Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Kaiser Bogomil

This is not a joke - but it should be

22 posts in this topic

a new addition to the TPV policy reads: I.e

2.k : You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience of the virtual world in any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden Lab viewer.

I.e., don't do anything that would actually improve the users shared experience beyond what LL does.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I.e. keep all experiences similar to / for everybody ;)

One of the wisest policies of LL i have seen in years.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was a joke, was yesterday Phoenix/Firestorm tried to have a meeting on 4 sims, and was running the meeting about these new policies on TreetTV. The sims crashed one by one, as they got them back up, finally they were about able to get into the meeting and i'll be darned if LL didn't decide to restart the main sim where the meeting was being broadcast from, for the new roll out. I dunno, seemed sorta coincidental to me, a bit too much. As far as no one can have anything in their viewer that LL does not, first of all in the past to be a TPV all new additions to a viewer had to be approved first, but now, this just ends any reason for the TPV's to write new code, test it, etc..seems a real shame when SL used to be

"YOUR WORLD, YOUR IMAGINATION" sorta place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


kinda Fallen wrote:

What was a joke, was yesterday Phoenix/Firestorm tried to have a meeting on 4 sims, and was running the meeting about these new policies on TreetTV. The sims crashed one by one, as they got them back up, finally they were about able to get into the meeting and i'll be darned if LL didn't decide to restart the main sim where the meeting was being broadcast from, for the new roll out. I dunno, seemed sorta coincidental to me, a bit too much. As far as no one can have anything in their viewer that LL does not, first of all in the past to be a TPV all new additions to a viewer had to be approved first, but now, this just ends any reason for the TPV's to write new code, test it, etc..seems a real shame when SL used to be

"YOUR WORLD, YOUR IMAGINATION"
sorta place.

it probably wasn't the best timing for the meeting since tuesdays and wednsdays have been region restart days  for awhile now..

things like that happen..

i own a sim and 3 other lots on different sims..they all restart at the same time every week..talk about  bad luck lol

also  LL never said knowone can have something in their viewer that the LL viewer doesn't have..

they said that knowone can have any features in their version of the viewer that alter's other peoples worlds that are on the latest official viewer..

in other words..they can still have all the client side personal features they want..

but thier version of the viewer can't alter my worlds perspective or my second life..

your world your imagination  doesn't mean being able to get on viewers that alter other peoples worlds and imaginations hehehehe

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmmm   Everyone must have the same thing. No one may have anything that everyone else doen't have.  Everyone must be the same.    Looks on the news sites to see which of the current regimes policy advisors has left recently to enter the private sector and moved to San Francisco.

Have Linden Labs been occupied?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked a friend why they would remove the viewer part of one's tag and she said, "LL doesn't want everyone to know how few people actually use their viewer"

 

Seems stupid tho cause it is not like LL doesn't make a killing with all the L$ that fly around

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


MoiselleErin Teardrop wrote:

I asked a friend why they would remove the viewer part of one's tag and she said, "LL doesn't want everyone to know how few people actually use their viewer"

 

Seems stupid tho cause it is not like LL doesn't make a killing with all the L$ that fly around

Yes and no.  Aside from the money, it IS essential to LL that it is able to execute on strategy and that has been hampered by the use of TPVs.

Mesh is a prime example.  LL delivered mesh but... many people were using viewers that didn't support mesh so mesh was a "thing" that only some people could see if they succumbed to using LL's viewer.  That's not good for strategy at all.  I figured mesh would only become mainstream when both Firestorm and Phoenix viewers had mesh support.

LL are introducing new functions for games such as Linden Realms and who knows what else but if these require that TPV's update their code too and don't do something in the mean time break something else then that impacts on the strategy and isn't really supportable.

However, it shouldn't really be a case of spite, such as it feels like with the viewer tags, LL *should* be commanding that position from one of product superiority and user respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Sassy Romano wrote:


MoiselleErin Teardrop wrote:

I asked a friend why they would remove the viewer part of one's tag and she said, "LL doesn't want everyone to know how few people actually use their viewer"

 

Seems stupid tho cause it is not like LL doesn't make a killing with all the L$ that fly around

...

However, it shouldn't really be a case of spite, such as it feels like with the viewer tags, LL *should* be commanding that position from one of product superiority and user respect.

Yes I agree.  And I'd add that it says something about LL.  If you compete with LL, and you're winning they can & will hurt you.

And the features TPV developers implement now are limited to LL's approval - which would be fine if LL had some vision and played fair.   Its their actions that define them, not the words.  And now it is very clear "who they are".

TPV developers don't work for Linden Labs and have visions that go beyond LL's ability and/or imagination.  And now LL is explicitly supressing the ambitions and creativity of TPV developers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Sassy Romano wrote:


MoiselleErin Teardrop wrote:

I asked a friend why they would remove the viewer part of one's tag and she said, "LL doesn't want everyone to know how few people actually use their viewer"

 

Seems stupid tho cause it is not like LL doesn't make a killing with all the L$ that fly around

Yes and no.  Aside from the money, it IS essential to LL that it is able to execute on strategy and that has been hampered by the use of TPVs.

Mesh is a prime example.  LL delivered mesh but... many people were using viewers that didn't support mesh so mesh was a "thing" that only some people could see if they succumbed to using LL's viewer.  That's not good for strategy at all.  I figured mesh would only become mainstream when both Firestorm and Phoenix viewers had mesh support.

LL are introducing new functions for games such as Linden Realms and who knows what else but if these require that TPV's update their code too and don't do something in the mean time break something else then that impacts on the strategy and isn't really supportable.

However, it shouldn't really be a case of spite, such as it feels like with the viewer tags, LL *should* be commanding that position from one of product superiority and user respect.

 The policy does not oblige TPVs to include everything that is in the latest LL release, but rather to exclude anything that impacts the shared experience and is not accessible from LL's latest release viewer.

So if this policy had been in effect when mesh rolled out, it would have made absolutely no difference whatsoever...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Anaiya Arnold wrote:

 The policy does not oblige TPVs to include everything that is in the latest LL release, but rather to exclude anything that impacts the shared experience and is not accessible from LL's latest release viewer.

So if this policy had been in effect when mesh rolled out, it would have made absolutely no difference whatsoever...

Yes, maybe my point wasn't clear enough?

LL would rather people aren't attracted to TPV's, for the reasons I mentioned.  LL needs to have the dominant viewer, NOT TPV's which DON'T have the latest goodies that LL wants to put out.

By not advertising TPV's in the tag, that's a simple way of hiding their numbers.  Whether this is the underlying reason or not is irrelevant, it remains in LL's best interest for LL to have the dominant viewer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not realize you could see the tags in LL's viewers so I did not take that into consideration when trying to understand your point.

I can see how it's in LL's interests to have the dominant viewer but  it's a complete surprise and news to me if they see it that way.  Their response to user concerns about the quality of their viewers has always seemed to me to indicate that they would rather we used another viewer than bother them with our needs and expectations.

The problem in trying to figure out where LL is coming from is that LL both are not entirely explicit and clear about their policy direction and priorities and that these things change without being explicitly signalled to the user base.  So firstly you have to read between the lines to figure out where they are at, and then you have to keep re-checking between those lines to see if they've entirely changed directions.  Based on historical attitudes toward viewers (as I perceived them) LL could not give a toss how you logged in so long as you did not use a viewer with prohibited functions.  They would in fact prefer you used a TPV rather than place expectations and demands on them to produce a viewer that fits our broad and diverse needs.  But even if I am right and that is how they felt historically, that does not mean they still feel that way now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of jokes, I wonder if anybody from LL with any authority or sway in their company has ever read their forums. When I try to imagine a LL business meeting I always picture a bunch of dip-**bleep**s wearing suits, fumbling awkwardly on tech speak they can't understand, brainstorming solutions for problems they're still working to create and musing leisurely on those quirky nerd suckers who pay their bills. :I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if it's the official viewer being the dominant one that LL's so concerned about, as it is the TPVs and the Official Viewer using a common codebase.   To my mind, the problem at the moment is that when LL brings out new features -- e.g.. Mesh -- or tries to fix stuff under the hood, like inventory loading,  it's very simple for most TPVs -- Dolphin, Catznip (which has just been added to the TPV list, I see), RLV, Exodus, Niran's, NaCl and so on -- to adopt it.     It's rather more difficult for Firestorm, and very difficult for Phoenix.   

So, for example, if and when Qarl's mesh deformer code gets rolled out in the main viewer,  the TPVs I mentioned will, in a matter of days, be able to bring out updates that include it.    But my mesh clothes -- which will look perfectly-fitted to me (I mostly use Niran's, Catznip and RLV) -- and my friends who use the official viewer or one of the modern TPVs will look decidedly odd to Firestorm users until Firestorm manages to adopt the deformer, and that still leaves the hoards of people using Phoenix not able to see or use the deformer unless and until someone gets round to putting it in there, if they ever do.

And while I'm sure that Cool VL and Singularity are both keeping a very close eye on the deformer and preparing their respective code-bases to be able to adopt it pretty swiftly, I'm pretty certain the same isn't the case for Phoenix.

So what's going to happen, I think, is that the general usefulness of an innovative feature the community wants and, in part, paid for, and on which LL is working with Qarl to develop, is going to be held back, not by LL but by the large "market share" of two very popular TPVs, and one in particular.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Innula Zenovka wrote:

I don't know if it's the official viewer being the dominant one that LL's so concerned about, as it is the TPVs and the Official Viewer using a common codebase.   To my mind, the problem at the moment is that when LL brings out new features -- e.g.. Mesh -- or tries to fix stuff under the hood, like inventory loading,  it's very simple for most TPVs -- Dolphin, Catznip (which has just been added to the TPV list, I see), RLV, Exodus, Niran's, NaCl and so on -- to adopt it.     It's rather more difficult for Firestorm, and very difficult for Phoenix.   

So, for example, if and when Qarl's mesh deformer code gets rolled out in the main viewer,  the TPVs I mentioned will, in a matter of days, be able to bring out updates that include it.    But my mesh clothes -- which will look perfectly-fitted to me (I mostly use Niran's, Catznip and RLV) -- and my friends who use the official viewer or one of the modern TPVs will look decidedly odd to Firestorm users until Firestorm manages to adopt the deformer, and that still leaves the hoards of people using Phoenix not able to see or use the deformer unless and until someone gets round to putting it in there, if they ever do.

And while I'm sure that Cool VL and Singularity are both keeping a very close eye on the deformer and preparing their respective code-bases to be able to adopt it pretty swiftly, I'm pretty certain the same isn't the case for Phoenix.

So what's going to happen, I think, is that the general usefulness of an innovative feature the community wants and, in part, paid for, and on which LL is working with Qarl to develop, is going to be held back, not by LL but by the large "market share" of two very popular TPVs, and one in particular.

 

The very policy of which the OP speaks is what is going to effect the progress of the deformer the most... without TPVs being able to include the latest versions to test, feedback, that's crucial to it's development, will grid to a halt.  So, what we'll end up with (if and when LL decides to include it in their viewer), is a half-baked version of it that will still have to be worked on after LL releases it as a feature... of course, for LL, that's par for the course.

Phoenix/Firestorm's focus has never been on adopting the newest features as fast as they can... it's always been about stability and options.  I see no reason whatsoever why their usage would hold back development of new features... adoption maybe, but that's a completely different issue.

And, btw, as far as I know, the community has fully funded the mesh deformer project, not, as you said, in part... but I could be wrong.

...Dres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Dresden Ceriano wrote:

The very policy of which the OP speaks is what is going to effect the progress of the deformer the most... without TPVs being able to include the latest versions to test, feedback, that's crucial to it's development, will grid to a halt.  So, what we'll end up with (if and when LL decides to include it in their viewer), is a half-baked version of it that will still have to be worked on after LL releases it as a feature... of course, for LL, that's par for the course.

I don't understand. TPVs -- at least Niran's, Exodus and Cool, as far as I know -- are testing the code already, based on test builds Oz is making available for public testing as and when Qarl makes new alpha versions available. See STORM 1716.   And Dolphin until recently, when Lance decided that -- since it's an early alpha -- it was causing more trouble than it worth.   As far as I know, Oz hasn't raised any objections to this.


Phoenix/Firestorm's focus has never been on adopting the newest features as fast as they can... it's always been about stability and options.  I see no reason whatsoever why their usage would hold back development of new features... adoption maybe, but that's a completely different issue.

That was my point. We'll likely end up with a feature that people want and that works perfectly well, but is likely to prove pretty much a white elephant unless and until Phoenix gets round to adopting it, at least if the experience of mesh sales is anything to go by.

And, btw, as far as I know, the community has
fully
funded the mesh deformer project, not, as you said, in part... but I could be wrong.

...Dres

I think you are mistaken, I fear.    As I understand it, once Qarl submitted the initial alpha version, LL have been working with him on developing it futher  (they'll have to, after all, for the server-side stuff and QA).     Where do you say their staff costs are coming from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Innula Zenovka wrote:


Dresden Ceriano wrote:

The very policy of which the OP speaks is what is going to effect the progress of the deformer the most... without TPVs being able to include the latest versions to test, feedback, that's crucial to it's development, will grid to a halt.  So, what we'll end up with (if and when LL decides to include it in their viewer), is a half-baked version of it that will still have to be worked on after LL releases it as a feature... of course, for LL, that's par for the course.

I don't understand. TPVs -- at least Niran's, Exodus and Cool, as far as I know -- are testing the code already, based on test builds Oz is making available for public testing as and when Qarl makes new alpha versions available. See
.   And Dolphin until recently, when Lance decided that -- since it's an early alpha -- it was causing more trouble than it worth.   As far as I know, Oz hasn't raised any objections to this.
I certainly hope you're right... I was going by what the policy says
and as it's written, it would have to be taken out of those viewers.

Phoenix/Firestorm's focus has never been on adopting the newest features as fast as they can... it's always been about stability and options.  I see no reason whatsoever why their usage would hold back development of new features... adoption maybe, but that's a completely different issue.

That was my point. We'll likely end up with a feature that people want and that works perfectly well, but is likely to prove pretty much a white elephant unless and until Phoenix gets round to adopting it, at least if the experience of mesh sales is anything to go by. 
Yes, but eventually they will... in fact, I think the mesh deformer is crucial to people starting to really want to adopt mesh for clothing.  The way it works now is far too limiting.

And, btw, as far as I know, the community has
fully
funded the mesh deformer project, not, as you said, in part... but I could be wrong.

...Dres

I think you are mistaken, I fear.    As I understand it, once Qarl submitted the initial alpha version, LL have been working with him on developing it futher  (they'll have to, after all, for the server-side stuff and QA).     Where do you say their staff costs are coming from?

The money they make from users?... lol.  I see your point though.

...Dres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Dresden Ceriano wrote:


Innula Zenovka wrote:

 We'll likely end up with a feature that people want and that works perfectly well, but is likely to prove pretty much a white elephant unless and until Phoenix gets round to adopting it, at least if the experience of mesh sales is anything to go by.


Yes, but eventually they will... in fact, I think the mesh deformer is crucial to people starting to really want to adopt mesh for clothing.  The way it works now is far too limiting.


Which brings us back to my point that, if I were in LL's position, I wouldn't be too happy that the widespread adoption of an important new feature that lots of people want, and that a lot of time and money (both that of LL and of independent developers) has gone into developing, is ultimately contingent on members of the Firestorm/Phoenix team getting round to porting the feature (if they're able to) to a viewer in which many of them have lost interest.

It just seems to me a position that no company would wish to be in, and I'm not sure how sustainable it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will we still be able to upload temp textures for free as we can now with some TPV's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Porky Gorky wrote:

Will we still be able to upload temp textures for free as we can now with some TPV's?

According to what Jessica said at the Phoenix Hour Q & A, this policy won't effect temp textures... but something LL is planning for the future will, at some unknown point.

...Dres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Tillyboy wrote:

Speaking of jokes, I wonder if anybody from LL with any authority or sway in their company has ever read their forums. When I try to imagine a LL business meeting I always picture a bunch of dip-**bleep**s wearing suits, fumbling awkwardly on tech speak they can't understand, brainstorming solutions for problems they're still working to create and musing leisurely on those quirky nerd suckers who pay their bills. :I

If you listen to any live recordings with Linden employees...they can all do with some conference & media training. More often than not, they mumble and stumble to get their messages across.

Oz Linden is no exception if you listen to the sound file in his meeting with the TPV developers....in fact he came across rather arrogant, whilst his sidekick colleague was very smarmy in that meeting.

They're not good communicators at all....aside from Philip Rosedale, who was a natural in that department.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Dresden Ceriano wrote:


Innula Zenovka wrote:

Which brings us back to my point that, if I were in LL's position, I wouldn't be too happy that the widespread adoption of an important new feature that lots of people want, and that a lot of time and money (both that of LL and of independent developers) has gone into developing, is ultimately contingent on members of the Firestorm/Phoenix team getting round to porting the feature (if they're able to) to a viewer in which many of them have lost interest.

It just seems to me a position that no company would wish to be in, and I'm not sure how sustainable it is.

You say that as if it takes years for them to adopt new features, what's a few months in the scheme of things?

As far as mesh clothing is concerned... if LL had really thought it through, they'd have known that the mesh deformer would be crucial to people wanting to adopt it.  I mean, no one really wants to be restricted to only the shapes that creators provide, no matter how nice they are.  SL is all about being able to express your creativity and a person's chosen avatar shape is a huge part of that... that's what makes the deformer so important.  It's not Phoenix/Firestorm's fault that LL chose to release it in a way that isn't as readily attractive to users as it could have been from the start.

...Dres

 Do we know if Phoenix intend even to attempt to adopt Qarl's deformer if and when it becomes part of the Official Viewer?    Last I heard was Jessica's blog post of January 21st:

 we want to get another Phoenix release out some time soon as well. When? good question.. no time frame yet but hopefully within the next few months. We're hoping we can address some of the performance, stability and mesh related issues our Phoenix users are experiencing on the 1600 release.

and that's before they try to address any additional problems inherent in porting the deformer over, plus the new tools for pathfinding and so on.

It's not a question of whose fault it is, or how diligent Phoenix devs are or aren't.   My point is that, at present, LL are in a position where the take-up rate of any new feature, whether they develop it or adopt it, is more or less in the hands of some TPV developers who are nothing to do with LL and who work on an increasingly incompatible code-base, as a hobby, in their spare time, as and when they they want to.

People have rightly drawn attention to the way TPV developers may be discouraged at the prospect of being unable to introduce new features because LL aren't interested. That cuts both ways; LL must feel the same about trying to introduce new features and then having to wait on Phoenix, too, and LL have to worry about wasting the shareholders' money as well as their own time.   If I were in Rodvik's shoes, I would feel very uncomfortable indeed that the fate of any project in which I invested significant resources was so completely out of my hands.   That's all I'm saying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0