Jump to content

Madelaine McMasters

Resident
  • Posts

    22,926
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    19

Everything posted by Madelaine McMasters

  1. Czari Zenovka wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Czari Zenovka wrote: I still greatly appreciate your reply, Parhelion. I was going to ask a follow-up question to Maddy but since you're here :matte-motes-big-grin: - On the back of my PC the HDMI plug is labeled, amazingly enough, "HDMI" but in tiny lil writing under the plug it says HDMI v 1.1. I did a quick read about HDMI cables and see that there are newer versions. Will that be an issue? If the card says 1.1, virtually any HDMI cable should work with it. There are fancier cables that also carry Ethernet and 4K HDTV. You don't need that. Updated good news - contacted my father and he has extra HDMI cables so I won't have to buy one! Woot!!! The day is looking up! (But if I hadn't posted to vent - I would NEVER have known this monitor has an HDMI port!!!) I wonder what I'll discover if I vent.
  2. Czari Zenovka wrote: I still greatly appreciate your reply, Parhelion. I was going to ask a follow-up question to Maddy but since you're here :matte-motes-big-grin: - On the back of my PC the HDMI plug is labeled, amazingly enough, "HDMI" but in tiny lil writing under the plug it says HDMI v 1.1. I did a quick read about HDMI cables and see that there are newer versions. Will that be an issue? If the card says 1.1, virtually any HDMI cable should work with it. There are fancier cables that also carry Ethernet and 4K HDTV. You don't need that.
  3. Czari Zenovka wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Czari Zenovka wrote: Dilbert Dilweg wrote: Not many use VGA monitor plugins any more lol. Its all about high def and flat screens lol I guess it helps knowing what you have to work with before you shop may make it easier. My monitor is a flat screen, probably two years old. I also did a good six months research prior to deciding on a PC and about another month alone making a graphics card decision. Trust me, I'm not laughing...glad it amused you. ETA: According to the CS rep., that manufacturer normally includes the necessary adapter; apparently the neglect for this was on them. If your monitor is two years old, it should have HDMI or at least DVI on the back. You do NOT want to go from your graphics card to a VGA connector on the back of your monitor. That forces the graphics card to convert the digital video into analog, and the monitor to de-digitize it again. What connectors are on the back of your monitor? The EVGA specs list both HDMI and DVI on the back of the card. Ooooooooooo!!!!!! It DOES have an HDMI connector (version 1.1 if that makes a difference). It is hard to even find the power plug-in and the VGA plug-in on this model, so I never noticed the HDMI one. One of my father's friends gave my father this monitor when he purchased an All-in-One PC; then he moved out of country, gave that PC to my father, and I inherited this one. I was just given the monitor alone by my father and used the power cord and VGA plug in from my smaller monitor because they are the same manufacturer and work fine. Sooooo, now I need to see if my father still has those connectors. If not, is an HDMI connector something that is standard, meaning can I buy one at most PC shops? Whew!!! Thank you, Maddy! All you'll need is a standard HDMI cable. The question is where to get one that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. BestBuy is probably NOT the place to go. Home Depot, Lowes or Walmart will have lower prices.
  4. Czari Zenovka wrote: Dilbert Dilweg wrote: Not many use VGA monitor plugins any more lol. Its all about high def and flat screens lol I guess it helps knowing what you have to work with before you shop may make it easier. My monitor is a flat screen, probably two years old. I also did a good six months research prior to deciding on a PC and about another month alone making a graphics card decision. Trust me, I'm not laughing...glad it amused you. ETA: According to the CS rep., that manufacturer normally includes the necessary adapter; apparently the neglect for this was on them. If your monitor is two years old, it should have HDMI or at least DVI on the back. You do NOT want to go from your graphics card to a VGA connector on the back of your monitor. That forces the graphics card to convert the digital video into analog, and the monitor to de-digitize it again. What connectors are on the back of your monitor? The EVGA specs list both HDMI and DVI on the back of the card.
  5. SL does not run as well under Mac OS as under Windows. I presume that's because LL develops first on Windows. That said, SL viewers run fine on my various Macs. Pussycat is quite right in recommending iMacs or the 15" MacBook Pro with Retina Display. Those are the only Macs that have nVIDIA GPUs. The MacBook Airs, 13" MacBook Pros and Mac Mini all use integrated Intel graphics and will not run SL as well. The upcoming Mac Pro will have ATI graphics. Opinion here in the forum seems to favor nVIDIA. You can run Windows on a Mac, so the performance hit of running SL on Mac OS may be avoidable.
  6. Hi Jaden, have you got a budget for your graphics card? Are you sure you'll need an upgraded power supply go with it? If you can give us the specifications for your existing computer, we'll be better able to help you pick your upgrade.
  7. Welcome to the forums, Mell! I've never been bitten, but I believe if you wear the proper garlic necklace, you'll be marked as "leave her alone" in the Bloodlines database". Here's a link that necklace in the Marketplace. It's free. https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/The-Garlic-Necklace-Bloodlines-Bite-requests-Spam-Protection/912384 Once you've worn it and followed the instructions, you can remove it and delete it from your inventory. As for what to do with the really nice seeming fella, I suppose that's up to you. I'm not into roleplay either, so I'd probably curtsey and run. Good luck!
  8. Dresden Ceriano wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Marybeth Cooperstone wrote: "Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your POV), to remove the ability to Cam someone would also require removing the ability to Cam around in general in SL" The only thing I object to is the "Zoom In" feature on the right button using the "People" window (in Firestorm, maybe other names in other viewers). AFAIK, that is the only way to cam into someone in a closed room, such as a dressing room. While that may be the easiest way to cam into a closed room, it's not the only way. I routinely cam around, moving through walls with impunity by alt-clicking on things and then mousing the camera around. You can't move the camera up or down this way, so there is some privacy afforded by altitude, but not much. For those using 3D pointing devices like the Space Navigator, Flycam mode allows you to go anywhere with ease. Ctrl+alt+click lets you move your camera up and down. It's easy to switch between the two by pressing just the alt button with one finger, then using another finger to press ctrl whenever you want to go up and down. ...Dres Now nobody is safe from me!
  9. Rolig Loon wrote: Is it still Friday? It is, though as you know, I've never needed that excuse.
  10. Rolig Loon wrote: LOL!! :smileylol: OK, OK .... You can wear one (or more). It just won't work. You can't sit on an attachment. (It's kinda like lifting yourself by your own bootstraps.) Golly Rolig, I think you're just too picky. I think this look really works for me. (Ooooh, I am sooo tempted to run back in-world and photograph myself in mid-air, tugging at my boots.) ;-)
  11. Czari Zenovka wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Earlier, someone posited that your use of a V1 viewer had, at some point, potentially decoupled your avatar shape settings from those stored in SL's servers, causing you to see a different shape for you than the rest of us. Sharing a few recent in-world pics of yourself should help determine if this is the case, or if it's something else. Have someone (I'd be happy to do so) take a pic of you and you also take a pic of you, then exchange them and compare. I don't quite understand the "decoupling avatar shape" thing. As background (for those who do understand that), I have not changed my shape for I would estimate a good two years and the avatar shape that I saw using the Phoenix viewer on my old PC was always the shape I created and intended so I'm not understanding how the SL servers would show a different shape to me. I sent Trinity a few photos of how I saw myself on Phoenix and she said she had always seen my shape as much thinner. I just downloaded the Phoenix I had been using and took a photo of myself in that viewer and an identical shot with Singularity. My avatar looks a bit thinner on Phoenix now, but is still more "shapely" than the identical shot on Singularity so I'm now thinking that two things are at play: 1) my having a larger monitor and 2) a difference of some sort between the pre-mesh Phoenix and mesh viewers, which may what you were alluding to, not sure. Someone was explaining that around the time "Outfits" came to the viewer, the responsibility for remembering shape settings moved from the viewer to the servers. Until then, the shape parameters were apparently cached locally. (This doesn't sound right, I may be remembering it wrong.) The theory was that, since you stayed with V1, the servers may have been handing out your shape parameters to others from their own storage place, and not from the local copy in your viewer. You'd never have noticed since your viewer was always rendering your shape from your local settings, not those on the server. How the server ever got settings that differed from those on your PC was not explained. Let's examine your PC/monitor hypothesis... If your old PC was driving its monitor with the wrong aspect ratio, everything should have looked a little wrong to you, including RL images. If your new PC is driving its monitor with the wrong aspect ratio, everything would look a little wrong to you know, again including RL images. If SL is the only place you notice something wrong, and it's only with your shape, and only when you view yourself, then we're looking at your viewer somehow working with shape parameters for you that are not the same as those stored in the SL servers and distributed to everybody else when you appear within their SL scenes. That's the decoupling I mentioned.
  12. Rolig Loon wrote: You can't wear a pose stand. Ahem...
  13. Rolig Loon wrote: True, Maddy, but you'll have to admit that's a very narrow corner of the market. Limited edition works of art are almost always numbered and signed, following a long-standing tradition that was in use well before those few state laws were enacted. The much more common case, described at length in the wikipedia article that you quoted, is "special editions" or "limited editions" of DVDs, music albums, teacups, and paperback novels, for which "companies widely use special editions and incremental improvements to sell the same products to consumers multiple times." I certainly agree that there are ethical boundaries to the practice, but I think you'd usually have a hard time getting people to agree where they are. Yep, I agree. What got me to highlight the limited edition line was the OP's statement that the item was purportedly to be sold to 15 people. That feels a li'l like numbering prints. There's plenty of grey here. I sympathize with the OP. I don't think there's anything to be done about it.
  14. Marybeth Cooperstone wrote: "Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your POV), to remove the ability to Cam someone would also require removing the ability to Cam around in general in SL" The only thing I object to is the "Zoom In" feature on the right button using the "People" window (in Firestorm, maybe other names in other viewers). AFAIK, that is the only way to cam into someone in a closed room, such as a dressing room. While that may be the easiest way to cam into a closed room, it's not the only way. I routinely cam around, moving through walls with impunity by alt-clicking on things and then mousing the camera around. You can't move the camera up or down this way, so there is some privacy afforded by altitude, but not much. For those using 3D pointing devices like the Space Navigator, Flycam mode allows you to go anywhere with ease.
  15. Rolig Loon wrote: DISSONI wrote: Ok, i understand but it is not normal, we payed a SEMI- EXCLUSIVE, available for 15 persons ONLY and now its available for the whole marketplace for a much lower price than before a FAT PACK. Must be a rule or something about this, they dont have respect Oh, I see what you mean. Yeah, that's sad but I can see exactly why a creator might do that. It takes a lot of time and creative energy to make a beautiful product, but it's very hard to decide what to sell it for. After all, it's not worth anything if nobody is willing to buy it. So, you set a high "semi-exclusive" price and hope that a few people will pay for it. Sadly, only one or two people do. After it has been on the market for a while, you swallow your pride and decide to take the Wal-Mart option. You drop the price 50% and it sells like magic. Did you cheat the one or two people who paid the original price? No. They agreed that it was worth paying. They just bought during the "test marketing" phase. The only time I would not even consider doing that is when I have created something as a custom item for a specific client. Under those circumstances, I promise the client that I will not sell the same thing to anyone else. The promise is only as good as my word, of course, so Linden Lab wouldn't punish me if I broke it. I'd know, though, and I'd probably lose future clients if the news got out. I doubt there's anything to be done about this, but the concept of "limited edition" does have some legal standing in the physical realm (in this case art prints). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_edition In which there's this line... "In the United States limited editions are regulated under state consumer protections laws."
  16. Czari Zenovka wrote: Deej Kasshiki wrote: Despite the Lab's always talking about "the shared SL experience", there is in fact no way to ensure that two people (even if using the exact same hardware and viewer) will ever see the exact same thing. As long as there are graphics and performance settings that can be user adjusted, not to mention the variety of different computers, viewers, monitors, etc, the chances of having your av look exactly the same as what you're seeing is kind of low. I think the solution is to just make your av look the way you like. In the final analysys that's what matters the most anyway. :matte-motes-smitten: Yes, Deej, I realize that and stated such in a previous post; what really confuses me is why I look substantially different to ME and would like to find out if it is due to the viewer, a larger monitor, going from XP to Win 7, my PC specs, or which way the wind is blowing. That is what mystifies me way more than everyone else being able to see me as I see me. Earlier, someone posited that your use of a V1 viewer had, at some point, potentially decoupled your avatar shape settings from those stored in SL's servers, causing you to see a different shape for you than the rest of us. Sharing a few recent in-world pics of yourself should help determine if this is the case, or if it's something else. Have someone (I'd be happy to do so) take a pic of you and you also take a pic of you, then exchange them and compare.
  17. Kylie, I finally got a chance to visit "The Trace". It's lovely and I must thank you for leaving a telescope out for me to use. I can't resist them. Nor can someone else...
  18. Hippie Bowman wrote: LOL! I saw a clip on that! Whew! Was it 29 dogs? Peace! 69!
  19. 7-5-2013 Fire fighters called to the home of Joey Chestnut, winner of the Nathan's Famous Hot Dog Eating Context at New York's Coney Island the day before, are forced to lubricate the home's front doorway with mustard to extricate the ailing Chestnut from his living room. Paramedics at the scene argued over whether Chestnut's condition was rare, overdone, or both.
  20. Czari Zenovka wrote: KarenMichelle Lane wrote: Actually I beg to differ. It is about technology. many of the current features that make SecondLife even more enjoyable [shading, reflections, spectral brightness, etc ] are using technology not available on the older graphics cards GPUs & Firmware. These features make SecondLife more real to and for many of us. And in like manner, many of us who have been in SL for years have thoroughly enjoyed SL without all those features. My main enjoyment within SL is the people I've met and I can enjoy them while sitting in my SL house and IM-chatting as well as I could chatting with them in a sim that has all those features. For at least the last year, I've done most of my chatting with friends while standing on the ottoman in my lighthouse. It hardly makes a difference if I'm in Low or Ultra if I've got my IM window covering 95% of the screen. What does make a difference is the quality of the conversations I have with the interesting minds I encounter here. I have a computer with a huge display, capable of running ultra, which constantly reminds me of just how beautiful my lighthouse might actually be, if only the viewer would render all of it! I understand KarenMichelle's desire to have more realistic rendering in SL, but I'm the sort for whom "reality" encompasses a lot more than what I see. I have flown real airplanes in RL, but ultimately found that to be less fulfilling (and far more noisy) than climbing into the little paper airplane I just folded, tossing it into the air, and riding it across Lake Michigan to visit the strange creatures who live on the far shore, eating popcorn with forks. ;-)
  21. Perrie Juran wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Qwalyphi Korpov wrote: @ Madelaine & Perrie To be fair the LL is probably just taking a little short cut with the 'you can't have a contract with an avatar' FAQ item. Something like 'while we fully believe the contracts we have with avatars are valid it is considerably easier to deal with real life identities - so we require you to provide and sign with your real name.' The longer version may be more accurate but it doesn't flow as well or sumptin. There's generally no need for LL to have an avatar's RL identity. If you break the TOS and they boot you, it's up to you to decide whether you wish to out your RL self in order to challenge them. This is why I say the TOS can act like a big stick, even if it's legal swiss cheese. The TOS was written to protect LL. There might be a reason for LL to take legal action against the operator of an avatar, but I can't think of one off the top of my head. In that case, anonymity would be a practical protection, if not a legal one. It would not surprise me if one of these days a law suit did not pop up by LL against one of the operators of these phishing web sites. I think that would be a welcome sight to many of us. I think such a lawsuit would based on something like trademark violation. Those phishing sites needn't be operated by anyone who actually uses SL. I'd have to read the TOS carefully to help me find a situation in which I think LL might come after someone in court for violating it. That last thing I want to do on a beautiful summer day (or any day for that matter) is to carefully read the entire TOS. That's what our li'l chipmunk is here for! Happy Fourth, Perrie! I hope you find some tasty berries and seeds while you're out exploring, Qwal! ;-)
  22. 7-4-2013 Once again, adult children throughout the US celebrate Independence Day by returning home to their parents for free food and unconditional love.
×
×
  • Create New...