Getting rid of Viewer 2

[leliel Mirihi]

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It  had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance..

---

You're intentionally dodging the question and invoking the will of the gods, aren't you? What makes you so certain that LL will one day prevent TPVs from logging in?

---

For those who can come up with a scenario that could not possibly be put into effect because of its stupidity, have yet to meet Linden Lab. The creation of Viewer 2.x is testament to this fact.

---

Obvious troll is obvious. Wasting my time with bs. Go crawl back under your bridge.

---

We can pick this conversation up this time next year. As LL keeps pushing Viewer 2.x, we may have these boards all to ourselves, so it won't be difficult finding oneanother.

---

I'm calling you a troll because you consistently refuse to explain why you believe this or back up your assertion that LL will block TPVs with any proof. Not because I disagree with any of it. SL is obviously dead to you already so why are you still here?

[Yoki Enoch]

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It  had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance..

---

You're intentionally dodging the question and invoking the will of the gods, aren't you? What makes you so certain that LL will one day prevent TPVs from logging in?

---

For those who can come up with a scenario that could not possibly be put into effect because of its stupidity, have yet to meet Linden Lab. The creation of Viewer 2.x is testament to this fact.

---

Obvious troll is obvious. Wasting my time with bs. Go crawl back under your bridge.

---

We can pick this conversation up this time next year. As LL keeps pushing Viewer 2.x, we may have these boards all to ourselves, so it won't be difficult finding oneanother.

---

I'm calling you a troll because you consistently refuse to explain why you believe this or back up your assertion that LL will block TPVs with any proof. Not because I disagree with any of it. SL is obviously dead to you already so why are you still here?

---

It should be obvious. Any TPV that are not Viewer 2.x compliant will eventually be blocked. This is not rocket science. And no, SL is not dead to me. If it was, I wouldn't care. It is because I do care that I will continue to say that Viewer 2.x is a piece of crap, and that the further pushing of it onto SL will eventually lead to a further demise of SL. Just look at the last published stats. When do you see the beginning of a drop in concurrency? It is at the same time as Viewer 2.x came out. LL staff have their heads in the sand and do not realize how detrimental this Viewer is to the success of SL.

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It  had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance..

---

You're intentionally dodging the question and invoking the will of the gods, aren't you? What makes you so certain that LL will one day prevent TPVs from logging in?

---

For those who can come up with a scenario that could not possibly be put into effect because of its stupidity, have yet to meet Linden Lab. The creation of Viewer 2.x is testament to this fact.

---

There's a big gap, though, between "something could possibly happen" to "it's going to happen" or even "there is any indication it's likely to happen," is there not?

---

Oh yes, there are big gaps there. We can be assured though that as long as LL keeps pushing Viewer 2.x, SL will keep declining in use. Ever since Viewer 2.x was introduced, the decline in concurrency started a downward trend. You can see this by LL's own published stats. Why oh why LL doesn't try to hide those stats too is beyond my comprehension.

---

You will, of course, be familiar with the logical fallacy post hoc, ergo propter hoc.   Surely LL's banning traffic bots and also changing the search ranking methods to make traffic gaming less rewarding anyway must have had some effect on concurrency, too?    At least some of the fall in concurrency must be because not so many people are now bothering to keep umpteeen  bots logged in, surely?   

 

[leliel Mirihi]

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

It should be obvious. Any TPV that are not Viewer 2.x compliant will eventually be blocked.

---

Could you define v2 compliant please?

[Yoki Enoch]

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

It should be obvious. Any TPV that are not Viewer 2.x compliant will eventually be blocked.

---

Could you define v2 compliant please?

---

Viewers containing 2.x code.

[leliel Mirihi]

So you're saying that even if somebody updated a v1 viewer to work with all the new stuff that LL would still block it? Why would LL care, why would they bother? And why are you so shure?

[Void Singer]

probably a little to meta for this discussion, but reality is what you perceive... so if the perception hasn't changed than neither has reality.... at least as far as you are concerned.

but since message boards are a pretty poor imitation of an concept of afterlife I've ever heard of, I'm going to assume at the very least that not matching is description provided by the doomsayer means the doomsayer was wrong...

 

@Yoki:
well then it's settled, since every public TPV I know of, and certainly every one in the TPV directory is based off of snowglobe 1.5+, they all have substantial V2 code in them, since V2 uses a large portion of that code base... and to add to that, those same TPV's cover most of the core features that were added by V2.

 

[Yoki Enoch]

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

So you're saying that even if somebody updated a v1 viewer to work with all the new stuff that LL would still block it? Why would LL care, why would they bother? And why are you so shure?

---

I am not so sure. I am only speculating like anyone else could. LL can and will do whatever it so pleases, even to the extent of raising tier fees by 67% with a lame excuse that such a rise in fees is necessary since a small percentage of owners are abusing their sims.

[Kascha Matova]

 

---

Void Singer wrote:

probably a little to meta for this discussion, but reality is what you perceive... so if the perception hasn't changed than neither has reality.... at least as far as you are concerned.

but since message boards are a pretty poor imitation of an concept of afterlife I've ever heard of, I'm going to assume at the very least that not matching is description provided by the doomsayer means the doomsayer was wrong...

 

@Yoki:

well then it's settled, since every public TPV I know of, and certainly every one in the TPV directory is based off of snowglobe 1.5+, they all have substantial V2 code in them, since V2 uses a large portion of that code base... and to add to that, those same TPV's cover most of the core features that were added by V2.

 

---

Is that so?

Well you...

ahhhh

/run

[Yoki Enoch]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It  had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance..

---

You're intentionally dodging the question and invoking the will of the gods, aren't you? What makes you so certain that LL will one day prevent TPVs from logging in?

---

For those who can come up with a scenario that could not possibly be put into effect because of its stupidity, have yet to meet Linden Lab. The creation of Viewer 2.x is testament to this fact.

---

There's a big gap, though, between "something could possibly happen" to "it's going to happen" or even "there is any indication it's likely to happen," is there not?

---

Oh yes, there are big gaps there. We can be assured though that as long as LL keeps pushing Viewer 2.x, SL will keep declining in use. Ever since Viewer 2.x was introduced, the decline in concurrency started a downward trend. You can see this by LL's own published stats. Why oh why LL doesn't try to hide those stats too is beyond my comprehension.

---

You will, of course, be familiar with the logical fallacy

post hoc, ergo propter hoc.  

Surely LL's banning traffic bots and also changing the search ranking methods to make traffic gaming less rewarding anyway must have had some effect on concurrency, too?    At least some of the fall in concurrency must be because not so many people are now bothering to keep umpteeen  bots logged in, surely?   

 

---

The banning of traffic bots was done some time ago. How long will an argument like this be maintained? Besides, in my journeys around SL, I still run into traffic bots all the time. I find some joy in pointing out these bots to the sim owners involved, as they bring up the old excuse that these are just users who are currently away. The traffic bot is far from dead, but the arguments explaining how their banning is the cause for lower concurrency rates is dead in my books.

[Yoki Enoch]

---

Void Singer wrote:

probably a little to meta for this discussion, but reality is what you perceive... so if the perception hasn't changed than neither has reality.... at least as far as you are concerned.

but since message boards are a pretty poor imitation of an concept of afterlife I've ever heard of, I'm going to assume at the very least that not matching is description provided by the doomsayer means the doomsayer was wrong...

 

@Yoki:

well then it's settled, since every public TPV I know of, and certainly every one in the TPV directory is based off of snowglobe 1.5+, they all have substantial V2 code in them, since V2 uses a large portion of that code base... and to add to that, those same TPV's cover most of the core features that were added by V2.

 

---

Is that why I don't use any TPV's either? I have truly seen the light.

Actually, I really missed your point. What is your point? Thanks.

[Void Singer]

your argument was that they could be blocked for not supporting V2 code/features.... since they all do, there is no argument.

the only exception is LL's own V1 download, which still operates (poorly) in direct opposition to your "theory".

 

or to it in more visual and less kind words, the facts show your supposition has more holes in it than swiss cheese used for mini gun target practice.

[Yoki Enoch]

---

Void Singer wrote:

your argument was that they could be blocked for not supporting V2 code/features.... since they all do, there is no argument.

the only exception is LL's own V1 download, which still operates (poorly) in direct opposition to your "theory".

 

or to it in more visual and less kind words, the facts show your supposition has more holes in it than swiss cheese used for mini gun target practice.

---

Since I do not use a TPV but only the "poorly operating" Viewer 1.23, you have me at a disadvantage. At least with my Viewer 1.23, I can tell you how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any moment in time, whereas you can't.

[leliel Mirihi]

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

Since I do not use a TPV but only the "poorly operating" Viewer 1.23, you have me at a disadvantage. At least with my Viewer 1.23, I can tell you how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any moment in time, whereas you can't.

---

 

You can do that in any v1 based viewer...even TPVs.

[Void Singer]

actually I still use phoenix as my main viewer, so I'm not aware of any V1 feature I don't have access to, or that V2 broke corrupted or hid... and quite a few available in neither. It's not everyone cup of tea, but it has features I've come to depend on

[Yoki Enoch]

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

Since I do not use a TPV but only the "poorly operating" Viewer 1.23, you have me at a disadvantage. At least with my Viewer 1.23, I can tell you how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any moment in time, whereas you can't.

---

 

You can do that in any v1 based viewer...even TPVs.

---

It is a bone basic function that one can not do in Viewer 2.x - just one symptom as to why it is a piece of crap.

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

Since I do not use a TPV but only the "poorly operating" Viewer 1.23, you have me at a disadvantage. At least with my Viewer 1.23, I can tell you how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any moment in time, whereas you can't.

---

 

You can do that in any v1 based viewer...even TPVs.

---

It is a bone basic function that one can not do in Viewer 2.x - just one symptom as to why it is a piece of crap.

---

Yeah, most people  need to know how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any momet at least once a ... errm.... 

Seriously, because I've always used For Sale By Owner to buy and sell stuff, what's V1 got in the regard that V2 hasn't, if you sort the land for sale in descending order by size?

[Yoki Enoch]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

---

leliel Mirihi wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

Since I do not use a TPV but only the "poorly operating" Viewer 1.23, you have me at a disadvantage. At least with my Viewer 1.23, I can tell you how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any moment in time, whereas you can't.

---

 

You can do that in any v1 based viewer...even TPVs.

---

It is a bone basic function that one can not do in Viewer 2.x - just one symptom as to why it is a piece of crap.

---

Yeah, most people  need to know how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any momet at least once a ... errm.... 

Seriously, because I've always used For Sale By Owner to buy and sell stuff, what's V1 got in the regard that V2 hasn't, if you sort the land for sale in descending order by size?

---

I collect stats, so I need a basic feature like that. The inability of Viewer 2.x to do something that basic is very telling.

If anyone is relying on Viewer 2.x to buy and sell land, considering its inability to do the most basic in land search, I do pity them. I would pity them even more if Viewer 2.x was used by more people. For anyone in the land selling/renting market, have you noticed that your sales/rentals to noobs has been almost non-existent in the last year or so? Hmm, I thought so.

[Void Singer]

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

[...] For anyone in the land selling/renting market, have you noticed that your sales/rentals to noobs has been almost non-existent in the last year or so? Hmm, I thought so.

---

you mean the last 4 years or so don't you? land buying renting noobs have always been almost non-existent since free accounts opened.

[Yoki Enoch]

---

Void Singer wrote:

---

Yoki Enoch wrote:

[...] For anyone in the land selling/renting market, have you noticed that your sales/rentals to noobs has been almost non-existent in the last year or so? Hmm, I thought so.

---

you mean the last 4 years or so don't you? land buying renting noobs have always been almost non-existent since free accounts opened.

---

Really? Well, I used get quite a few on my estate sims, and they helped fill up the gaps. About a year ago, I had to abandon them all because the demand for residential estate land simply died suddenly in February of 2010. The noobs could have helped me out, but I guess it was a downturn overall. 

[Void Singer]

my statement may be biased by mostly hearing from themed estates... by the time they are ready to buy/rent they've gotten past their noobhood (although many of them are still newbies to property ownership)

odd fact: even though I've been in SL since late 04, I didn't own land until linden homes, and only have that because I was doing research.... I spend 0 time there.

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

BayleeSimone wrote:

When will they get rid of viewer 2???

It is too complicated to use

If I have to take a class to figure it out, it is too complicated.

---

/facepalm

You've had a year to figure it out. It only took me a week, and I considered that slow.

 

[Wolf Yip]

So funny, reading about a supposed "massive decline" should v2 ever become mandatory. People have been using SL for ages despite the fact 90% of all sims are strip clubs, casinos or casinos run by strippers. They're still here even though teleports don't work half of the time, facial animations get messed up on a regular basis and items disappear or stop working for no reason. People are still here despite the drama, particle spammers and folks dressing up like massive, walking wangs. People are still here despite the worst camera controls known on this side of the universe. They have all kinds of reasons to leave - they're not all gonna start running, should v2 suddenly become mandatory and everyone has to get used to a different UI and a useless search function. :matte-motes-big-grin-wink:

[Luscious Starship]

The irony is that even though there are more features, Linden Labs also REMOVED some of the BEST features of the UI like permissions setting.  Before Viewer 2 you could highlight a whole bunch of objects and then right click them and select "Properties" which would open a window and let you systematically set permissions on the highlighted list of objects so you wouldn't have to individually open the properties for each object or script.  It was relatively efficient to set permissions on multiple objects this way.   Now not only is the viewer slower, but I need to individually set the permissions of every object by opening and closing a new window.  It's incredibly tedious and a complete waste of time.