a working demonstration of how SLE can be integrated seamlessly into a company's workflow, and be convinced of its functionality that goes beyond mere novelty.


I have always been sceptical of Mark Kingdon as the choice for Linden Lab's CEO because his background and expertise first and foremost is in marketing. While a good marketer can sell handbags to people who don't need them, making products for businesses is an entirely different ballgame because the business client is after efficiency and productivity in a reliable product (reliable being the keyword here).

Creating a funky 'in the box' solution, slapping a slick logo on it, and having the endorsements of a few B-list celebrity I.T companies does not magically improve the product's functionality. In my personal opinion, the SLE product is not polished or complete enough to be released as a business world tool.

SL was not originally developed as a business tool, so at its most fundamental level, it fails the basic criteria required for office use. Even as a communication tool, the chat tools leave much to be desired with no function for sorting contact lists into groups which is almost a prerequisite for any online chat program these days.

Let's see some evidence, rather than some inscrutable claims. Otherwise SLE is no better than snake oil. The worst thing for a CEO would be a record of being a 'snake oil salesman', let's hope that this won't be the case.

by Honored Resident Karmyne Bruun on ‎11-12-2009 10:35 AM

Hello!

The cost of USD 55K for SLE, is not high if you look at it from the point of view, that than buying of 8 private islands plus maintenance, SLE is 8 Sim, full permission, package support Enterprise with avatars surnames and other,  and then it is a reasonable cost. Framed precisely the same business model of the purchase of Sim. SLE has 800 seats and can take advantage of only 100 avatars because also the avatars are with licensed, and is normal. And for me SLE is not connected to the main grid of SL probably as a solution to questions and issues that posed the same company interested to SLE, on issues of identification and security of who accesses their Sim, but I think that every company has its needs, and the LL soon increase its service offering Enterprise with SLE also connected to the main grid of SL. SLE is still a Beta service and Linden Lab is testing it with the company. Proceed in small steps and is improves.

The USD 55K for SLE, are the baseline figure to begin a ample supply of services, ranging from Avatar to the content creation and development of Sim. I think the costs are personalized to the needs and demands of companies. Then, I am sure that a large company that regularly organizes conferences and other events, they spend USD 55k to event at least.

Quote

Deltango Vale

Because Linden Lab is engineering-centric, it understands one product (the platform) but not the other (the political economy). This is why, in my opinion, Linden Lab focuses on technology at the expense of policy. Having built Second Life, Linden Lab says, 'Right, now what can we do with this technology?" The answer is SL Enterprise.

The sad irony is that the technological infrastructure of Second Life is not as important as the political economy that resides on that infrastructure. A radio - no matter how much effort went into its development - is just a radio. Far more important are the programs received on the radio. The value of a mobile phone is not the handset, but the services available on the handset. The technology to produce a DVD disc is amazing, but the value of the plastic disc is insignificant compared to the movie imprinted on the disc.

I agree about the speech as the radio and telephone, but not entirely because it is different: Linden Lab must continue to develop the technology, and I agree that the heart of Second Life is not technology, but the fact remains which however is important and it is normal that the LL you are interested.

Second Life is made of dreams and the heart in each of its residents, Linden Lab provides the world of SL, the technology and more it is developed, will best benefit the residents. Are the people has make Second Life wonderful with their dreams. Linden Lab provides us with all the services and tools such as Xstrett, advertising, blogs and assistance, but we must be ourself find and realize what we feel in our hearts and this makes Second Life great.

Linden Lab develops the technology, but also all other situations of assistance and maintenance, but has also the Commerce Team that is committed for improve from view of trade commercially, as the next microsite Brings Holiday Winterfest and reflecting on feedback from the residents for continue move forward.

SLE then not it is only USD 55k and all other additional costs, but a wonder that even allows you to make also a conference near the beach, with the sea and a sky magnificent, birds twittering them around you and express yourself! The attention of a user is very high, over that to say "fascinating" and it would be fair to say, there is also the benefit of the savings! It is a new view on the work.

I think that every company should study its needs, ask the right questions that LL will certainly be happy to respond and make his reflection.

If are organizations like that of Nany Kayo, who intend to share their works, sell content and organize other events, then we must focus on the purchase of islands connected to the main grid of SL, but if you want to organize events, prototype development and have the full control, then SLE is for you.

Quote

Nany Kayo:

We are looking at addressing the issues President Obama raises in this speech using a virtual world solution like SL Enterprise.

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/11/05/HP/A/25569/White+House+Tribal+Nations+Conference.aspx

One of those issues is extreme poverty, unemployment rates of 80%.  Commercial use of the platform is crucial.

Virtual Native Lands - Real Indians in Virtual Worlds

I am pleased that President Obama is interesting for Native of America.

Quote

Ceera Murakami:

And they clearly state that the Permissions system is 100% worthless on these grids. They state that the admin for the grid can make any item on the grid full perms, or set any perms they like, no matter who created it. THAT is why they are trying to restrict any export of content imported into or created on those grids. Because LL failed to provide ANY IP protection for content creators in this product. Their FAQ says that "IP Protection on these grids should be based on contracts for terms of use.", or something like that. Essentially that the Content Seller should have a contract with each grid, spelling out the IP rights and restrictions. Now how in the world are we supposed to do that, if a Solutions Provider uses their proposed new "Marketplace", and any SLE grid owner can purchase content there at will, with no approval from the Solution Provider?

For me, the intellectual property situation is resolved simply with the contracts and license of content creators or Solution Provider with the companies. SLE is not connected to the main grid of SL and hence it is normal that the companies have full permission on all content created and imported into their Sims.

Hello!

by Member Nany Kayo on ‎11-12-2009 11:38 AM

The cost of SLE is high if you can't make any money by using it.  You may even risk being sued by Linden Lab for selling anything you design or prototype on the platform.   It isn't clear to me what real value this product has for anyone.

We are planning to take a closer look at the possiblity of refining OpenSim to meet our needs.

by Contributor Ceera Murakami on ‎11-12-2009 04:10 PM

Karmyne Bruun said:

"For me, the intellectual property situation is resolved simply with the contracts and license of content creators or Solution Provider with the companies. SLE is not connected to the main grid of SL and hence it is normal that the companies have full permission on all content created and imported into their Sims."

What contract? If a Gold Solution Provider places content in the Enterprise Marketplace, how are they going to know in advance who is purchasing that content? They would not even know that ThumbTwiddler Inc. had purchased an SLE server set, let alone secured contractual agreements with them. At best, the Marketplace might have a policy in effect across the board that acts as some sort of generic, one-size-fits-no-one-well "contract" that spells out things like LL's assertation that the buyer is not permitted to export the purchased content to any other grids. But no individual Content Provider would have their own agreements with any of those clients.

In SL, customers are bound, however imperfectly, by the permissions system and the TOS and Community Standards. Those don't exist on these SLE grids. In SL, only Linden Lab can alter the permissions on your goods (via legal means). On an SLE grid, (or on any of the OpenSim Grids), anyone with admin rights can do what they please, behind closed doors, and you'll never even know how badly you got ripped off.

The ONLY way a Solution Provider (Gold or otherwise) would have a contract with the company in question would be if that SLE client company contacts that Solution Provider directly, and hammers out a signed, real-world contract for specified work or content to be provided.

by Honored Resident Bristle Chesnokov on ‎11-12-2009 07:17 PM

for me, i dont care about gold providers or whatever.  i dont care how companies will conduct their businesses.

when i signed up for SL it was for lots of people do interesting things.  and they had a open source client. i use hippo for most of my work because i go back to SL, osgrid, and my private server.  there are also other open source clients and i have use them too. but now LL is restricting the open clients, especially the text base ones. and the bots are behind bars now. what used to be a free and open SL, now it trying to grow up. there were other vworlds before SL. but where are they now?

i expected a server to be open sourced too.  but that didnt happen and i think that is done for.  i appreciate the fact that the server is documented in the wiki but i am afraid that will go away too.

SLE or not. it doesnt matter to me as long as if work continues on SL. for example, whatever happened to the megaprims thing.  or the ability to import obj or other meshes.  LL doesnt have to give up the SL to be SLE. but im am afraid LL is not big enough to continue with SL and SLE.

but i was wrong about everquest. there is a hard core that refuses to give up and Sony has continue to support it. maybe i will be wrong about SL.  for 0-2, i would be happy.