Tools and Technology

I can't see the profiles inworld, i must be missing something. Does anyone know what i need to have downloaded so i can see it? Thanks

Are you getting an error message?

I know anyone who doesn't normally use Internet Explorer has to first download the certificate by logging into the SL homepage via IE.  After that, the cert is downloaded on your PC and you should be good to go.

No error message, i can see the writing, but no pictures :-(. Sucks, lmao

Same picture as my traditional profile, but with a different aspect ratio?  Can we set these separately, or is it just always to be messed up in one if it appears correctly in the other?

Cody you ANGEL, that worked, lol, thank you so much

No error message, i can see the writing, but no pictures :-(. Sucks, lmao

Ahh, I see.  Not sure what to tell you on that one.  Web profiles load fine for me, they just load 4X slower and look like crap.  To each their own, I suppose.

Cody you ANGEL, that worked, lol, thank you so much

Don't tell anyone I'm an angel....that's supposed to be a secret 

Thanks for the update. In general, profiles never fitted into the sidebar properly, so it would be good to be able to have a properly formatted and professional looking profile.

As far as I can see, there are just 4 things wrong with this.

Starting from friends list, I (on a Mac) right click on a friend and select profile.

1) It takes too long to load the profile. As somebody said above, it should be as fast as loading any ordinary web page.

2) The window opens with my friend's URL but then switches to my URL and loads my profile. #DEFECT!

3) The profile does not show all of my groups and all of my picks, but instead selects 3 of each to show -apparently the first in alphabetical order. They should be 3 that I select if they are limited to 3.

4) Aspect ratio! The group image in the web profile is stretched into a rectangle, but is square elsewhere in the viewer, for example in the group profile. #LAME!

Showing an image at anything other than the desired aspect ratio is inexcusable. It makes a mockery of the work that people put into making these images as professional as they can manage. SL's handling of image aspect ratios has been amateurish since I joined SL in 2006. There is no excuse whatsoever for making the group images in the web profile rectangular when you know that people are already using square images elsewhere.

What would be an improvement apart from fixing the above? Ease up on the length restrictions for the text and allow formatting.

Agreed with others, there are bigger elephants in the room than profiles.

The new web-based profile system is in my experience a significant hindrance, and greatly inferior to the previous 2.0 profile system. The web based profiles are slow to load and fill the entire screen (or worse require scroll bars to view), negating any utility in being able to open more than one profile at a time. Yes having a nice profile on the website is a good thing, but what users want from a website and what residents want from the SecondLife client are different.

I ask that you remember that the SecondLife client exists to assist residents in completing tasks quickly and efficiently. The SecondLife client is NOT the World Wide Web and resident’s goals are not the same as users of browser software. While there may be things to learn from other interfaces it should not be assumed that what works well in one interface will translate well to another.

It is hard to believe that even basic Human Computer Interaction principles were considered in implementing this, and I find it incredulous that having had similar feedback from the Beta viewer this change was pushed live in its present state.

Linden had to hear "feedback" to understand that privacy is a crucial feature?

New boss, same as the old boss.

If Linden was serious about improving SL for users, it would be fixing software that is obviously fundamentally flawed, as the system continues to lag and crash for everyone constantly.

If Linden merely wanted to rebrand SL as a Facebook app, it would do...exactly what it's doing.

Enough with the promises of better communication and Potemkin village browser tweaks. Real improvements will be touted by users, by the industry press...by anything other than another SL press release (or, in Orwellian terms, "blog").

Q Linden said: Watching the internal data, we've already seen a noticeable improvement in stability and performance--on par with Viewer 1.23.

Back To The Future?

TriloByte, I have heard that sort  of statement about games like WoW for years... and I still don't quite  understand the reasoning.  I'm probably misunderstanding what you mean  but let me just ask:

1.  In what way does the number of different  textures/objects have anything to do with the way in which they are  rendered?  Aren't all textures rendered by the same engine(s)?  Aren't  all objects rendered by the same engine(s)?  The server feeds  information into the viewer, why does it matter how many different  textures/objects there may be?

2.  In connection with #1, aren't  all avatars the same basic object as well?  Being rendered by the same  engine(s)?  Doesn't the server just send the "modifications" to the  avatar object?  Why should the behavior of the overall system change from one day to the next?

Now obviously the amount of time required to render a  given scene/texture/object can vary quite a bit, but that in itself  isn't the question.  I always thought that my "custom content" was  stored in a database and otherwise treated as any other object/texture  would be.  Other than the time factor (perfectly understandable), how do  the comments about WoW vs. SL have anything to do with loading/rezzing  failures in SL?

I am not being critical, I am asking so that I can understand.

After saving my privacy settings ("Your Groups" and "Your Picks" under "Friends"; available on web unchecked), if  I sign-in again to the profile later, the radio buttons are back to the default of "Second Life".

Are the privacy settings not fully retained after saving, or do we simply have no user-friendly method of confirming what our settings are?

 

edit: re-word

Am sure relieved they put privacy functions into the web profiles. Would be nicer if the settings were available on the page so even those not using viewer 2.5 can set them.

I won't upgrade to this quite yet due to several concerns.

First, I've heard you cannot use web profiles to share inventory. Big problem considering the "share" feature added a few versions back is broken. Most of the time I go to open the "share" window and go to "near me" it tells me there are no avatars near me. I can be standing in a room full of people and it will tell me no one is nearby. I believe this is due to the SL viewer having never been fixed to accomodate builds created higher than the old, old height limit from years ago.

That's the big problem. Beyond that, I'm waiting for LL to make improved web profiles. I've been told we're getting expanded/improved profiles, which is great SL has needed them for years now, but instead the web profiles display less information, less efficiently than the 2.x profiles, which themselves displayed less information less efficiently than the old 1.x profiles. We need bigger, better profiles, why does LL keep making the profiles less useful?

 

On a side note, why do LL's viewers still hide my notes tab from me? I used that all the time and now I can't access it unless I log in using a third party viewer.

Beyond all that, I think that moving profiles to the web is a great idea, I'm just disappointed by the execution so far.

Q Linden said: "...we've added some privacy settings that will allow you to control just how public your profile is. Group settings set in the Viewer will be overridden by these group privacy settings."

Since the default settings in the new web profiles are set to be visible in SL, does this mean that anyone who had previously set groups to be hidden within SL now have them visible?

If so, does the override apply to the entire community, or  only those using viewer 2xx?

 

Q Linden said: "Second Life" means that the information is available to all Second Life Residents who are logged into the website or inworld. This is the default for all existing Residents using Viewer 2.5.

Ambiguous. It appears to be the default global setting for all web profiles, regardless of which viewer happens to be used inworld.

 

(edit: addendum)

i m curious about one thing with viewer 2.5 and i also had this with the beta 2.5.

I live on a homestead and i have lived on there for 2 years so i am more than well aware of what is normal or not.

Lag has never been a problem,i have used emerald,emergence and now phoenix. and others

All worked very well,no lag.

I downloaded the beta 2.5 a week ago to try it,i walked through my shop and i was walking in the same spot then all of a sudden i was catapaulted into a display or wall,i immediately came back in with phoenix and it was perfect,no lag at all.

I tried the beta 2.5 today again,same thing,again i switched to phoenix and it was perfect,no lag at all.

I downloaded the official 2.5 sl viewer out of beta and tried again,i walk along then slowed to a stop while still walking then get catapaulted in to a display\ its like walking in mud,i have experience that kind of lag on sims where there are 40 to 50 avys ,but i am alone on my island

Time dilation is 1.0 ,,,,Sim FPS 45

Lots of spare script time but they don t show that but it was always around 16 MS

FPS averages 50

on phoenix  FPS is usually abour 20   time dialation 1.0 and sim FPS 45

I have never  ever experience lag on my homestead in the 2 years i have been there  like i experience with this sl viewer 2.5,it is usless for me to use,

I dread to think what would happen if i went to mainland with it or a busy sim,

On the surface there would seem to be no reason why the 2.5 viewer is extremely laggy on a

sim with one avy on it wheras the phoenix is'nt

In 2 years there i have never had bad lag like that or even any lag

I just want to say something: this was an awful mistake. Like I said once, Web Profiles are quite a backwards step. I (like many other users) prefer the profiles to be only displayed on the viewer itself, rather than a browser window. Its faster, safer, and stuff.

I went and Installed 2.5 and it wont load all of it and now i have no sl

Beyond all that, I think that moving profiles to the web is a great idea, I'm just disappointed by the execution so far.

Having decent profiles on the web that show the same information as in world is a big plus, but what works on one medium doesn't work on the other. Same data displayed relevant to the context it is being used in please !

So its set to private by default right?

Adds up all the + and comes up with = 0

I'd love to download and try out viewer 2.5, except that I can't. You see, viewer 2.4 took it upon itself to ninja-download and install 2.5 without my consent or participation. So in order to "Download and try out" 2.5 I'd first have to uninstall the version of 2.5 that you pushed to me, clean out all traces of SL, download 2.5 and then install it on my own.  Just sayin.

You can use the web profiles to share but it's a bit bugged.

Open a profile of a person you do not currently have an IM session with, you will see the the actions button, pull it down and click Share, the IM window will open and you can drop something into it anywhere = works.

If however you already have an IM window open, Share makes it close. #DEFECT

If you have a closed IM chiclet for the person, Share does nothing at all. #DEFECT

Of course, if you are already IMing the person you would not open their profile to share something. But share should always work irrespective of what else you are doing.

I'm using the IM in separate windows / chiclet method. Anyone using the tabs method feel free to describe how it works with tabs.

Anyone else finding Shakespeare's Pants a problem with this viewer? This is when pants (EN-US) or trousers (EN-UK) appear tight around the ankles like leggings instead of being the expected width at the hems.

I am not sure my opinion will really matter in the grand scheme of things but I need to say how much I dislike the web profiles. I am a big advocate of viewer 2 and absolutely love it because it hits my OCD nature just right. It is organized and linear in its approach. However, the web profile option is slow, covers up the screen and defeats the purpose of being able to have an organized side tab system. I would love to see it go back to the way it was with the option to take it to a webpage for ease. I am a profile nut and love to read them because I can learn so much about people from SL. This is hindering that part of my enjoyment of SL.

Thanks!

Ephany

I'd love to download and try out viewer 2.5, except that I can't. You see, viewer 2.4 took it upon itself to ninja-download and install 2.5 without my consent or participation.