Fender Strangelove

Destiny, I just went through this same problem with LL Support and although it took a little work, it got fixed. You may want to try this, it worked for me: 1. Download and install the latest version of the LL viewer 2. Use this viewer to log into SL 3. There is a People option on one of the tabs on the left side of the display 4. Pick one of the built-in avatars and allow it to load 5. If it loads completely (it did for me), you should now be able to reload your own avatar and see it properly I will mention that I tried this first on the Aditi (beta) grid--if you do, be sure to let your inventory load completely before you do anything else. At this point, your proper avatar should work in the viewer of your choice. If it does not, try the above steps after logging into Agni (the "main" grid). I hope this helps! --Fender

Yes, I tried loading the test avatar--she won't show up until I run Phoenix again >.<

For the past week or so, my avatar will not render in any viewer except Phoenix, and then only if I rebake after logging on. Not in a Linden Lab viewer (any version), Firestorm, Singularity, Cool VL, Rainbow, Imprudence, Frontier or anything else I have tried--only Phoenix. Now that is weird behavior. So far as I know I didn't make any changes although I admit the possibility, but still... why only Phoenix? I have waited for over an hour without result. I've tried fresh installations, clearing every cache there is, changing every setting there is, changing the graphic driver, and nothing makes any difference. Soooooo.... anyone have any ideas? No matter how outlandish, it can't be more outlandish than this behavior!

This particular issue with nVidia graphics cards has been going on for a long time and is not limited to Second Life. Although a lot of people have tried to fix the problem, I have not found any one fix that works for everyone. The problem seems to be caused by the graphics driver timing-out--you may want to try turning-off CUDA in the nVidia driver settings Control Panel (some people have had success with this and it is very easy to try--if it doesn't help, you are not out much time or effort). The problem seems worst with the newest nVidia cards, from what I can find, but can occur on almost any nVidia card. I know this isn't a definitive answer but take some comfort in knowing that you are far from alone.

The type of script you are describing is not really very difficult to make (I can say that because I am not a scripting guru and I have used both llSetLinkAlpha and llSetLinkPrimitiveParamsFast to accomplish this task, usually with a touch event as the trigger. However, to write a working script requires knowing a few things such as the actual link numbers of the prims you want to control, and the parameters of the touch event (owner only? probably), as well as any other conditions that you may wish to apply.

Chosen, Thank you very much for your reply. As a matter of fact, my "first" avatar mesh is sitting at about 6300 triangles but I would have liked to use more in some critical areas. I tugged and pulled and reduced reduced reduced until any further reduction ruined the appearance. The existence of the original avatar mesh bothered me and I am glad that you confirmed my thoughts. Taking your advice I am going to look at moving some of the triangles from non-critical areas to detail areas that are getting smushed--that was truly helpful! I can see that I should plan to do several uploads, experimenting with the mesh, to find the compromise that works best for me. Thank you again for taking the time to give me such a thorough, helpful response.

Hello all, Would one (or many!) of the Mesh Gurus be able to give me some idea of a practical number of triangles to aim for when making my mesh avatar? I realize that I am asking a very general question but I would really like some idea of the number of triangles which makes a reasonable compromise between detail/smoothness and performance. One thousand? Ten thousand? Fifty thousand? Any and all information greatly appreciated! Thank you in advance. --Fender Strangelove

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.

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 past, and I don't see any particular reason they would start now... though that is only my personal opinion and I hope I am wrong.

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 different textures and objects shouldn't make any difference except for the amount of time required to get the information (as you said).

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 Life is not viable, then there won't be any Second Life for anyone in any form. If this means that they have to risk the loss of some of their current user-base, I for one cannot find it in my heart seriously to blame LL. Their resources are finite and must be applied in a way that makes sense for their future. I absolutely have no idea if this new approach will produce the results Linden Lab wants and needs but one thing seems to be clear: Linden Lab feels that it cannot continue with the original plan and remain a serious competitor in the virtual world arena. And if that is what they think, then they have no choice but to change their operations to reflect it.

*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 .

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?

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. Your ideas for handling this situation are very good but I am not sure that Linden Lab has either the resources or the interest in taking that approach, sound as it may be. Here's hoping

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 your comments or anything although I am a bit unclear if you really meant to reply to me. The whole issue with LL not listening to its users is a longstanding one in the SL community but if LL had listened to us, they wouldn't have been able to move their direction in the way in which they want to go. And if that is what LL feels they need to do, well, it's their company and perogative to do so, just as it is ours to leave if we don't like it.