Chaz Longstaff

Thanks Sassy, That was the kind of more detailed information I'm looking for: "full 60 second animation with lots of BVH data". That might explain why the issue is only occuring with animations from a few animators, and not the rest. I spend about L$ 500,000 linden a year licencing animations so needed to understand the issue more in depth. I remember now some animators polling in the year whether to do 60 second ones or not. The jumping results in user complaints. I can and do explain the technical cache thing to them, they listen patiently, and then reply, "but it jumps." Those same animators (the ones with whom the issue is demonstrating itself) -- are recommending using AVSitter now instead of MLP "to avoid jumps." Do you have any sense of how using AVsitter would help? Or does it require custom scripting (I'm a scripter) to introduce precise starts and stops for these larger 60 second animations? Thanks for your taking the time to help me understand this issue; I really appreciate it.

Thanks for your answer, much appredicated. I understand the caching. I should maybe have been more direct in my question, because that doesn't really explain what I'm seeing. I'm seeing it *only with certain animations*, and *not with others*. And I handle hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of animations a year. The jumping is starting to appear recently (this year) with animations from some animators who have (a) never had that issue before in their animations in 7 years of licencing from them; and (b) in animations that they are producing meant to be used in sequences. It's not appearing with animations meant to be used in sequences from most other animators. Thanks Sassy!

I'm curious, why does it happen in the first place?

On some sets of sequenced anims that I see from certain animators, the first time through the set I see hops / jumps between each animation. The second time through, I don't see the jumps, I guess it's cached. But anyone who doesn't go through the cycle a second time (as in most users who won't have any reason to hang around and run it twice) will leave with the experience of the hops. Does anyone else experience this on their screen? I'm using Firestorm v 4.4 maybe it's a Firestorm thing.... Several other people confirm seeing the hopping as well btw.

Thanks all. And yep the llRezAtRoot -- good reminder, that really helped to do the trick! Cheers.

Rotations are the one major thing that I will probably always suck at, just can't seem to get my mind around them fully. Oh well. Can anyone help me with this? The following works great, unless you rotate the prim that items are being rezzed out of (move it 90 degrees on Z for instance) -- then the items rezzed will rez out of place. //parameters coming in from a dialog menu system TargetVector = <0 + (float)tmpx, 0 + (float)tmpy, 0 + (float)tmpz>; llRezObject(ObjectName, llGetPos() + TargetVector, ZERO_VECTOR,llGetRot() , ch);

Convert the incoming string to lowercase (or upper), then test for a match on that. efault { state_entry() { llListen(0,"", NULL_KEY, ""); } listen(integer channel, string name, key id, string message) { if (llToLower(message) == "testy test") { // This line will pick the first object out of the container and rez it llRezObject("Test", llGetPos() + <0.0,0.0,1.0>, <0.0,0.0,0.0>, <0.0,0.0,0.0,1.0>, 0); } } }

Hey Peter, figured that topic would come up. Though it's a "holo vendor", I'm not doing temp on rez. I own the sim and am careful with prim usage in other ways, so lots of prim.

Okay my subject line sucks. But then I suck at rotations too. I have some holo-vendors that I've jerry-rigged, several years ago. They rez cards (the cards have 0 rotation) for people to look at. Whenever we have a re-arrange in the shop and move the holo vendors around, sometimes changing the rotation of the vendors themselves from 0 to 90 or whatever, I have to manually edit the script in each holo vendor to adjust the jerry rigging. Picture attached of what goes wrong. Is there a way to have the script pick up what rotation the holo vendor is at, and then compensate accordingly, so that I don't have to manually adjust each script? Doing this right now: input = input * DEG_TO_RAD; rotation rot = llEuler2Rot(input); vector rezzingOffset = <0,0,0>; llRezObject(Object,llGetPos() + rezzingOffset, ZERO_VECTOR, rot, holoChannel); If the holo vendor is rotated to 270, I have to do adjustments like this: vector input = <0,0,90>; to compensate.

Couple things: 1) When do we get our old reviews back from the old marketplace? I may have missed the announcement. It will show like 15 as the total number of reviews, but not actually show any reviews. 2) Broken help link -- Go to Merchant Home, left hand menu. Last section, HELP RESOURCES. Click on discussion forums. You get a redirect to general forums, very confusing, needs to be updated for new link to commerce forums. Cheers! Chaz

Blue Mars throws in the towel, admits defeat: http://eddihaskell.blogspot.com/2011/01/breaking-news-blue-mars-to-discontinue.html

To be fair Ansariel, I know many people who use the new viewer, and are just fine with it, or even LOVE it, and who would likely refuse to use the old viewer. I myself liked lots of things about it when I was just in an "end-user" frame of mind, bouncing around from club to club. I think it's great for people who are just regular "end-users." That being said, there may even be a few content creators who found that they were able to work productively with it, who knows, there's bound to be. Judging by what FJ, just said, it sounds like LL "gets" now that different interfaces will be needed: "Content creators will have very different interface and tools capability requirements than a resident who just wants to explore and experience Second Life's content." So, the best way forward may be to see how we can positively support them in that direction.

I have just recently finished 5 months of trying to give the viewer 2 interface an exclusive try, during which I used only it. The last straw for me was at the end of December, when anything I clicked on to edit turned all invisible on me under 2.4, and I could no longer see what I was working on. I re-downloaded viewer 1.x, fired it up, finished my chore for the client that day, got paid, and haven't looked back. My productivity shot back up to where it was before I determined to master viewer 2.x at the start of those 5 months. So, I don't suppose there's a way of offering a choice of viewer interfaces: 1.x for advanced users, content creators, and 2.x for regular users, both just pasted on as skins to codebase 2.x? I've never tried a third-party viewer, but I'm given to understand that the Phoenix people are essentially doing it, or trying to.... Lots of softwares offer two versions, end-user and developer versions.... I suggest this because I totally agree, FJ, that it would be a pain in the butt to support two different codebases and really in the long run a bad use of resources that are ever more scarce, and I certainly wouldn't want to be in your shoes having to do it! Ugh. Maybe we certify something like Phoenix (caveat as I say, I've not tried it, just an example) as the developer version, though Lord knows what the politics and legalities would be behind a word such as "certify."

All of that is great FJ, many, many thanks! Re the new viewer, I want to leave some feedback, finally. I tried it exclusively for the final 5 months of 2010. Figured it was time to bite the bullet, and all that. There were some nifty things about it, I gotta admit. But I work for a living in SL, and I gotta say even after I got past the learning curve my productivity level plummeted. In the end, on 1 Jan 2011, I went back to viewer 1.23, and now I'm back in the groove. I'd like to suggest -- I know, I'm mad -- that you offer TWO viewer versions. A regular version for most people in SL -- the 2.x line, and a "developer" version, the 1.23 x line. I think the 2.x line is fabulous for those who are "end users" in SL. It is a total winner for them, it's amazing for that purpose. And the 1.x line is better for those who are content creators. It's like, I love my iPad for content consumption, but I'm not going to create a lot of content on my iPad; I'll do that on my desktop and laptops.

Ugh. And henceforth 2.3 shall be known as the "wait for 2.4" version.