solstyse

In the next few weeks I'[m going to be doing some experiments with Mint13 64 bit. I'm picking 13 instead of 14 because just like you, nothing I did in 14 seems to work. Also, my particular video drivers aren't available for anything after Ubuntu 12.04 and it's downstreams. the last linux distro that I got sl working on was based on Ubuntu 11. but in fairness, I skipped distros based on 12.04 before, so maybe that'll work. As an added bonus, mint 13 will remain supported until 2017. I'll keep an eye on this thread, and if my exdperiments bear any fruit, I'll post them here. check the thread I started called "Ubuntu troubles, would debian work better for me?" Others have been kind enough to offer me plenty of advice there. Maybe we have the same problem and their advice can help both of us. *edited to add... The workaround that I've been told about is to add the 32 bit libraries for better multiarch support. I know several others who tried it, and it worked, but I have to get past the same driver issues you have to be able to try it for myself. And it's worth working around since the 64 bit versions are better with multi-core processors.

christophansou wrote: it just says, "an error has occured and windows will now close the program" what i dont get, is my roommate on like right now..... and still nothing, I may have been wrong about drivers being the sole cause then. Usually Windows is pretty good about telling you when drivers have caused the issue. Isn't there any way to get more details or view the report?

Cincia Singh wrote: SL viewers work fine in Win8 once you install video drivers from the maker of your graphics/video card, i.e. NVidia or AMD. That's the most important point. The Microsoft drivers won't be full feature drivers for any hardware that doesn't come OEM on a Windows 8 machine. And you can't count on the name that's on the case of your machine to have the proper drivers either. Everybody left it up to the video card manufacturers to not only produce, but also distribute the new drivers. Why the laptop manufacturers that use those video cards aren't mroe involved in making sure that something made and available for free, and makes their own machines work better to the consumer is beyond me.

TDD123 wrote: You can also save yourself much troubles if you can exchange your GPU from ATI to NVidia. Afaik ATI users experience much more trouble in properly installing and maintaining their driver than the latter. I always stuck to NVidia and hardly have the trouble I notice ATI users have. Not questioning ATI products, just the(ir) (proprietary) driver support on linux. Oh, how badly I wish I could! Unfortunately 3 years ago I got "laptop curious" and now I'm stuck with the hardware that came with the machine until I go back to desktops next year. I read all over the place that Nvidea walks all over ATI in Linux. And a new card would be soooo cheap if I had a desktop. And, to top things off, I don't have ANY free partitions to put LMDE on. So I'll have to either boot into Win8 or figure out why my Mint14 virtual disk is so picky about 3rd party apps. I think I'll reinstall, so that I can start fresh, then go down the list of advice that people gave in this thread. I hope something else works before I re-read about downgrading the kernel

Gadget Portal wrote: solstyse wrote: So, the summary here is that because one person complained wrongly, anyone and everyone with an older or underperforming pc should be punished. And LL should take the hit to their revenue streams that results. And it all comes down to, of all the stupid things it could be, whether or not you're a fan of Mesh. .. Flaming someone and trying to make an arguement that they should be banned for getting fewer fps or being able to enable fewer features in sl than you can is a clear demonstration of just how pathetic your rl is. That's what I read of that post. It shows me you didn't read the whole thread and you're too over-emotional to have a conversation without resorting to insults. Go back and read all the replies, calm down, and stop getting so whiny and upset over a forum post. Unless you are actually a 12 year old girl. Then your response is fine. Quite the opposite. The problem is that I not only read the whole thread, but several other posts by you also. I have accounted for the fact that someone who is in the wrong mood may post the wrong thing, but a wrong mood doesn't account for the consistent snobbiness that you exhibit toward anyone and everyone who hints that sl may be underperforming on their machines. The message is consistent. That indicates a general outlook on life. And, call me judgemental if you want, but from what I've seen it's that your outlook on life is that anyone with less than you is someone to look down your nose upon. And to use sl as a method of putting yourself on a pedestal is a sign that there is little if anything going for you in rl. In other words, yes, quite pathetic. Note that I am not insulting you in your entirety. I am simply insulting that attitude that you have demonstrated on multiple occasions. Over several threads, each and every time someone has asked for advice on how to improve their performance in sl, you have replied with the same snotty, "Upgrade your computer because mine is better than yours" response. There is a definite pattern. Then you start a thread stating that anyone on a viewer that is beneath your standard should be disabled. So, since you didnt' answer the first time, I ask again.... How does having a better computer than someone else who uses SL make you a better person? And how is this disdain for anyone running lesser hardware a demonstration of anything other than your ineptitude to offer any solution beyond the simplistic "throw money at it" solution? I have read your posts very carefully, and if I got the wrong impression of you, then the problem is not my ability to comprehend. It is your inability to express yourself in a manner that is not insulting and overly simplistic. Now, do you want to offer a counterpoint that has the potential to change my mind? Or do you want to take the simple path and just question my age again?

So, the summary here is that because one person complained wrongly, anyone and everyone with an older or underperforming pc should be punished. And LL should take the hit to their revenue streams that results. And it all comes down to, of all the stupid things it could be, whether or not you're a fan of Mesh. Oh, and if sl is the worst performing program on your computer, then it's your fault. And, if you work two jobs but LL isn't your absolute top priority, causing you to spend money just for that while your computer does everything else you want it to quite well, then, you're lazy. And soehow, even though you can't see someone else's screen, that screen that is out of your vision and should be out of your mind is somehow so offensive that the owner of that computer should be banned, cause they affect you that much. But in other threads, Gadget, you flamed people for asking how to optimize their hardware so that they could see all these you say they should be banned for not seeing. Can you please clarify why someone trying to do the best with what they have is so offensive to you? I mean really, think about how illogical this hatred for anyone who has less than you really is. Now, over time, requirements will increase. They always do. So of course, someday we'll all be using different computers. But the problem will always be there. When all computers can display mesh, there will be some other LL feature that can't be enjoyed by everyone. Because in the future, the same thing is going to happen. Since it can't go away, the best you can hope for is that it'll be limited. There are things that are being done right now by plenty of other companies that are easier for them than for LL because they aren't dealing with a decade of old code, old methods, and old machines. I've been saying for a long, long time that the best fix is for LL to improve the performance of it's product. Reintroduce optional lightweight viewers for x86 machines, and make them able to see mesh. Lumiya can do it for 1ghz phones and tablets. Even most xp machines have faster clock speeds than that. More careful implementation of new features is a must. Many people's first experience with Mesh was quite poor. Before mesh, many who were capable of running v2 were still using v1 for the speed and stability. v2 and v3 viewers have finally made headway in the stability department, but they're still heavier viewers than v1. And the v1 viewers that do display mesh are far more obscure, and took way longer to implement the code than the v2 and v3 viewers did. That's where the perception that mesh causes lag comes from. I'll bet everyone who says that only switched because of mesh. Instead of this stupid "You don't deserve Second Life because my computer is better than yours." attitude that the militant meshies seem to possess, why not do what I did, and start a thread about how to optimize your machine? It's a stupid thing to argue about, especially when those arguing have done absolutely nothing to try to help. So, of course then those who can't see mesh, and either can't afford to upgrade their computer, or see sl as the only motivation to, are perfectly right to feel offended. It's a weak point of view that comes from weak minded people. When there's a problem, you try to solve it, and "throw money at it" is the exact kind of answer one would expect from someone who is too inept to help themselves, let alone anyone else. As for the "laziness" of not upgrading... Some of us actually take the time to analyze our machines, or finances, and the cost vs benefit of upgrading. Some of us who do have the finances consider our "overall user experience" quite adequate, despite the low marks we would give sl's performance on our machines. Some of us prefer to come up with a more educated, more technical, more practical method of problem solving than opening our pocketbooks. In other words, some of us do the work to figure out that there's a better method. Some of us have priiorities. Some truly can't afford to upgrade. I have a challenge for anyone who thinks there's no excuse. make friends with someone who's on disability. Or on unemployment. Make friends witha minimum wage earner. make friends with someone who's dealing with medical expenses that aren't adequately covered by their health plans. make friends with someone who has an unreliable car that seems to rob them of every dime they make. Maybe take a walk through a poor neightborhood, and take a glimpse at some people who could never afford a new computer. Know any single parents? Sl is full of them. It takes the income of two to run a household where I live. On the opposite end of the spectrum,maybe you can meet someone who has real life goals. Someone who would rather upgrade their real life than their second life. Someone who is saving up for a house. Or someone who is going to college. Or a starving artist. Or someone trying to start a business. Someone with something better to spend their time on than belittling those who don't make sl a top priority. Flaming someone and trying to make an arguement that they should be banned for getting fewer fps or being able to enable fewer features in sl than you can is a clear demonstration of just how pathetic your rl is.

Does the error say wnything specific? Even if it makes no sense to you, or seems like a gibberish number, then post it here. The more details there are the more helpful we can be.

It is an ATI card. Radeon mobility 4200, specifically. when I tried installing the proprietary drivers from ATI it led to a lot of dependency issues that eventually caused the gui to not render. So, I'm going to start fresh nomatter what I do. I don't have enough saved to make it worth further troubleshooting. Especially since while nobody on this thread will directly say it, the hint that I get from all of you is that I'm best off switching to Mint Debian Edition. I'll try that first with the Cinnamon desktop, since it was actually born from the unhappiness of the Gnome changes. It seems like the developers want to continue what Gnome started before it branched off wildly. If that doesn't work, then well, for everyone here KDE seems to be working. I really should just skip straight to KDE and be done with it, but Cinnamon looks so good! If neither works for me, then I'll install Mint 12, and apt-get my updates as suggested here. But what makes LMDE so appealing to me is that hopefully, I won't have to continuously reinstall on a 6 month cycle as I would with Ubuntu based versions. We'll see. I'll try everything that's suggested here and keep you posted on what does or doesn't work for me. Thanks everyone!

The problem is that back in my Win7 days even, Ubuntu just seemed to perform better for me when it was version 11 than version 12 also. And the two really shouldn't affect eachother anyway.

So, the last version of Ubuntu that worked perfectly for me was 11.10. I'm wondering what dropped from the repository that would make it stop working as soon as it hit the number 12. I mean, I could still use anything in 12.04 or 12.10 from the repository, and I probably wouldn't notice a problem if I didn't ty to sideload any apps. (using some android language there.) The problem I have is that third party apps seem to just not work after that distro for me. I have done a bit of research,and found that I'mnot the only one who feels that Ubuntu distros later than 11.10 feel "broken" but at the same time, there are plenty of people who have no trouble at all with releases up to their latest 12.10. there also seems to be some disagreement on the net as to what is the cause. Some cite the libfontconfig 2.9 files, saying that replacing them with libfontconfig 2.8 specifically in your sl directory will fix it. Others say it's a video driver issue. It seems that this is unique to Ubuntu, although not all users experience the symptoms. Now, here's my question. Since I've laid eyes on Linux Mint, I fell in love. but Mint gives me a few options. Mint is based on either Ubuntu (Mint 14 corresponds with Ubuntu 12.10) or on Debian. So, I can try the Debian version, and see if it works better, or I can "regress" to a version of Mint that works because it's based on Ubuntu 11.10. In either case, would running apt-get update or apt-get upgrade from an older distro put me right back in the same position, or would it only upgrade the packages that are not too modern for my 3 year old machine? I mean this fo now only as a general question. If specifics are needed, I'll gladly post them. But for now, since it seems that there are others in the same position as I am, I think it's a general linux/distro question, and not a question so much of my specific hardware.

I've experienced these kind of "remote gesture" devices for myself. Not this one specifically, but a couple of others. They're fun for a minute, but they're not quite perfect yet. Either this is leaps and bounds ahead of the systems I've tried or your hand has to be at such a precise angle to the sensor it's actually cumbersome. For the best results, go to a store that has such an item displayed. In fact, make sure it's the exact one you want to spend money on, and try it out before opening your wallet. The technology seems really close, but you'll need to see if you're comfortable with it.

Gadget Portal wrote: Oh, a post on the forums about an SL user trying to use SL on a computer grossly out of date and/or totally inadequate for 3D applications. This is my shocked face. Protip: SL isn't that intense. If your computer can't handle a modern viewer on semi decent settings, it's time to upgrade. My microwave is probably more advanced than that junk. Yeah, that's really helpfu. The OP asks for advice on what viewer is optimal for their machine, and her you come with the usual "You should feel like **bleep** for running a machine that's not as good as mine" non-advice.Just don't post. I mean that. Okay, you have a brand new state of the art compter with specs that make you **bleep** nightly. Good for you. Let's all golf clap. OP, you can take advice like this which will cost you half a grand, or you can read a post like this http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/sl-for-slower-computers/td-p/1839263 Such a post won't help forever, but it at least answers your question instead of belittling you by saying that a computer that you haven't even posted the specs of is junk by a person who worships themselves because they spent some money. *edit: that bleep was a perfectly accepted word that means "pleasure oneself by touching his/her own genitalia."

TDD123 wrote: solstyse wrote: Ubuntu (probably 11, since it seems that 12 is where it all went wrong) Huh ?! ..... Running Ubuntu 12.10 ( with KDE 4.9.4 ) . Nothing wrong with it. On my pc, that distro won't run sl. I've been reading into it, and I come upon some info about libfontconfig issues. I'm not sure if those have been fixed or not. But then AMD only offers the proper drivers on my PC for 12.04 and below. I'm a huge fan of proprietary drivers. My version of Ubuntu was running the Unity desktop. But that was before I discovered Linux Mint. When I saw the Cinnamon desktop it was love at first sight. But mint is available based on either Ubuntu or on Debian. When I scoured reviews, I got the impression that between the font issues and the driver issues, Ubuntu and Ubuntu based systems were more problematic in terms of compatibility starting with version 12.04 than in previous distros. And when I was running older versions of Ubuntu, it just worked. Now it doesn't for me. (I'm currently running Linux Mint 14, which is based on Ubuntu 12.10.) Now, everything I've read has me thinking that the best solution for me is to go to the debian based version of Mint. I can be misinterpreting that though. To tell the truth, I'm a Linux novice. Not as clueless as a Noob, but still probably what would be considered below average. So I guess I mean if you can give me any advice, I would greatly appreciate it. If you'd rather start a seperate thread where we can get all technical instead of jacking this thread, just give the word. I'd be glad to learn.

I would continuously run different operating systems finding new and creative ways to make sl run on everything. I would spend some time on each and every viewer, in Winxp, win7, win8, Android (GB, ICS, and JB) Linux Mint, LMDE, Ubuntu (probably 11, since it seems that 12 is where it all went wrong), Debian, mandriva, and OpenSuse just to see how different the experience is. then I would port the x86 versions to the ARM archetecture, and virtualize ARM in x86. After all that, i would try to convince someone with more than the middle class resources that you're willing to give me to make a cloud based viewer so that I could use a server as my desktop at my laptop to run sl. And if I succeeded at that, then I would use my phone, in Unity, to access the server that accesses the server just to see how far downstream I can go.

Drake1 Nightfire wrote: solstyse wrote: Well, the OS is the same. And the viewer is the same. Logically, we must look at what is different... The hardware. So now, the relavent question is what the people with Win8 as the OEM OS need to wait for. Is it for the hardware manufacturers to improve on the drivers that they offer? Or is it for LL to update their code to become compatible with the newer hardware? Scientifically, the fact that Windows 8 will run sl on some machines makes the statement that Windows 8 is the problem false. Also, if Win8 is the OEM OS, then they are dealing with a different computer, which makes hardware the variable, not the OS. So, if Win 7 works just fine out of the box with SL but Win 8 has to be tweaked with what drivers it installs when that OS is installed its a hardware problem? That doesn't make a lick of sense. If the OS installs drivers that are not the latest for your hardware, even though the latest drivers are already installed and it rolls them back to older ones, then it's an OS software problem. The OS is screwed up. Have you ever installed an operating system? This is a much more common occurance than you think. I'ts not unique to Win8. It happened in every single previous edition of Windows, and will happen again in Win9. The problem is neither the hardware, nor the OS. It is the drivers. An operating system does not "talk" directly to the hartdware. It does so through the use of drivers. To oversimplify, the drivers "translate" between the software and the hardware. Windows, Mac, and Linux require different drivers for the same hardware because they "speak" different languages. Between versions of the same OS, it might be considered a different dialect. Basically, a good analogy would be an American talking to someone with a thick Scottish accent. The American will generally understand, but there will be moments where the American will have to ask, "What the hell did he just say?" Same basic idea. Windows dialect (drivers) change little by little with each new distrobution. That's why the older you go in Windows, the harder it is for Windows 8 to understand. Now, hardware that has existed since the older operating system, and continues to be supported by the manufacturer will have a versioin of the driver for both operating systems, so the solution would be a simple download. However, if your driver is incompatible with Window 8, it will supply it's own "generic" driver. This is necessary. In the case of video drivers, it's the only thing that prevents a blank screen. Often, the generic driver will even display at full resolution, giving you little clue that there's anything wrong. However, due to the fact that it's not made specifically for the hardware, some functionallity is lost. Usually it's 3d acceleration and/or 3d rendering. This is the cause of older PC's that upgrading being unable to see SL. On the flipside, if the hardware is so new that the drivers are written do different standards than a program such as your Second Life viewer is written to recognize, then your back in the same situation. The manufacturer may have dropped some of the backward compatibility that is needed for "legacy" applications to run. (Legacy means any software designed to run in the old fashioned desktop instead of the new modern/metro ui. It's important to note that computers will always use the manufacturer's proprietary drivers instead of the Microsoft generic for 3d rendering. This situation is fixed in one of two ways. Either the manufacturer releases an updated driver which allows for the backward compatibility that is needed (which will happen if enough popular programs fail to work with that driver) or the software developer makes an update to incorporate the new standard. To put this in perspective, on a technical level expecting Windows8 to be compatible with Windows XP would be like expecting Windows 7 to be compatible with Windows 98/ME. The only reason why people expect it is because XP was such a popular, long running distrobution. If it wasn't one of Microsoft's best, then it really would seem just as silly as expecting 98/me programs to work. It's hard to part with. the announcements that have already been made about Win9 speak both for the age and the popularity of XP. If you think there are compatibility issues now, just wait.

Well, the OS is the same. And the viewer is the same. Logically, we must look at what is different... The hardware. So now, the relavent question is what the people with Win8 as the OEM OS need to wait for. Is it for the hardware manufacturers to improve on the drivers that they offer? Or is it for LL to update their code to become compatible with the newer hardware? Scientifically, the fact that Windows 8 will run sl on some machines makes the statement that Windows 8 is the problem false. Also, if Win8 is the OEM OS, then they are dealing with a different computer, which makes hardware the variable, not the OS.

Thanks for the compliment The Win8 fix went nice and smooth. Now, if only I could get SL running in Ubuntu 21.10 or Linux Mint 14 (Nadia) I'd be set. Both are the 32 bit versions, by the way. Anyone have a fix for the latest Linux distros?

Fabiano Dover wrote: i think the title is a little misleading, it's not W8 what is the problem but your machine. drivers for graphics are known causes for glitches for many years, not only after updates. I have W8 on 3 machines and all work just as promessed. Actually, the most common complaint about Win8 is that by default it replaces the manufacturer supplied video driver with a microsoft video driver. If Win8 is installed on a computer with the video hardware that Microsofrt had in mind, then you are able to skip an installation step. So, the problem is not Win8 OR my machine. Nor is the problem present on my machine. But there are several people who do have this problem that they can't get certain "legacy" programs to work after dooing the win7 to win8 upgrade. I knew I was going to need to fix drivers going into the install. I was ready for it before purchasing my OS. The drivers that are supplied by the hardware company always work better than the ones that the OS provides, so you should update when switching OS'es even if there are no warnings or apparent issues. The only part of this that disturbed me is that the fix was basically a "one click" method that the manufacturer of the hardware has put out. Essentially, all I needed was the newest release from AMD. I can think of no excuse for HP not to link it, and make "support assistant" and "hp advisor" auto-update this. What bothers me, not in a technical sense, but in a "this is bad business" sense, is that the update wasn't available directly from HP. And it got me thinking that there's a chance that some people who are having issues are just expecting that the name attached to their computer is the place to go for these updates. It's a very logical thing to think, so in this case, you can't blame the user. Blame goes strictly to the "brand name." My experience hasn't soured me at all, but it did make me wonder how many people believe the myth that if an OS install doesn't go without a hitch that it won't work at all. It also makes me wonder how many people might shy away from HP purchases in the future simply because nobody informed them that they would have to go further "upstream" to get the proper driver. So, I disagree about the title being misleading. I made this post in direct response to the number of threads started by people asking for help after a Win8 install. The point that I was trying to make is simply that sometimes an OS install is incomplete until you verify that you have the latest updates. And sometimes you need to figure out not who assembled the computer, but who manufactured the parts. Peggy, your points about the potential pitfalls of driver installs is well taken. In my case, I knew that I would lose little if any functionallity. In my post, I forgot to stress that it's important to get the driver for your EXACT hardware, made by and for the exact manufacturer of it. (eg, the drivers for a radeon 5000 series would probably have misbehaved on my machine in exactly the way you described. That's why I made sure that I got the proper driver for the mobililty radeon 4200, and the package included the latest release of the ATI Catalyst Control Center) I suppose that there are people who will have to take further steps than I did, such as locating the old Win7 .inf file and manually placing it where the generic Microsoft Win8 file resides. But I really meant this to show how simple it can be. Oh, and making backups is important. I think you were trying to hint at that too. Always set a restore point before you do anything with drivers, and before making any major changes to your OS.

The dedicated graphics ram you quoted is downright painful. Is there any way on the mac to use your system ram to make up for that? Or is there any kind of usb based readyboost option? maybe tweak the swap settings? It shows that I know more about PC's. I can't tell you how to make any of those ideas work on a Mac, but at least maybe it's something to google.

Vista animation huds usually include a "short avi" versiion. Try that.

So today I updated from Win7 to Win8. I've been told to expect problems, but I'm an optimist. So, it takes just as long as every other OS in the world to install. I finally get it up and running, and decide to test SL, since so many people have been having trouble. Well, it happened. SL wouldn't open because the "brand new" Windows 8 video drivers were'nt getting along with my ATI Radeon Mobility 4200 video card. Why does nobody ever say that's the error they're getting? And there was a notice that CCC was incompatible with my OS. No problem. I fire up HP support assistant. It says my driver is up to date. Ummm, no it's not. Okay, device manager. Same thing. It pretends my driver is up to date. HP's website. Yeah, maybe support assistant is just being as useless as it always is. Uh oh, HP claims that there's nothing I can do. That since my computer was released before October 2011, it can't run the Windows 8 OS that I used to get online and see their site without bugs. HA! (well, technically they said my machine is unsupported and untested.) Okay, type "device manager" click settings, click device manager, find video card info, select properties, click drivers, select "pudate." It says it's up to date. LIES! Highlight name of video card, copy, open google, paste. Oh look, AMD has drivers for xp, vista, 7, AND 8! navigate their website, find a file called 13-1-legacy_vista_win7_win8_dd_ccc.exe. Save the file, then run. Answer the questions, accept the terms, watch the screen flash, then click "finish." Click my favorite viewer, and no more error. It loads, but renders me as a cloud. Ctrl-Alt-R. Problem solved. I'm seeing sl perfectly, without even messing with .inf or .ini files. I posted the whole experience instead of skipping right to what works as a way to show all of you who can't get it working that I can see where your frustration is coming from. The point is don't give up. And, if you haven't been through all the troublshooting, then just skip right to the website of the company that manufactured your graphics card. Skip over the computer manufacturer completely. HP told me it wouldn't work, and if I would have believed them, then I wouldn't be running sl on Win8. I find it a bit disappointing that I had to go straight to AMD for the driver. I thought HP support was better than that. Hope this helps. *edit: Technically, I misused the term "video card." The mobility graphics are integrated graphics for laptops.

you need the drivers directly from the manufacturer of your video card. Google "(your card) windows 8 drivers" and look for the official site to AMD. Download the latest version of the Catalyst Control Center. Run the program, look away when your screen flashes, and hit finish. Then, get back to enjoying Second Life.

Drake1 Nightfire wrote: solstyse wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: Windows 8 has issues with SL. it has been reported in many many threads. I'll be testing that theory next. I just got a copy. I hate the UI, but I really, really want it's efficient task manager. Should I put the results on this thread, or start a new one? Cause I promise, it will work on my machine. Its not a theory.. many people have reported issues with Windows 8. Good news for all that reported issues with Win8 and sl. It happened to me. And I fixed it in less than an hour. I'll be starting a thread about that next.

Oh, it WILL be an interesting yeart. That's for usre. When the new Samsungs come out with 8 cores, it'll be fun to see the ripple they make in the industry. I guess the best way to say what I've been trying to is that LL should consider better support for voluntary downsampling, both to help those with aging x86 devices, and those with the newer arm devices. I know plenty of people who change their video settings frequently, so that they can walk around without feeling like they're getting nowhere, and so that they can up their graphics settings to take pics once they got where they needed to. If you combine that idea with automatically storing assets at the maximum resolution that the highest end viewer will display, I think you would get your wish of keeping all the LL eye candy intact, while those on slower machines will get theri wish of a faster performing sl. Using clothing as an example, if the top of the line computers will always display it as 512, then it should reside on the asset server as 512. If a "lightweight" viewer can only display it at 256, then instead of ignoring the texture, what is to stop the lightweight viewer from downsizing a second time locally to display that texture at 256? For that matter, if the higher end viewers (which means 99% of them) can interpret the 1024 texture as 512, then why not Lumiya? That must mean that the viewer is handling that locally on the user's machine. Now, if that was done server-side, preferably at the time of saving the object, or item of clothing, I think even the high end computers would see a benefit, without sacrificing any of the looks that you've grown to love. And it seems that a patch like that to how textures are handled wouldn't be too difficult to the people who invented the grid. But then I wonder, if that's not exactly what they're preparing to do, why else would they change baking to server-side?

Syo Emerald wrote: Well....considering how unsuccessful it can be to get SL to run with wireless, I would bet a stick causes the same problems. It could also be a really slow experiance. that's a myth. A properly configured 802.11.n router runs sl just fine.