davidventer

Yes, my post here would be trash critique indeed but I have already offered the Firestorm team my critique on the Firestorm Jira long ago, right on Jessica’s Jira entry regarding the UI, and some more following that. My post here was not even directed at the Firestorm Team but at those who also think Firestorm is ugly, and I provided a fix for the ugly. Let me make this clear: 1. The OP here is a fix/solution for those who despise/don’t like the firestorm UI. It was not directed at the Firestorm Team but at users looking for how-to fix the Ugly. 2. I could’ve used less unsavory words, but my words did get the point across and already attracted at least one person who thanked me for the fix and another who agreed with me. So, objective achieved. My non-trash constructive criticism that’s actually aimed at the Firestorm Team can be found on the Firestorm Jira. But as with Jessica’s entry, nothing came of that, so, here I am, providing a fix for the ugly to others who also think it’s nauseatingly hideous. You’re welcome.

And that there is exactly why I used the words that I used. So that others who also dislike the UI and think it’s ugly can easily discover my provided fix.

Funny you should say that because my avatar is modeled after the real me, and I’m using my real name on here. So perhaps if you were to say my avatar is ugly, I would find that somewhat insulting but I wouldn’t take offense because I know that I’m not everyone’s type. No one is everyone’s type. Everyone is ugly to someone but beautiful to someone else. The same goes for the ugly Firestorm UI. You may not think it’s ugly, in which case, that’s cool, ignore my OP and move on. Some do think it’s ugly and I provided a solution for making it less ugly.

So you’re taking offense to me apparently “insulting” a graphic user interface of a piece of software, Made by a developer (not a designer). So the apparent “insult” isn’t even directed at their code/profession, just an observation of the lack of quality design on top of it? Albeit still not an insult… …lol, what?

Please explain to me how calling a piece of software’s user interface ugly is in any way personally insulting anyone? Also, the Firestorm team is comprised of developers working on viewer feature code, they’re not UI or UX specialists. They are developers/coders; not designers. So again, how is this insulting? The viewer is ugly. I don’t recall saying the team is ugly. How is this an insult? In fact, I praise their work; the Firestorm Viewer features are amazing! I’m a designer, not an app developer. If I try to code and you tell me my code is trash, that’s not an insult, just a fact. Also; great developers/coders are often bad at UI/UX design. Calling the bad UI of their great coded features ugly is not a personal insult to them nor their code; just an observation of the ugly that’s on top of it. I don’t insult or blame a developer for making ugly design decisions. It is what it is… but it’s still ugly. And the steps I shared in my OP makes it less ugly. So, what’s your problem?

That all sounds like a nightmare for the Moles. I wouldn't want to be the one in charge of managing all that. A simpler solution would be s system similar to how Linden Homes operate, with a similar covenant, but one that allows commercial use, land in search, and classifieds for the parcels in the commercial-zone areas. As for your last point - I don't think that this would be an issue, as the land restrictions and covenant rules would still be in place, they would apply then as they do now. I don't anticipate any confusion. If a "Linden Shop" parcel happens to be on the same region as a "Linden Home" parcel, the covenant could clearly state that if a parcel doesn't enable you to set it to search or create classifieds on it, then no commercial activity is allowed on it. If it's not possible to block those features from some parcels but not from others - If it's a region-wide system setting, then the only option would be to create some commercial regions in between the residential regions and drop the idea of putting both residential and commercial in the same region - but they could still be connected and part of the same continent.

I do love browsing the Marketplace but 99% of the time, I go look at an item in-world before buying it. I don't always buy it in world. Sometimes I would view my Marketplace wishlist items in-world, go around looking at different options, and then buy the desired one off the Marketplace. Other times I'm so happy with what I see in-world that I end up buying it in-World instead. I very rarely buy anything that I cannot see in-world first, when it comes to furniture, building components, general decor items at least. The only things I buy straight off marketplace without an in-world visit are clothes with demos, Everything else; Furniture, vehicles, interior and outdoor decor, prefabs, you name it, I like to see in-world first. If there is no in-world preview of such items, or if the in-world store only has display vendors, I tend to not buy from them and find alternatives instead that do have in-world previews available.

Retrofitting existing regions is not impossible, just timely. They could prevent abandoned homes from from claimed again and turn those into commercial spots instead. Or if there's someone not abandoning a home in a place where many around them have abandoned, and the Lindens are holding off on retrofitting that location due to one or two home owners not abandoning, they could contact that particular home owner with some pre-written email about the new commercial project, and maybe offer them a different home, or reimburse the home-owner in some way for reclaiming such homes - Kind of like how it works in the real world when property developers want to put up a new project somewhere but there are old homes and residents in the way. There is definitely a way to do this. Not an ideal solution but it's possible. Or an even more time consuming method would be moving the regions on the grid: create one region space right down the center of the continent, fill in those opened spaces with more Linden Homes but make every 5th or so region in that line a commercial zone. Alternatively, maybe in the future we'll have Linden Homes 3 (We're now Living in Linden Homes 2). Version 3 could perhaps blend residential and commercial as suggested in my OP and Jira entry - This is also why I titled it as a "Future" feature request.

My apologies, it was meant to attract the attention of those who dislike the Firestorm UI, to show them that it can be changed. I love Firestorm. I use Firestorm. I recommend Firestorm. My aim is not to insult the Firestorm team, but to show others that the UI can easily be made more tolerable for those who prefer a more cohesive experience on par with other official Second Life experiences, interfaces, colors and properties.

I see the dilemma, and admittedly, I'm a graphic designer, web developer and specialize mostly in web-based UI experiences, or merely designing graphical mockups of user interfaces for developers to implement. I'm not an app developer/programmer, and I have zero experience in working with the Viewer code. I just discovered the steps shared in my original post by messing around with the debug settings, so I'm not sure how I could contribute but I am willing to learn, and willing to contribute. Point me in the right direction. I could perhaps contribute with the design of the Firestorm website's front-end, not so much the viewer code. Apologies if my OP came across as insulting the team, it was trigger words meant to attract others who find the Firestorm UI disgustingly ugly as well, and my contribution to the cause here was explaining to such people, how they can make some simple changes to make Firestorm more tolerable through the simple steps indicated in my original post. While this isn't exactly contributing to project code, it does provide those who are anti-Firestorm due to its UI; those who prefer the default viewer, a way to make Firestorm look more like the default viewer. Opening up Firestorm to the default Second Life Login screen and using the same color scheme as official Second Life properties creates an entirely different and a more seamless experience. Starlight Teal is not exactly perfect either. I think the default orange Firestorm theme looks better than Starlight in terms of the button opacity and the window borders/corners/title spacing but then the orange/gray/light-green/bright-blue messy mix of colors is an eyesore for many people and doesn't fit in with any of the other Second Life properties like the new search, the over-all color scheme of Second Life marketing materials and Second Life web properties, etc, so Starlight Teal provides a better experience in that regard. But why not have the Default Second Life Viewer skin as an option in Firestorm? And it's already available, no need for someone to contribute its design, it's there, free to use. Firestorm's orange theme is basically close to Default anyway, just with modded colors. Why not leave the default Second Life viewer colors as an option to those who want a more seamless experience - on par with the colors of other Second Life properties (search/website/web-profiles/marketplace/etc)?

I would love to contribute. Sign me up as Quality Control, but you, as project lead, have even pointed out the messy UI. My original post above provides a more tolerable solution to that. That's my contribution for now. I'd be happy to contribute more, let me know if/how/when/where I can. Let's turn the disgusting and ancient-looking User Interface into something beautiful, shall we? Or was that sarcasm, I can't tell. Thank you for your hard work though! (And that's serious, not sarcasm)

For reference: https://jira.firestormviewer.org/browse/FIRE-8533

Your point being? ... Do you think I would not have said these things if I knew them? Also, I'm not calling THEM ugly, am I? No, I'm critiquing work and I'm always brutally honest, even with close friends. If something is causing an unpleasant user experience, I'll tell you, in my own way, no matter who you are. Did I not also point out the awesome feature set? Can you not see that this post is my way of showing those who are anti-Firestorm due to its ugly UI, that Firestorm can still be enjoyed; made more tolerable; that there is a way to improve it, and use it. The UI is also but one small aspect. I'm not insulting Firestorm nor the Firestorm Team. If the team takes offense to my criticism of but one aspect of the viewer, perhaps they shouldn't be in the business of designing public-facing user interfaces in the first place. I'm not going to sugar-coat my feedback. It is what it is. It's UGLY. I'd be more than happy to get to know the person(s) who designed it and say it to their face, and advice on how to make it less UGLY but even Firestorm's own project lead have tried that, to no avail, so... I posted this guide with the few simple steps to make it less ugly - a solution to an issue that annoy some people.

Fair enough. But valid nonetheless as I know for a fact that I’m not the only one with such opinion. And again, if it’s not an issue for you, why are you even responding to my post? I’ve worded it in a way specifically to attract those who have given up on Firestorm because of its unpleasant visual user experience. Like the person who responded earlier in the thread; they’ll see this, make the simple changes, and enjoy Firestorm a lot more. You’re welcome.

I have. Even Jessica has. Firestorm's own project lead doesn't even like the messy UI. She actually posted screenshots many many years ago indicating, with red arrows and lines where all the UI imperfections and ugly, triggering annoyances are. Go dig through the Firestorm Jira for Jessica's old posts, you'll find it. But guess what, people who try Firestorm by word-of-mouth referral, finding it ugly, then going back to using the default viewer instead aren't going to go look in the Firestorm group chat or Firestorm Jira for how to make it look less ugly. They'll just give up and go back to default or learn to tolerate the UGLY in favor of the extra features. My OP shows such people that they can make Firestorm less ugly through a few simple steps.

I'm trying the Catznip macOS beta. It's quite a pleasant experience and it runs really well, like extremely well, in fact - Much better performance than any other viewer that I've tried (higher FPS, smoother UI interactions, etc). I do find myself missing some Firestorm features though. Or maybe I just haven't discovered everything yet (mostly the Favorites button/folder, more features in the quick preferences window, and more privacy features, like being able to disable edit beams, some chat interface settings - I like my chat window content to look exactly like that of the default viewer, or at least some extra spacing between the lines, and to not have the individual chat chicklets at the top right - it would be nice to have 'none' or 'hidden' as an option for those) so I may probably end up sticking with the hideous Firestorm Viewer in the long run, albeit with the few visual changes I've made as per my OP to make it more tolerable. I'll definitely keep testing Catznip for a while though as I'm really enjoying it so far and it provides a MUCH better user experience than Firestorm. I will switch to it as my main viewer of choice if those other features of convenience get integrated. Thanks for informing me of this beta! I'll keep playing around with it from time to time and I'll reach out to you if I experience any bugs or issues. Looking forward to the official release!

Who, you ask? Well, I'd assume anyone with a keen eye for detail, an appreciation and understanding of quality design and user experience, and who needs to look at that ugly login screen every time before entering the virtual world. My guess is; many people. But thanks to the hard work put in by the Firestorm team and the great feature set they’ve provided for us, we ignore or tolerate the ugly but we don’t have to. It can be improved as per my OP.

When, in the last X? years, have the Firestorm team done any work on fixing or improving the UI? It's been the same, ugly, terrible mess since launch. That said, I'm well aware of the hard work they've put into other aspects of the viewer; like the awesome feature set, and keeping important things on par with Linden Lab's code. That's all good and much appreciated but the fact still remains; the Firestorm Viewer is absolutely, nausiatingly UGLY - We're all just barely tolerating it, or ignoring it's ugliness at best, and someone needs to come out and say it. I'll take the heat and be that someone. The simple fact remains that the Firestorm UI is utter trash, yet it has THE BEST feature set (thank you, Firestorm Team). It's possible to make it look a little less trashy and I've provided a way. You're welcome. It's also possible to absolutely dislike one aspect of someone's work while still appreciating the over-all product. It's not all black and white; it's not only this or only that. I'm not refusing to use or recommend the Firestorm Viewer because I think it looks like garbage. I still use it; I still recommend it. This post is me showing Firestorm-haters that it's possible to make it look less ugly, so they can fix some of the ugly, and actually use it, and experience the awesome feature set. I'm still grateful for its existence and to the people who put hard work into it. It's just not a pleasant thing to look at, and it's possible to change it, that's all I'm saying. If my calling the Firestorm viewer ugly, is an insult to the team's work, well, it's not meant as an insult, just a brutally honest and blunt observation. IT'S UGLY - FACT! Take it as constructive criticism or user feedback.

I do, the default viewer's login screen is great, useful and visually pleasing. It shows some cool new places to explore. And even when I don’t explore those places, it’s still a much better experience to get greeted by upon launch than the ugly mess that is the Firestorm login screen.

Runs on Windows only. I’m on macOS.

This is great! I'll give it a try. Thanks for sharing.

I'd have to look into that, but the great thing about Firestorm is that, it already has built-in skin options, with a skin option that's close to default. So, I don't feel that this is entirely necessary, and I don't think that the Firestorm team will be including any more skins into their stack. I remember reading something somewhere on the Firestorm Jira that they won't be doing that because of the number or files or lines of code already in the stack and that adding more would not be ideal. As a special request to them, I would ask to make the default Second Life Viewer UI an option, as that's the viewer that Firestorm is built-on anyway, not removing that theme and leaving it as an option would be awesome. Starlight Teal is close, but it's not quite default. The windows don't have those beautiful rounded edges; the content spacing is a bit messed up; the buttons have some transparency to them; the chat interface is completely different; the bar at the top looks totally different. But seeing as Starlight Teal is an option that's close to default, adding another theme to the stack is not really necessary, nor will they accept a new theme nor add it to a future releases. Anyone designing a new theme for Firestorm now would have to market the theme themselves, provide a download for it, and explain to others how to manually add it to Firestorm as an option. The painstaking manual theme installation process would then need to be repeated every time there's a viewer update, which would not be worth the effort for most when they can just choose Starlight Teal as an option to get a close-to-default and close to 'as-intended' experience. But maybe if more people raise their voices on how much they dislike Firestorm's UI, the Firestorm team will hopefully keep the Default UI that their viewer is built upon anyway, and just add to it, rather than changing it. Then we can have a UI as intended by Linden Lab but with awesome extra features.

Not shaming, quite the contrary... Firestorm is an amazing viewer. Some just don't use it because of how it looks, or they reluctantly tolerate it in order to have access to its awesome features. Now they can make it look less hideous and enjoy its awesome features, and have an over-all more pleasant experience through their view into the virtual world, without having to tolerate the hideous login screen or the unpleasant color-scheme in order to have access to the awesome feature set.

1. Obviously you do. Otherwise, why even respond here? 2. I am aware of that, but there are rules. I'm not the one name-calling. 3. It was meant as keywords for people who are triggered by Firestorm's UI, not to illicit personal attacks from anonymous forum trolls, but I'm well aware that this is the internet and that there are people who somehow feel better about themselves when they attack others from behind an anonymous avatar. 3.1. Again, keywords. Along with a helpful guide. Apologies if my language was unsavory but did I personally attack anyone? No. And even if I did not explain my personal disgust at the Firestorm UI, some people would've probably still felt the need to attack me from the comfort of their anonymous online personas, such is life on the internet, so I may as well use the necessary keywords that'll make it easy for those who dislike Firestorm's UI to find this post. 4. Refer to your own point 2, above.

While I agree that my OP language was perhaps a bit 'unsavory' to get the point across of how ugly I think Firestorm is (and I'm 100% sure I'm not alone in this), it was not meant to incite angry responses, nor am I the one name-calling or firing off personal attacks. Also, this is going off topic. This post was meant for people who prefer the default viewer, so that they can instead try Firestorm's awesome features without being discouraged by its awful UI. Again, if it doesn't bother you, ignore this, move on. Thank you.