Jump to content

Fluf Fredriksson

Resident
  • Content Count

    117
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Fluf Fredriksson

  1. I'm just sad that I had to spend half an hour reading forum posts and LL's answers to the forum posts to find out what the heck it all meant. Pointing people at a mile long TOS page full of legal jargon wasn't ever going to go smoothly was it?
  2. Now lets look at that as a non US payer who wasn't paying annually, who wants 2048m of land total... Quarterly payments will no longer be available so... US version: $11.99 per month premium + $7 per month land = $18.99 per month or $227.88 a year so (227.88 x 100) / 365 = 62 cents per day Non US version with 20% VAT: $11.99 premium + 20% VAT + 3% Transaction charge = $14.82 per month. $7 land + 20% VAT + 3% Transaction charge = $8.65. Total $281.66 a year or 77 cents per day. That's a very very expensive MMO. Most multiplayer online games are around $10 a month. 32 cents per da
  3. Doesn't make it any less nuts. The price hike just made me go look at what SL was costing me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I gain more money in my bank. LL drains some of the non-US payers out of the system (they already pay around 3% just to pay in $). It's all good. EDIT: Question for US SL premium payers ... Would you try and reduce what you pay to LL if it cost you 18% to 23% more on top of the price hike? Because that's what a lot of people outside of America are looking at.
  4. I think what they mean is .. they will deduct the VAT (sales tax) from the $99 annual fee they get and pay it anyway. But it's a sucker punch in pricing strategy. Anyone (outside of America) that wasn't paying the annual fee to avoid a larger lump sum payment, will now see it as an extra burden to pay monthly or quarterly. Best option? Go basic and drop the premium. It's a very USA centric strategy. But it gets worse .. if you dig into the cost of owning land in SL vs premium membership .. Say you have a premium account, you have 1024m2 of land, you decide you want another 1024.
  5. Cheers & thanks to all LL monkeys involved. After the "random disconnects" nightmare fix, and now whatever you guys have been furiously hitting with spanners, sim crossings are about the smoothest I've ever known them to be. Whatever it was you guys did, it seems to have worked! Source: Approximately 350 sim crossings with only one "unsit bug". NOT BAD AT ALL!
  6. I sorta hoped this topic was dead. "Is it just me or?" ... Since LL rolled EEP back out to a few of the server channels .. (Hello Black Stars!).. Sim crossings have got more difficult again. No disconnects, but since the timeout is much longer now, you're stuck way up in the air for much.. much.. MUCH.. longer. Wave goodbye to whatever vehicle you were on, it's 5 sims+ away by the time you regain control. Yes, those were the golden times. That brief window you had between "We fixed the disconnects!" and "Here's EEP again!".
  7. As of April 25th. Yes this is fixed for both sim crossings and teleports. "This" is random disconnections on sim crossings or teleports. Having a problem crossing a sim boundary smoothly was not fixed and was not what LL was trying to fix. But I find I'm getting fewer "unsit" bugs on sim crossings now as well as no random disconnect issues. If you are still getting disconnected on sim crossings or teleports, it's possible it's a problem with your computer / network. If that all looks good then you probably need to raise a JIRA describing the problem, because for apparently the v
  8. @animats It sounds like you've collected a lot of information on the "old style" sim crossing problems. If you haven't already, it's probably worth creating a JIRA bug with the problems you know of laid out as clearly as possible.
  9. Resolved - We have finished updating main grid regions with a fix which should reduce incidence of teleport disconnects. Thank you for your patience during this time. Apr 25, 15:37 PDT https://secondlife-status.statuspage.io/incidents/10gthjdtjjky https://secondlife-status.statuspage.io/incidents/3g3fshq350wq
  10. I know you don't want to hear this, but that's not the problem that LL have been trying to fix for a month. You didn't get disconnected. The random disconnection issue is fixed.
  11. Well it's pretty much official from me. Whatever fix LL rolled out on the 24th April has fixed sim crossing random disconnects for me 100%. The entire Yavascript S1 route completed in one run using Firestorm on Linux. If you asked me before March 18th if that was possible, I'd have said highly unlikely. To whichever LL codemonkey(s) that figured out what to roll back / reconfigure, my sincere thank you. I hope they get you another monitor, a nicer keyboard and a more comfy chair. You deserve it. To LL in general. That was one monumental ***** up. I'm sure it has cost you both revenue
  12. @animats Thanks! Nice post. That's more information in one forum post than we've had out of LL for over a month! I hope your optimism for a genuine fix is well founded. I have a feeling though that after today's sim roll-outs and tomorrow's (seemingly related) server maintenance, it might be declared "good enough" and back to the EEP roll out.
  13. Well. Only time for 1 test so far since the server roll out, but it's promising. "Cautiously optimistic". Entire H4 run completed, just over 2 hours online with no disconnect problem using Firestorm (Linux). Previous average disconnect time 20-45mins, with one 1h45m run. So that does look like a very significant improvement. But... Only one test run. It's possible that's random good luck, but given the results of previous test runs, statistically unlikely. Finally I can go back to using Firestorm. Phew. Sadly some of you still seem to be in disconnect hell, and as usual we have
  14. For the sake of quenching the nay sayers out there, I'll put down my findings on different client experiences during the current disconnection problems in more detail. If it helps people who are interested in sim-crossing activities in SL, that's great. Ideally we want the problem fixed though. Around the beginning of March I decided to complete all the Yavascript pod routes again for reasons not worth explaining here. Using Firestorm (my usual viewer), this was going fine. The 18th March was the last time to date that I have managed to complete any of the Yavascript pod routes using
  15. I have given you substance and reasoning to support their position over many hours and many hundreds of sim crossings. You are choosing to ignore that well informed advice because it doesn't suit your narrative. I am the one being objective. You are the one who is being subjective by ignoring well research information because it is contrary to your un-researched opinion. Others on here already have you marked as a block worthy troll. I hope I've managed to make that view seem more reasonable for others in this thread. Have a nice day.
  16. What makes you say I'm testing on something that Linden Lab isn't working on? That doesn't make sense. Yes all clients are affected. As I said in my post, the source of the problem is server side. Some clients however are having a lot more trouble than others. You said "Your friend is showing bias, based on their own experience and conjecture" .. no they are possibly not. Different clients are handling the current server problems differently. WOW do we all use different computers? It's amazing anyone ever debugs anything! *_* tell me more of your wisdom! You are the one that raised h
  17. Network speed - Same for all tests, Internal timeout margin? - Yes could well be different between viewers. That's what I was trying to point out. Despite LL claiming all viewers have the same problems, they do not. Hand off channel used - ?? Care to explain ??. Some system hardware - Same for all tests. OS - Up to date Linux I specifically said my testing is on sim crossings. Welcome to the "I only TP sometimes and I don't have much problem" club. Take a seat, read a book.
  18. After many many *many* hours of testing sim crossings, I can tell you that at the moment Henri's CoolVL is much less prone to the disconnection errors on sim-crossings (Teleports not tested to a degree where I could confirm or deny either way). The now horribly out of date "Alchemy" viewer also seems to do surprisingly well on sim-crossings, but I've not put enough hours in to testing Alchemy to confirm one way or another yet. I was hoping the problem would be fixed before I'd be able to. It does seem to me that this is a two sided problem. Viewers that I've tried based on LL's latest vie
  19. Agreed on more info required. I'm not having a problem free, joyful SL life if that's any comfort. Even I'm getting bored with being pleased I have slightly less disconnects one day (and then far more a few days later), and I have a fairly high tolerance for bugs usually. Like many others I'm starting to wonder what other games / things to do of an evening I could be doing instead. I can see @MBeatrix's logic in suggesting that we all keep doing what we do so we can log a bunch of disconnects for the Lab. But I'm also beginning to see the alternative logic in just not logging in
  20. I can't blame LL for really not wanting to roll back to say 18th March. It may even be impossible by now. They would need snapshots of all the different server states back then, and would then need to make dif / changlogs of everything they did since then so they could re-implement it in stages. After a month I'm unsure if they would even have the snapshot backups available to do it if they wanted to. Maybe. Who knows? Anecdotal TP vs. sim-crossings note though. I've noticed that if I stick to just Teleports, often they can go fine for a while (sometimes not), and if I stick to just sim-c
  21. It seems very very very unlikely that the February DNS changes would be biting SL in the ass. One of the things I spend a while quadruple checking when the disconnects started happening was DNS queries. I couldn't find any significant problems getting DNS replies for any of LL's servers (but I did slightly improve my DNS caching and response times). The rest of your summary describes a painful predicament for LL to be in. With so many potentially contributing changes it's going to be hell eliminating possible causes, or even just rolling back to a previously known good state. Practically
  22. While I'll stand by what I wrote above, it's still basically guesswork as to what the current problem is. Deeper knowledge of the system would well help them debug it faster, having less long standing undiagnosed bugs in the code would probably make it more resilient to problems like this, but the source of the current problem is apparently unknown to all. [My Magic 8 Ball says .... "systemd" .. hm .. shakes it again]
  23. systemd strikes again :) (Jessie introduced systemd to Debian)
  24. Well, as previously said in the thread. The problems people are having are very random. Sometimes you get a few days with very few problems, then boom, you get a few terrible days in a row. I've had both teleport and sim crossing failures, using Firestorm I can't cross sims for more than about 20 minutes before I get a disconnect message. Teleports sometimes work, sometimes don't. We sort of have to rely on LL collecting the stats on how many disconnects they are seeing and of which type. It seems any individual's experience is unique.
  25. Well ... no. Apparently there's been fairly regular staff turn over at LL over the years, so not many (if any?) of the people there now will have the kind of in depth knowledge of the code that the original coders would have. Pile on top of that a reluctance to improve on or solve problem areas that have no visible financial gain for years now (accountancy led project management at it's finest), see long standing JIRA issues for proof. Anddddd ... No ... No they don't. Not any more. If they can't be bothered to debug why sometimes you can't see the sim next to you for several years.
×
×
  • Create New...