Yoki Enoch

Insky Jedburgh wrote: Thank you Cerise. I suspected I was simply missing something since I don't use V2. Now just imagine new users trying to figure that out. Yeah, that was quite the hoot. Now how many clicks was that to tp to a parcel? I lost count.:matte-motes-big-grin-wink:

Void Singer wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: [...] For anyone in the land selling/renting market, have you noticed that your sales/rentals to noobs has been almost non-existent in the last year or so? Hmm, I thought so. you mean the last 4 years or so don't you? land buying renting noobs have always been almost non-existent since free accounts opened. Really? Well, I used get quite a few on my estate sims, and they helped fill up the gaps. About a year ago, I had to abandon them all because the demand for residential estate land simply died suddenly in February of 2010. The noobs could have helped me out, but I guess it was a downturn overall.

Innula Zenovka wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Since I do not use a TPV but only the "poorly operating" Viewer 1.23, you have me at a disadvantage. At least with my Viewer 1.23, I can tell you how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any moment in time, whereas you can't. You can do that in any v1 based viewer...even TPVs. It is a bone basic function that one can not do in Viewer 2.x - just one symptom as to why it is a piece of crap. Yeah, most people need to know how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any momet at least once a ... errm.... Seriously, because I've always used For Sale By Owner to buy and sell stuff, what's V1 got in the regard that V2 hasn't, if you sort the land for sale in descending order by size? I collect stats, so I need a basic feature like that. The inability of Viewer 2.x to do something that basic is very telling. If anyone is relying on Viewer 2.x to buy and sell land, considering its inability to do the most basic in land search, I do pity them. I would pity them even more if Viewer 2.x was used by more people. For anyone in the land selling/renting market, have you noticed that your sales/rentals to noobs has been almost non-existent in the last year or so? Hmm, I thought so.

Well, after a few hours, the brave of the community have tried it out. Needless to say and considering the feedback, I will wait longer, probably much, much longer to try this thing out, if ever. So long.

After over a year of the release of Viewer 2.x, it please me to see that it is suggested here that this viewer may actually even have a search function now. I shan't ask why it took so long, but I will wait to see what the community says about the "new search" function for Viewer 2.x. If it is even close to good, who knows, I may try to use Viewer 2.x again. But if I do, it will be with much, much trepidation. Four tries within a year really is my limit, ya know.

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Since I do not use a TPV but only the "poorly operating" Viewer 1.23, you have me at a disadvantage. At least with my Viewer 1.23, I can tell you how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any moment in time, whereas you can't. You can do that in any v1 based viewer...even TPVs. It is a bone basic function that one can not do in Viewer 2.x - just one symptom as to why it is a piece of crap.

Void Singer wrote: your argument was that they could be blocked for not supporting V2 code/features.... since they all do, there is no argument. the only exception is LL's own V1 download, which still operates (poorly) in direct opposition to your "theory". or to it in more visual and less kind words, the facts show your supposition has more holes in it than swiss cheese used for mini gun target practice. Since I do not use a TPV but only the "poorly operating" Viewer 1.23, you have me at a disadvantage. At least with my Viewer 1.23, I can tell you how many estate sims are available for sale or lease at any moment in time, whereas you can't.

Void Singer wrote: probably a little to meta for this discussion, but reality is what you perceive... so if the perception hasn't changed than neither has reality.... at least as far as you are concerned. but since message boards are a pretty poor imitation of an concept of afterlife I've ever heard of, I'm going to assume at the very least that not matching is description provided by the doomsayer means the doomsayer was wrong... @Yoki: well then it's settled, since every public TPV I know of, and certainly every one in the TPV directory is based off of snowglobe 1.5+, they all have substantial V2 code in them, since V2 uses a large portion of that code base... and to add to that, those same TPV's cover most of the core features that were added by V2. Is that why I don't use any TPV's either? I have truly seen the light. Actually, I really missed your point. What is your point? Thanks.

Innula Zenovka wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Innula Zenovka wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance.. You're intentionally dodging the question and invoking the will of the gods, aren't you? What makes you so certain that LL will one day prevent TPVs from logging in? For those who can come up with a scenario that could not possibly be put into effect because of its stupidity, have yet to meet Linden Lab. The creation of Viewer 2.x is testament to this fact. There's a big gap, though, between "something could possibly happen" to "it's going to happen" or even "there is any indication it's likely to happen," is there not? Oh yes, there are big gaps there. We can be assured though that as long as LL keeps pushing Viewer 2.x, SL will keep declining in use. Ever since Viewer 2.x was introduced, the decline in concurrency started a downward trend. You can see this by LL's own published stats. Why oh why LL doesn't try to hide those stats too is beyond my comprehension. You will, of course, be familiar with the logical fallacy post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Surely LL's banning traffic bots and also changing the search ranking methods to make traffic gaming less rewarding anyway must have had some effect on concurrency, too? At least some of the fall in concurrency must be because not so many people are now bothering to keep umpteeen bots logged in, surely? The banning of traffic bots was done some time ago. How long will an argument like this be maintained? Besides, in my journeys around SL, I still run into traffic bots all the time. I find some joy in pointing out these bots to the sim owners involved, as they bring up the old excuse that these are just users who are currently away. The traffic bot is far from dead, but the arguments explaining how their banning is the cause for lower concurrency rates is dead in my books.

leliel Mirihi wrote: So you're saying that even if somebody updated a v1 viewer to work with all the new stuff that LL would still block it? Why would LL care, why would they bother? And why are you so shure? I am not so sure. I am only speculating like anyone else could. LL can and will do whatever it so pleases, even to the extent of raising tier fees by 67% with a lame excuse that such a rise in fees is necessary since a small percentage of owners are abusing their sims.

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: It should be obvious. Any TPV that are not Viewer 2.x compliant will eventually be blocked. Could you define v2 compliant please? Viewers containing 2.x code.

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance.. You're intentionally dodging the question and invoking the will of the gods, aren't you? What makes you so certain that LL will one day prevent TPVs from logging in? For those who can come up with a scenario that could not possibly be put into effect because of its stupidity, have yet to meet Linden Lab. The creation of Viewer 2.x is testament to this fact. Obvious troll is obvious. Wasting my time with bs. Go crawl back under your bridge. We can pick this conversation up this time next year. As LL keeps pushing Viewer 2.x, we may have these boards all to ourselves, so it won't be difficult finding oneanother. I'm calling you a troll because you consistently refuse to explain why you believe this or back up your assertion that LL will block TPVs with any proof. Not because I disagree with any of it. SL is obviously dead to you already so why are you still here? It should be obvious. Any TPV that are not Viewer 2.x compliant will eventually be blocked. This is not rocket science. And no, SL is not dead to me. If it was, I wouldn't care. It is because I do care that I will continue to say that Viewer 2.x is a piece of crap, and that the further pushing of it onto SL will eventually lead to a further demise of SL. Just look at the last published stats. When do you see the beginning of a drop in concurrency? It is at the same time as Viewer 2.x came out. LL staff have their heads in the sand and do not realize how detrimental this Viewer is to the success of SL.

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance.. You're intentionally dodging the question and invoking the will of the gods, aren't you? What makes you so certain that LL will one day prevent TPVs from logging in? For those who can come up with a scenario that could not possibly be put into effect because of its stupidity, have yet to meet Linden Lab. The creation of Viewer 2.x is testament to this fact. Obvious troll is obvious. Wasting my time with bs. Go crawl back under your bridge. We can pick this conversation up this time next year. As LL keeps pushing Viewer 2.x, we may have these boards all to ourselves, so it won't be difficult finding oneanother.

Innula Zenovka wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance.. You're intentionally dodging the question and invoking the will of the gods, aren't you? What makes you so certain that LL will one day prevent TPVs from logging in? For those who can come up with a scenario that could not possibly be put into effect because of its stupidity, have yet to meet Linden Lab. The creation of Viewer 2.x is testament to this fact. There's a big gap, though, between "something could possibly happen" to "it's going to happen" or even "there is any indication it's likely to happen," is there not? Oh yes, there are big gaps there. We can be assured though that as long as LL keeps pushing Viewer 2.x, SL will keep declining in use. Ever since Viewer 2.x was introduced, the decline in concurrency started a downward trend. You can see this by LL's own published stats. Why oh why LL doesn't try to hide those stats too is beyond my comprehension.

Void Singer wrote: every large scale change in SL has had people claiming it will be the end of SL... and every such change in the future will hear the same claims until the end of time if need be. assuming that some other disaster doesn't overtake the world first, eventually one of them might even be right.... but lacking an actual reason, they (and you) still have it wrong.... saying the "signs are there" about the same bs that was claimed the last time isn't really a sign of anything, much to Doomsayers dismay, but it sounds good (after all the world was supposed to end last Saturday... yet here we still are chatting away) I am not suggesting doom, just further decline, just as it has been happening ever since Viewer 2.x was first introduced. It is not just a coincidence.

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance.. You're intentionally dodging the question and invoking the will of the gods, aren't you? What makes you so certain that LL will one day prevent TPVs from logging in? For those who can come up with a scenario that could not possibly be put into effect because of its stupidity, have yet to meet Linden Lab. The creation of Viewer 2.x is testament to this fact.

Innula Zenovka wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Innula Zenovka wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: I can cope with the Viewer 2.x interface, just like I can cope with an MS-DOS interface versus a Windows 7 interface. However, I refuse to downgrade to Viewer 2.x, in the same way I would refuse to downgrade to MS-DOS 6.1. Yeah, but if someone asked me to explain why I would find MS-DOS now so difficult to use as compared with Windows 7, it would be easy for me to tell them that I can't remember all the commands and find remembering file paths, and typing them out in full, and having manually to change directories, and so forth, very arduous as compared with just clicking on stuff with my mouse pointer and using context menus and dragging and dropping and so on. What is it about V2 that you find similarly arduous? I simply refuse to use downgrades unless forced to do so. With SL, I am not so forced to do so. Thus, when I am forced to use the Viewer 2.x interface, I simply won't. Since it takes 3 to 4 extra clicks to accomplish the exact same thing one can accomplishes in a Viewer 1.x viewer with fewer clicks, not to mention the non-existent search function in Viewer 2.x, which is affecting the economy in SL, believe it or not....should I go on? While I know people say everything takes a lot more keystrokes, I can't say I've noticed it most of the time when I'm building and scripting, though looking at (and changing) permissions on items in your inventory is a bit of a pain. And I am told that if you're a serious clothes-maker, V2 isn't the viewer of choice, which I can understand. Search could certainly use some work, or so I am told, but I've long been out of the habit it of using because it was -- at least when i gave up on it, almost four years ago, just after I started -- pretty hopeless, anyway. So I couldn't say for sure. In contrast, some things, like being able to pin your favourites to a hideable menu bar at the top, are great timesavers -- just click and tp. And I find being able to put multiple items on the same clothing layer a huge convenience when putting together outfits -- e.g. a long blouse or shirt and a jacket on the same layer, which always looks better than having the blouse as two separate layers. It's also a moneysaver -- instead of buying several different skins, identical safe for the makeup, I can get one base skin and some packs of lipsticks, eyeshadows and so on, as tattoo layers, at considerably less expense. I tried V2 when first it came out and hated it, so I saw no reason to bother with it. But earlier in the year I decided to bite the bullet and familiarise myself with it, partly because I wanted to be sure my scripts, particularly RLV ones, worked the same way in both V1 and V2-based viewers (they don't always -- and my advice to any serious scripter now is to test your products, RLV or not, in both viewers plus the main TPVs, otherwise you're asking for trouble), and partly because I wanted to be able to support customers who use V2. So I made myself start using Catznip, Dolphin and Marine's RLV, and found that they really weren't too bad to use. And after a little while, I decided that, for me at least, their benefits outweighed their disadvantages, at least for most purposes. So now I use one of those all the time except when I need to take advantage of the specialised building tools in some of the Snowglobe-based TPVs (being able to have the edit window do simple mathematical calculations is sometimes very useful, for example, and for that I use Imprudence). You used the comparison of Windows 7 and MS-DOS. I think a more accurate comparison -- based on my experience, anyway -- would be between XP and Windows 7. I was quite content with XP and only changed because I upgraded my PC, and for a few days I didn't much like Windows 7, because a lot of stuff wasn't where I was used to finding it -- though I soon overcame that -- and some things were - - and continue to be -- simply easier to do in XP. But, on the other hand, there's lots that's easier in Windows 7 and, on the whole, I'm glad I switched. All I'm saying is that, while it may well have been reasonable to dismiss V2 out of hand when first it was released -- I did, after an hour or so -- it's no longer reasonable so to do, particularly if you apply one of the Starlight skins. I don't say people should use it, but I do say that they shouldn't be put off trying V2.6 simply because they hated V2.1. I gave Viewer 2.x three good tries last year. After hours of use each time, I concluded 3 times that Viewer 2.x was a piece of crap. If you want to compare XP and Windows 7, sure. Such a comparison is more appropriate. I used XP for years and was very used to it. When Windows 7 came along, it was more than just a breath of fresh air, it was absolutely wonderful. There is no comparison between the two. Windows 7 rocks. Why is it that whenever I tried Viewer 2.x, that I came to the conclusion is was a piece of crap and went back to the old Viewer? So Viewer 2.x to me is a downgrade. It's user interface is so unbelievably poor, that I actually suspected at one time that a major competitor of LL's sabotaged the Viewer 2.x program. Such a conclusion, of course, is not necessary since LL's habitual incompetence is more likely the culprit.

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: I will try using a TPV viewer when forced to do so, in hope that this might be ok. As for killing SL, like I have said before, watch what happens when Viewer 2.x is forced upon us. SL won't collapse, but it will go into a severe decline from which it may never recover. How are you gonna use a TPV if you're forced to use v2? I think that's a problem right there. You keep conflating things together. If LL eliminates the use of TPVs as well, then my decision is made for me, isn't it. And you think LL is going to do this because of? Do what? Cripple SL? LL will do this because that is its destiny. It had a good shot at it 3 years ago and almost succeeded. This time it has a much better chance..

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: I will try using a TPV viewer when forced to do so, in hope that this might be ok. As for killing SL, like I have said before, watch what happens when Viewer 2.x is forced upon us. SL won't collapse, but it will go into a severe decline from which it may never recover. How are you gonna use a TPV if you're forced to use v2? I think that's a problem right there. You keep conflating things together. If LL eliminates the use of TPVs as well, then my decision is made for me, isn't it.

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: All LL has to do is admit it made a big mistake with Viewer 2.x, and redesign it from scratch, making sure its interface is intuitive and better than the interface in Viewer 1.x. It will take years to redesign the viewer from scratch so what exactly are we supposed to do in the mean time? Oh yeah that's right, nothing. The grid will fall even farther into obsolescence than it already is. That would kill SL even faster than forcing everyone to use v2. Incremental improvements on the existing code base is the only way forwards. Just use a TPV while you wait. I will try using a TPV viewer when forced to do so, in hope that this might be ok. As for killing SL, like I have said before, watch what happens when Viewer 2.x is forced upon us. SL won't collapse, but it will go into a severe decline from which it may never recover.

Innula Zenovka wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: I can cope with the Viewer 2.x interface, just like I can cope with an MS-DOS interface versus a Windows 7 interface. However, I refuse to downgrade to Viewer 2.x, in the same way I would refuse to downgrade to MS-DOS 6.1. Yeah, but if someone asked me to explain why I would find MS-DOS now so difficult to use as compared with Windows 7, it would be easy for me to tell them that I can't remember all the commands and find remembering file paths, and typing them out in full, and having manually to change directories, and so forth, very arduous as compared with just clicking on stuff with my mouse pointer and using context menus and dragging and dropping and so on. What is it about V2 that you find similarly arduous? I simply refuse to use downgrades unless forced to do so. With SL, I am not so forced to do so. Thus, when I am forced to use the Viewer 2.x interface, I simply won't. Since it takes 3 to 4 extra clicks to accomplish the exact same thing one can accomplishes in a Viewer 1.x viewer with fewer clicks, not to mention the non-existant search function in Viewer 2.x, which is affecting the economy in SL, believe it or not....should I go on?

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: The only broken Viewer used in SL is Viewer 2.x. It was broken from the beginning, and it is impossible to fix. The interface is of extremely poor quality, and the search function is non-existent. If it is fear mongering to say just watch what is going to happen, then sobeit. At least I will not be there to see the deluge. I think I liked you a lot better a few months back when you were more reasonable. Now a days it seems you won't be happy until LL deletes everything to do with v2 and goes back to v1. And no, apparently TPVs aren't good enough for you. You must get your one true viewer straight from the hands of the Linden gods or else the world is doomed. I'm sorry for wasting your time, I mistakenly thought you wanted to discuss this. All LL has to do is admit it made a big mistake with Viewer 2.x, and redesign it from scratch, making sure its interface is intuitive and better than the interface in Viewer 1.x. It should also ensure that the search function at least matches the search function of Viewer 1.x. Unless LL does this, it will be in for some serious problems down the line. Unfortunately, given the nature of the Linden mind-set, and I have had the opportunity to look right inside there a few months ago, the above just won't happen. It is too bad really, but given the recent developments, I feel like I am looking at a train heading straight for oblivion when it come to LL and Viewers. It is unfortunate and so unnecessary, but such is life.

leliel Mirihi wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: valerie Inshan wrote: There is no reason why LL should get rid of Viewer 2 because some users dislike it. You are free to choose a third party viewer from the list here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Third_Party_Viewer_Directory "Some" users dislike it? ROTFLMAO. Watch what happens when Viewer 2.x is made mandatory... time to update your resumes, Lindens. LL is never going to make v2 mandatory so quit beating that dead horse. What they will do is one day drop support for their v1 based viewers. They will not, repeat not, REPEAT NOT prevent v1 based TPVs from logging in so long as the developers update their viewers to work with the grid. Even then I don't think LL will bother. If you want to use a broken viewer that can't see half the objects in the sim and can't use half the protocols the sim uses to communicate just because it has a UI you like better I doubt LL will stop you. They still let people login with 1.19.0.4 after all and that viewer will crash the moment it sees an oblong sculpty. Of course none of that matters since the TPVs are updating stuff. Your fear mongering is betraying you. The only broken Viewer used in SL is Viewer 2.x. It was broken from the beginning, and it is impossible to fix. The interface is of extremely poor quality, and the search function is non-existent. If it is fear mongering to say just watch what is going to happen, then sobeit. At least I will not be there to see the deluge.

Innula Zenovka wrote: Yoki Enoch wrote: Innula Zenovka wrote: BayleeSimone wrote: If I have to take a class to figure it out, it is too complicated. I dunno. Phoenix is a very popular viewer, of course, despite the fact they offer frequent classes, "Phoenix 101", in how best to use it. That suggests to me a fair number of people must feel in need of assistance in figuring it out. Oh boy. LL dares not reveal that Viewer 2.x needs a post-graduate degree to learn how to use it. Forget "Viewer 2.x 101". All I can say is I can't see how it's any more complicated for a new user than is 1.23, which is hardly the most intuitive of UIs, though we all rapidly became used to it when first we started. And I didn't find it particularly taxing to get used to the new V2 UI. I found it a bit like driving a new car you're not used to; it's a bit hairy at first because everything's in the wrong place, but after a day or so it's second nature. The keyboard shortcuts are all the same, as far as I can tell, which I found a great help. What do you find so difficult about it? I'm not disagreeing with you, nor saying you should like, or even use, V2. It's just I use Marine's RLV a lot and -- maybe because it's got a Starlight skin -- I find it perfectly simple to use. I can cope with the Viewer 2.x interface, just like I can cope with an MS-DOS interface versus a Windows 7 interface. However, I refuse to downgrade to Viewer 2.x, in the same way I would refuse to downgrade to MS-DOS 6.1.

Charolotte Caxton wrote: Lol, cute, I had to look that up I hope you stick around, I bet it will be fun Nope, I will be long gone. Viewer 2.x is a symbol of everything that is wrong with Linden Lab, and it will give me an excuse for simply just dropping out. It is too bad, I have many friends, and very good friends in SL.