leliel Mirihi

The correct answer is. Preferences -> Move & view -> Single click to: None

Void Singer wrote: leliel Mirihi wrote: It's also trivial to get around. Show look at only tells you where the person's camera is focused at, so you can focus on anything and then alt cam over to the person and they'll never know. Which makes this Phoenix [viewer] feature doubly worthless. (emphasis mine) If your goal is to catch people looking at you... sure. Assuming, also, that the person looking knows that or cares. I suppose I should have said Emerald instead of Phoenix but the point still stands. In the official viewer the option is hidden in the debug/advanced/develop menu because that's all it was intended for, debugging the camera view. It was the TPVs that elevated it into more of a feature than it really is.

Astringofcharacters wrote: A pleasant vanity feature, I'd think, but quite a drama trigger for some people. You'd think they'd be flattered by the attention, but cam into the wrong face across a crowded room and you'll find avatar beauty can be skin deep. A snarling IM will tell you just how thin that skin can be. You can perv on me with impunity. I don't have the Phoenix viewer. It's also trivial to get around. Show look at only tells you where the person's camera is focused at, so you can focus on anything and then alt cam over to the person and they'll never know. Which makes this Phoenix feature doubly worthless.

Sigren Panthar wrote: Eventually, after a torturous process, and signing on twice (what?...are fraudsters going to throw in the towel because SL asks them to sign in twice?? I think not.) I can't comment on the rest of your post, but there is a real reason to have you sign in twice. Read up on session high jacking.

My guess would be that the official viewer and possibly firestorm are defaulting to shadows enabled on your machine where as singularity is not. There of course is an easy way to test this, do you see shadows?

I'm not part of the anti-facelight brigade. I've never demanded some one take off their lights and only very rarely even comment on their lights being too bright. Like I said above, I normally have attached lights disabled. I don't have a problem with people wearing a few lights here and there that fit in with their outfit. But can you tell me why exactly that guy needed his shoes to be so bright, they were just normal dress shoes, not some scifi space boots, so why? I've seen people wearing 200 prim hair lights as well. It doesn't make any sense, why would people want that many lights. On ultra settings where you can see all these lights it washes out everything, the entire room and all the avatars in it are white.

Ian Undercroft wrote: Some facelights are too bright and have an unnecessarily large radius. However, I don't accept that all facelights are bad. Don't those using the default ultra setting have the wit to reduce the brightness of local lighting if they consider many facelights (and presumbly many other fixed local lights) too bright? By face lights that are too bright I'm talking about face lights with 10 or more prims set as a light. Of course I'm using face light as a generic term for attached lights you don't need, so it also includes hair lights and shoe lights. Two days ago I saw a guy wearing 120 prim shoes, each prim was a light for a total for 240 lights. On ultra settings there is no 8 light limit, I could see all 240 lights in this guy's shoes, and it lit up the entire sim and parts of the neighboring sims. I would have to reduce the brightness of local lighting down to zero in order to keep that guy's shoes from looking like a mini sun. It's not that one light is too bright, but that people wear way too many lights.

Griffin Ceawlin wrote: I forgot to add, ShyBird, that some people will berate you for ever wearing a facelight, insisting that you are ruining their Second Life experience even if you never ever occupy the same sim as them. Some face lights really are so bright you can see them from the next sim over. Anyway back on topic. I always run on ultra and usually have attached lights disabled. I wish the face light trend had never started so I wouldn't have to but some people just take it way too far. It sucks because that means I can't see things like flashlights, hand held lanterns, or glowing parts on some space gun either. I have a feeling face lights will be with us long, long, after they're needed, but they say there's no sense crying over spilled milk.

Baloo Uriza wrote: Tristizia Demonista wrote: ps.: No, i do not have an idea why Features removed were deprecated in the OpenGL spec, and nobody should have been using them anymore at this point anyway. So...SL FAIL. 30% of the people that log into SL have GPUs that don't support modern OpenGL so what exactly is LL supposed to do? Not that it matter tho since everyone who has the problem with nVidia's latest drivers reports being able to login with basic shaders disabled which means the viewer is exclusively using these depreciated functions. If the driver didn't support them anymore then people shouldn't be able to log in at all no matter what their graphics settings. Oh and did I mention that nVidia as repeatedly stated that they have no intention of dropping support for the OpenGL fixed function API? People are barking up the wrong tree on this one. The viewer is doing something that's causing the latest drivers to take a really long time to crunch through the data, sometimes it gets reset by Windows, some times it crashes. Either way it's the driver that changed, not the viewer, SL isn't the only OpenGL program that's having problems with this new driver.

You can get older versions here. Make shure to disable automatic updates when you first start it. http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Category:Release_Notes

Tristizia Demonista wrote: leliel Mirihi wrote: It's really has nothing to do with things being pre loaded and everything to do with the content in games being made by artist that went to school and learned how to make optimized content. Artist that have product managers standing behind them saying no you can't do that due to performance reasons. Where as content in SL is made by hobbyist that don't know and don't care. Me tries to remember just what the last game ( on the PC) was that was made by professionals who "Optimized for performance" and if, on what kind of Ultra-High-End Machine ! .... Nope, can't remember one Anything made by Valve for starters. But seriously gamers don't use 7 year old laptops with Intel integrated graphics. However more to the point, SL could be faster if content was better optimized. I'm not blaming anyone for this, I think it's great that your average Joe can just login and start building without having to worry about these things. But we need to have some realistic expectations. SL is a hobbyist platform, we shouldn't expect it to be as polished as a professionally made game.

Cincia Singh wrote: Your logic is flawed; you're comparing apples to oranges. When you play a cryengine game you're mostly playing a game with all graphics pre-loaded on your HDD. It's much easier for a PC to render what are essentially static cached graphics than almost 100% streamed graphics like in SL. It's really has nothing to do with things being pre loaded and everything to do with the content in games being made by artist that went to school and learned how to make optimized content. Artist that have product managers standing behind them saying no you can't do that due to performance reasons. Where as content in SL is made by hobbyist that don't know and don't care.

Melita Magic wrote: Why not offer both? They could add D&D support to web profiles, I guess they don't see a need tho. Don't they still have to click each item and click 'share'? No. You select 100 people then 100 items (or you can do it the other way around) then click send once. You can literally send something to your entire friends list in 10 seconds.

Melita Magic wrote: And yes, I know the internet page is their profile. I still want to drag things to it. And I can't. I personally never liked dragging and dropping items onto people's profiles. It felt like a very clumsy interface that made it time consuming to give the same items to multiple people and was not very friendly to people will physical disabilities. The share interface fixes that, while it makes it slightly harder to give one item to one person, it is trivial to give 100 items to 100 people with it. It would take hours to do the same D&D into people's profiles.

Melita Magic wrote: Yes I found the search/people panel. But, either nothing comes up, or the person's internet page comes up. That internet page is their profile. I want to be able to send things from my inventory to a person's profile so they get the items. I don't want to have to find a spot to rez the item(s) which for instance might not be rezzable anyway (landmark, note card.) I don't want to IM them. Who said anything about rezzing the items? Just shift right click on the items in your inventory and select share. 

Kittykittycatgirl wrote: But the thing is, I can play games like Left 4 Dead, Team Fortress 2, Half-life 2 Episode 2, Counter-Strike Source etc. All of those games use the source engine which hasn't had a major update since 2006, and wasn't exactly known for having high system requirements before that.

Gadget Portal wrote: I'll add it, thanks. You know, you'd think LL would put their stuff on their own domain. WTF good is it otherwise? This is pretty normal, hundreds of websites scatter their stuff all over.

I hate to break it to you but the GT 430 is equivalent to the HD 5570. I doubt your video card is the cause of your problems tho.

Venus Petrov wrote: Good luck on that one. As you have just experienced, it is not always a 'viewer problem'. Sometimes it is a 'user problem'. It's not a user problem anymore than it's a viewer problem, it's a creator problem. Some people know how to make sculpties, others don't and force you to play around with viewer debug settings to cover up for their incompetence.

Your CPU doesn't support SSE2 which is now required.

Greene Paine wrote: Can you think of any dark depressing UI's out there that have had nearly the market success that these products have had? Even your website makes the user feel like their peering into a dark closet at the funny people inside. (Doesn't your closet have funny people inside?) Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but yes actually. Winamp, Lightroom, iPhoto, Logic, Pro Tools and Reason to name a few. Three of those are made by Apple by the way.

Viewer 2/3 work fine on my Ubuntu 11.04 64bit system. The only special thing I installed that I can think of is the ia32-libs.

LL is well aware of the problem, there are several issues in jira for it and they all list a work around. Just what kind of announcement are you expecting, do you want them to make a blog post for every bug that comes up? Do you want them to send out a personal email to everyone? What are you expecting, it's a bug and it's listed in LL's bug tracker.

Profiles have been available on the web for 4 years now. I recommend the privacy settings you're most comfortable with.

Deej Kasshiki wrote: So maybe the Lab should fix the problems rather than you attack dogs trying to beat everyone up? You've been barking for a year and a half and gotten nowhere. Maybe it's time you stopped talking and started acting by voting with your wallet, or even your time. If as many people hated v2 as is claimed and they all stopped paying, or worse yet stopped logging in, LL would sit up and take notice. You notice how it wasn't until recently I started saying anything about the complaints? That's because I'm tired of hearing the same things every day when they obviously aren't working. I'm tired of being attacked for not joining in on the circle jerk of hate. I think you have it backwards on who the attack dogs are around here. Oh, and since I've been here longer than both of you haters you I think I'll stick around, thanks. Exactly what am I a hater of? All I said was you've being beating a dead horse for ages with nothing to show for it and that I was tired of listening to it. Why is it you have the right to complain but I don't?