Jump to content

Fender Strangelove

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Fender Strangelove

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Kotari, that certainly sounds like a reasonable explanation. Going back to the original post on this subject: "Also how come Activision Blizzard can remake the entire world of Azeroth in a year, and you guys started working on stability 2 years ago and items from the marketplace still don't deliver all the time; people walk around without knowing their skin hasn't loaded; inventories fail to load. This is all backend stuff." Your answer supports this comment--my connection to the SL servers is spending almost all of it's time doing ACK/NACKs, so Guinevere is in fact correct.
  2. Lulu, I would be the last fennec on earth to suggest that you keep silent when there is something going on of which you disapprove. I did not mean to suggest that you should not express your disapproval, or approval for that matter. The only thing I really meant to address was your comment about there being a "friendlier" way for LL to do what they are doing. The rest of my post to you was more a restatement that LL is going to do whatever they feel they must do, regardless of what the residents of SL think of such actions. They have never been swayed very much by community feeling in the p
  3. Kotari, Thank you for taking the time to reply, but I am afraid that you didn't address my questions. What you said makes perfect sense to me if I were asking why textures/objects take longer in SL to load than in WoW, but that was not the question. The question is why the number of textures/objects would affect the way that they load--in other words, the problems with textures failing to rez completely, objects, especially sculpts, not rendering properly, avatars failing to load, etc. If all textures and all objects are rezzed by the same software (in a given viewer), the number of differ
  4. Deej, There is no reason to say that Linden Lab is taking an attitude of "your kind no longer welcome here." Of course you are welcome--we all are--but realistically, it has to be on LL's terms. LL is the backbone from which all else in Second Life derives, and no matter what we think of their policies and practices, without LL there is no SL. That is why I can truthfully say that a decision on LL's part to embrace the Facebook-style Web makes me sad but not angry. The situation is driven by economics and if LL goes under because of a refusal to accept that their original model for Second
  5. *laughs* A lot of the other grids out there are indeed OpenSim/Hypergrid based, but not all. The most successful viewers will be the ones that actually feature all the functionality that they need. Depriving Viewer 1.x of the ability to search is just one step towards making Viewer 2 the de facto mandatory viewer, if not by blocking Viewer 1.x, then by making it unuseable. Although the Phoenix team has shown itself to be remarkably resilient .
  6. From what I have seen, the problem has been that Viewer 2 (as first released) didn't meet the needs of the platform--it was too wonky to work the way LL wants to use it. It's taken a long time but apparently the viewer has become, or is very close to becoming, the tool that LL actually wanted in the first place. Some of the first comments (and complaints) about Viewer 2 related to "the Facebook-like sidebar." Almost everything in the Real World takes longer and costs more than initially thought. Why should Viewer 2 be any different?
  7. No no, not at all, Cody. I just didn't want you to think that I disagreed with your assement of the situation. I am trying to be realistic about what is going on and prepare myself for the worst case, because as of right now I am pretty sure that SL is turning into something I do not want to use. I hope I am wrong but I have a private scoreboard of predictions I have made in the past and, sadly for me, I have been right more often than I would have liked to be. It seems that your thinking and mine are meshed (no puns intended) pretty well, really, as far as what will eventually happen. Yo
  8. I think you may be confusing It's Made Voting Unnecessary with another world (concurrency now over 140,000). There are places which fit your description but they aren't one of them, from what I have seen. Of course they've said things about acquiring new users, over and over. And the whole "misery" didn't start with Viewer 2, it started long before that, slowly working it's way to what we have now. Viewer 2 was made the way it is so that LL could integrate it with things like Facebook--the other UI features that people love or hate are incidental to the viewer's purpose. I'm not arguing y
  9. Lulu, I personally don't see a friendly way of doing what LL wants to do, because people like you and me came to SL for what we perceived as the way LL did business and ran the grid. Changes to that perception are painful, no matter what the reasons behind the changes may be. For now LL is depending on everyone currently active in SL to take a "wait and see" approach, thus giving them time to drum up a new user base with the new features they are implementing and will implement in the future. I don't like the way things are headed either because it's not what I wanted when I joined but I am
  10. By "preaching to the choir" I meant that I, personally, agree with you already--you don't need to convince me I just have the impression, from the metrics that I have seen, that LL and SL are both stagnating in terms of growth, perhaps not at a complete standstill but certainly not where LL wants to be. And given the apparent success of other approaches to virtual worlds, LL wants to emulate some of the practices that seem to be driving that success. If the entire existing customer base were to disappear and was replaced by one an order of magnitude larger, LL would be a very happy corporat
  11. Oh, don't feel that I am arguing against your point of view, because I am not. I am just saying what I feel Linden Lab is trying to do. Somebody at LL thinks that being affiliated with Facebook and Twitter and who-knows-what-else is going to generate FAR more traffic than the movie Avatar did--the money people were disappointed about that, if you recall. Sometimes volume does more than make up the difference between spending levels. Unless everyone currently active on Second Life is spending a LOT more money than I think is the case, the volume vs. spending-level comparison isn't even a co
  12. I agree with what you say, but then, you're kind of preaching to the choir. The whole point of what LL is doing is to ensure a much larger, more viable pool of customers and potential customers than they have now. Why would LL care about their existing customer base if they expect to attract five or ten or fifty times more people with their new paradigm? Frankly, if I were the one doing it, I wouldn't care either, not from a business point of view. As I said to Crys, these changes and shifts aren't things that LL decided on a whim, no matter what anyone says. Second Life as a whole has be
  13. Well, the whole subject is one that we can only make assumptions about, for now. However, as I mentioned in my first post (and the thing that got me to thinking in the first place) was seeing how many users were on Its Made Voting Unnecessary this afternoon compared with Second Life. If a business model works, then it works and there is no point in Linden Lab burying their heads in the sand and hoping that their original business model would come out on top in the long run. From what has been going on and announced so far, it would seem that someone, or a group of someones, connected with L
  14. Crys, I think I am not making my point clear at all, and I apologize for my lack of verbal skill. What I have been trying to say is that all the people on SL who "join SL to get away from RL," who don't want Facebook, etc., all the faithful users... are not who are driving the changes in Second Life. Linden Lab is making a deliberate effort to recruit new users who do want Facebook, etc., whether or not that effort costs them existing customers. Part of the existing customer base will probably not go along with most of these changes, and LL is taking the stance, "Well, that is too bad, and
  15. Crys, I am not saying that I agree with the changes LL is making, only that I understand why they are being made. The one thing I don't have anyway of finding-out is the actual income of competing services like Its Making Voting Unnecessary. However, I would be willing to bet good money that Linden Lab does have access to the kind of information that would say to them, "If you don't get on the Facebook bandwagon, you're going to be buried by other services that are." Facebook is HUGE and there are a gazillion people who love it along with a gazillion others who at least use it. I truly do
  • Create New...