Peggy Paperdoll

Tailgating on someone like KarenMichelle is not a bad thing.

What I wonder is that when your "tech" guy reinstalled Windows what did he do before he went that drastic route? I mean, if you are going to start over with an operating system you really need to start over...from scratch. Formating and reinstalling is starting over from a 3rd base.......basically only the software for user controlled part of the OS (plus, of course, all the third party software) is "removed" and presented in it's original configuration. All that registry stuff remains pretty much untouched. You're starting over but only with the stuff you see and interact with......the guts of the OS remain as before (untouched). Most malware places code in the registry that, you reinstall the OS, regenerates itself and you are back to square one......the problem is still there just as if you did nothing to fix it. To get a clean and complete operating reinstallation you must do one of two things. Wipe the drive that the OS resides on before reinstalling the OS. Or get a new drive to install the OS on. A drive wipe is cheaper (of course) but it's time consuming.........it took me just over 25 hours to wipe my 500 gig HD the last time I did it (I used a pretty secure method with 3 passes though........a single pass would probably work for something like your problem). There are some good disk wipe utilities on the Internet that are free (most are somewhat limited but adequate for a simple disk wipe). You can also purchase full blown disk wipe utilitites that are pretty close to the cost of a new hard drive.........decision time in that case. A new hard drive is quicker and easier if you don't mind a little surgery on your computer (desk tops are easy but laptops can be complicated.........just opening the case can be a nightmare). And the most expensive way is to get a new computer......but is also very unnecesssary. Once you get a hard core virus or mal-ware on your system, you have to use hard core methods to get rid of it. Prevention is the real solution but that is sometimes just not possible if you want to use your computer at all. I've had infections myself and I do know how to "prevent" them...........but it happens eventually to everyone.

The bottom image is the best in my opinion. Mostly because you somehow managed to cover the texture problem on the neck line in the bottom image plus the overall skin is softened to look more natural..........that could be the lighting settings you used for each picture (if they were the same then you did something to fix the skin problem.....if not then use that lighting setting all the time). I got to say you have done better on a look alike skin/shape combo than many (most, actually) of the well known pro skinners in SL........you know those celebrity look alikes that don't look alike? Good job.

Multiple avatars logged in at the same time only confuses this one track girl.

Melita. I don't know who you asked but I'll give you my thoughts on a video card for your new desktop. I'm not one to advocate purchasing more than you need (well, a little overkill is good but I will never recommend going for the best of the best when talking about a video card for SL). I would recommend that you stick with a mid-range gaming card. For nVidia cards that means the second number in the model number being 5 or greater (the higher, the "better"). The current newest series for nVidia cards is the 600 series. For a brand new computer (like you are getting) I would try to stay with the newest series simply to get the benefit of a longer time before "obsolescence" (maybe up to a year but most likely 6 months). I did a very quick Google search to get an idea of cost for 4 different cards that I know will give good performance in SL. What I found it that if you go with the 600 series the lowest card I would recommend is the GTX 650......about $250 USD. The highest card in the 600 series l would be GTX 660 Ti.........about $280 USD. Those two are the cards in the newest series I would recommend (anything higher in performance such as a 670, 680 or 690) is going to be quite a bit more expensive and the benefit you would realize in SL would not be noticable..........the GTX 690 card is $1000 plus USD). I happen to think $250 is a little steep (I'm a tightwad). So I looked at the 500 series. A 560 card is about $125 to $170 (depending on where you look......Newegg.com was about $125). And the 550 Ti is right at $100 (that's the card I have in this computer right now). All those card will run SL at high settings with no problems........I can tell you that my GTX 550 Ti shows a 5 to 10 frame rate drop with shadows and DOF enabled but it runs those setting fine (around 20 to 25 FPS). All those cards will run multiple instances of the SL viewer (up to three that I can vouch for since that's all the accounts I have and therefore all I've ever logged in at once). All those cards can run SL, GIMP, have multiple tabs open in IE, stream music or video, and/or play stored media across my home network to my TV or my friends computer......at the same time. That really isn't taxing your video card much and most any card can do that same quite well. If you want to run multiple monitors then a 670 or 570 card might be best..........but for a single monitor I would not recommend spending more money than the price of the 660 card (and that, for me, is a little more than I would ever need in a card so I'd go the 650 myself). Hope that helps.

Believe it or not Linden Lab has updated the minimum system requirements to run SL. The listed hardware and software requirements will run SL on all the newest mesh enabled viewers...........but if your system only meets the minimum requirewments you are not going to have a trouble free, enjoyable experience. You should shoot for the recommended requirements at the very least. What you will not see is a complete listing of all the hardware (and performance you might expect from that hardware) that will run SL........that's impossible to organize in a comprehensible way (it would be pages and pages long and very technical in nature......in other words useless). You're getting a new video card (that GTX 660). That is a card in the latest series that nVidia is currently offering. The LL software will not recognize that card as one that is supported and you will likely get a message stating that when you log in the first time after you install that card. You can ignore the message (and check the box to "not show message again"). The GTX 660 will work with SL quite well........but make sure you install the current drivers for it (don't rely on the drivers that comes on the driver diskette with your new card since those drivers are almost guaranteed to be old and probably a little buggy). I don't know what the point of your thread is. The minimum requirements for SL haven't really changed for years.........the recommended requirements have (and they are updated periodically.....maybe not exactly how you would like it but they are updated).

"Goodness, let's not bring up the awfulness that was Windows Vista. ..." --------------------------------------------------- I didn't endorse Vista. But since you brought it up, I will say that Vista never gave me problems......I can't say the same for XP though (for me, XP was a degrade from Win ME when I first "upgraded" (SP 1 fixed it for me though and I loved it after that). The only reason I mentioned Vista is because Vista was the first MS operating system that had the "Aero Glass" features........huge resource hog that ruined any performance increase over XP (and Vista was a much better performer than XP ever was). Vista had two issues to deal with. People loved their XP and refused to move to Vista (that bias is, to this day, still very prevailant for many Windows users)........they found excuses to fault Vista for every little "problem" they experienced. Had they turned off the Aero Glass features I know they would have had much less trouble. And. along that Aero stuff is the second issue people had with Vista. Many people had minimally spec'd machines when the upgraded and simply did not know they could turn off all that resource eating stuff that MS thought we all needed and wanted. I will admit that Vista x32 was a little problematic but Vista x64 wasn't (I attribute that to a more efficient use of system memory with x64). Vista also gets a bum rap in that respect........but MS could have avoided a lot of the resistance had they not turned on all the Aero features by default. All that's history for most people now. Windows 7 is not the resource hog that Vista was even with the Aero turned on. Plus, by the time Win 7 hit the market, a large percentage of the people getting Win 7 had also upgraded to new computers and opted for the x64 OS over the x32. Windows 7 has been called "Vista Fixed"...........I agree with that statement myself. The biggest issue for me with Win7 was finding all the settings so I could set up my OS the way I wanted it setup and not the way MS wanted it setup (they moved all that stuff around on Vista, then moved it around again on Win 7..........I did more than a little cussing about Microsoft over that). But all's well now..........I wonder what learning curve I'm going to endure if and when I move to Win 8 .

The speeds numbers are only crummy if that is kbps and not mbps. It appears the OP used one of the speet test sites (probably http://www.speedtest.net/ ). That site gives the speeds in mbps. Those numbers are very close to my numbers.........and I have pretty darn good numbers.

On the surface your system is decent enough to run SL at fairly decent frame rates. Your connection (assuming the numbers you posted are mega bits per second and not kilo bits) is very good.......no mention of packet loss but if that was excessive you'd be getting disconnects along with the low FPS). Also that ping is more or less useless unless you did your speed tests from your location to the two server locations that LL has for it's servers (San Francisco, CA and Dallas, TX.......and average of a few tests to each location would be best). I'm going to say the connection is probably not at the root of the problem (but if you are using wireless it's definitely not helping). What I do see as a possible source of the problem is your video card. The 9400M (with only 256 MB only card VRAM) card never was a particularly powerful video card (slightly below mid-range when it was developed and released to the market........what?; 4 years ago?). Be that as it may, the card is good enough to run SL at 20 to 30 FPS in most areas on the grid. The qualifying part of that 20 to 30 FPS is that your settings in preferences has to be set somewhere in the medium area. When the card fist came out it could run SL at high with some compromise on frame rates. But with the newer viewers and everything LL has added to the Second Life server code that is no longer possible..........shadows and depth of field will likely crash your viewer (or even your computer in extreme cases). You have to limit what your video card is required to do in order to render the scenes fast enough to give you more FPS when you are in-world. Set your viewer preferences to medium and lower your draw distance to 128 meters or less. You play with the bandwidth settings but don't expect too much help......1000 kbps is about as high as I would dare suggest for you (500 might be best). The goal is to limit the work load on the video card.

You did everything that the Phoenix Wiki said to try and still have the problem.........that's not telling us a lot. But something you evidently haven't tried that just might be the most important thing you could do to get your problem resolved. POST YOUR COMPUTER SPECS. Asking for help without giving anyone a single thing to work with is like saying "I have a problem. Now fix it for me." We can't fix it for you. Linden Lab can't fix it for you. No one can fix it for you. Only you can fix it for you. We can offer help if we know what your system consists of.......but it's up to you to fix it. It's not close to impossible to get help with SL. It's really quite easy. Just discribe your problem, what you've done to try to fix it so far, and POST YOUR COMPUTER SPECS. Leave out the exaggerations about how much you've spent on your avatar or the game...........we don't care for one and I actually don't believe your claims. Now, if truly want some help, launch your viewer (it's not necessary to log in). Under the "Help" menu click on "About Second Life"........copy the specs given and paste back here. Don't start a new thread.........use the "Options" in the upper right corner of your post and "Edit" to add the specs and any other information you have. Another, less convenient, way is to use the "Permalink" under a post that you want to comment on. Don't use that to diss me though..........please.

I don't think anyone has said it's a bad idea. What they have said (and what I was saying) is that, at this time in the technilogical evolution, the phones and tablets just are not capable enough to do it. Some day that evolution may get there (I estimate not less than 3 years but very likely before 5 years at the present rate of development). What I get from you is that you think LL should move to make SL compatible with phones and tablets. Doing that would either require a complete revamping of the entire SL platform or degrading what is already developed so that that attractive and growing market can get onboard. The former is just not economically sound (millions of man hours and, probably, millions more dollars tossed to move to a new market? Ain't gonna happen. And the latter........you may gain a small niche of that vast market but you'd loose what you have plus that niche you gain is very used to "free" apps (all, or most, of the virtual land that is now owned by users would have to be swallowed up by LL.....the money is gone. And no money, no business......SL is gone). In order for SL to ever be able to run on hand helds the hand helds have to evolve to the point that they will run SL. Not the other way around (which is what I take from your comments).

The LL viewer gets a bum rap from a lot of people. I hated it when SL changed the UI so much from the old 1.23 viewer but I forced myself to use it with the idea that, sooner or later, even the TPV's would have a similar UI.....and once I figured out where everything was moved to I found it's the stablest of all the viewers I've ever used (though I refuse to use any TPV again after the Emerald fiasco a couple years ago........but that's a different story). The SL official viewer can be setup for almost any computer to run smoothly. The problem I see with a lot of people having issues with the SL viewer is that because the preferences have all the latest features, they think it should run on their system. To use everything the SL viewer has to offer you better have a darn good (high end) computer. A middle of the road computer just won't run well (if at all) with shadows and DOF enabled. But, do you really need all that fancy stuff? It's like Windows Vista, 7 or 8........all that eye candy you can run looks beautiful. But it sure makes your computer run like crap.

You know I hate being the first to post that your graphics accellerator (it's not a graphics card........it's just a very basic and low powered graphics chipset intergrated into your computers CPU) is not going to run SL. The demands that SL requires from a graphics processing unit (GPU) is just too much for it to handle. Here's the first two paragraphs at Notebook Check" ( a well known and respected independant site that benchmarks and reviews GPU's for all computers). ------------------------------------------------------ AMD Radeon HD 6250 The AMD Radeon HD 6250 (or sometimes also called ATI Mobility Radeon HD 6250) is an integrated graphics card in the Ontario netbook processors (e.g., C-50 and C-30). It is based on the same graphics core as the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4330 but without any dedicated memory. Furthermore, it features the newer UVD3 video processor. The 3D performance of the HD 6250 is located in the low end above the integrated chipset graphics card of the 880M chipset (e.g. Radeon HD 4250). Due to the slow processor, the gaming is however very restricted. In our tests only very old games ran fluent in medium detail settings (e.g. Half Life 2). Even non demanding games like Trackmania Nations Forever ran in our tests with a C-50 APU only in low settings. Modern games like Starcraft 2 or Battlefield Bad Company 2 are unplayable. http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6250.40958.0.html ---------------------------------------------------------------- By your statement I gather you signed up for premium. That means you paid Linden Lab real life money. That's unfortunate because LL does not give refunds (it's stated in the agreement you had to read in order to become a member.....whether basic or premium). Hopefully you only opted for the monthly plan so your loss is minimal. Or, if you have access to another computer with a better GPU, you can use that computer instead. Most people sign up for basic and then, if they want, they upgrade to premium.......had you done that you would still not be able to run SL but you wouldn't be out any real money either. Sorry. I really am.

Writing the code for a tablet or smartphone is probably not all that difficult..........code is code afterall. But once that code is written what is anyone going to do with it? Fire up that viewer, then what? You really think there's a tablet or smartphone out there that has the graphics capability to handle the 3D environment that makes up SL? What tablet or smartphone do you know about that is capable of maintaining a high speed connection to the Internet without the aid of a router that is connected to the Internet. 4G may be fast for voice and text..........super slow for something like SL. There's a bunch that has to evolve on the hand held mobil devices before anyone needs to worry about a viewer for them. Until phones and tablets get faster and get more graphics capabilities they will never work satisfactorily for SL. Give it 3 to 5 years and if some phone or tablet advances that far, someone will create a viewer for it (it may even be Linden Lab who does it too).

What do you mean by "downloading"? The Second Life viewer is just like any other file (image, video, music or application) you might download from the Internet. There is nothing special about the download that would prevent anyone from downloading it. I have a feeling you are not downloading the setup file to your hard drive but, you are "running" the setup from the download site. There are a number of potential problems with doing that (not just for SL either). First (and what I think might be at the root of your problem) is if your connection to the Internet is slow (or weak) the setup file downloads as it installs the program (it downloads sections of the setup file, then installs it then downloads more, installs etc until the program is fully installed). If there is a hiccup in you Internet connection during one of the download processes the installation will often fail. That's why many people (myself included) say to never run a setuip file from it's location on the Internet. Instead, save the file to your hard drive before you install it. Two huge benefits there.......both will often come in handy. First by saving the file to your hard drive you have the opportunity to run your anti-virus software to check for mal-ware (even if the site you are downloading from is trusted you should always take the minute.......you might be surprised like I was a few years ago and ran across a virus from a very trusted site I used (and still do). I consider the SL site to be very trusted.....but I run my AV across every download I get from the site. The second benefit is by saving to your hard drive you now have the setup file to run incase something happens and you need to install that particular version of SL again. How many times do we read questions here in Answers about how to go back to an earlier viewer after someone upgrades to a newer viewer and finds it's just not for them and want the "old" viewer back? I read those questions often.......maybe an average of once a week. Linden Lab does not archive the older viewers.....once a new viewer is released the older viewer is no longer available for download. But if you have that viewer setup saved then you can go back at will. If you want to clarify what's happening then use the "Options" in the upper right corner of your post and then "Edit". Please don't start a new thread, as that causes lots of confusion. I could be wrong in my answer since I just guessed what your problem is.

If we could give kudos in this section I'd give you one (or two ). Pretty much my thoughts for a good system for, not only SL, but everything. I havent' convinced myself I need an SSD...........I use 2 HDD's (one for most of my stuff and one for data and system backups, music, pictures, and videos too). Two 500 gig HDD's are very much more than I will ever need in the forseeable future (my primary hard drive is about 20% full and my secondary is about 15%).

Melita, check out http://www.magicmicro.com/?gclid=CK2qxrbe47ICFdGizAodRk0Amw Just the other day I worked up a system to replace my current machine (I didn't order it because, right now, it's a little too close to Christmas and my checking account needs a break). I came up with a custom computer for $850 USD that is very close to a gaming rig......but I do have hardware in this machine that I will transfer to the new one so I did save some dollars there (probably about $200). I've had a total of three computers built by Magic Micro over the last 3 or 4 years (two for others, one for me). They will assemble the machine, test and burn it in for you and install your operating system for you so all you have to do is unpack it, plug it in, activate your Windows (if that is your OS) and then start doing all that setting stuff you do with any new computer. You can not get the same performance computer for anywhere near the price with an off the shelf computer. It's custom built according to your desires. Just pick a base "starter" machine and then go to customize and buy. Experiment with different hardware concentrating on the important stuff (like CPU, GPU, memory ect.........remember the high performance video cards need high wattage power supplies. 600 watts should do you unless you get two video cards). Another place that looks good too but I've not tried them is http://www.portatech.com/catalog/products.asp?id=1239&gclid=CKPk-KzXn7QCFUdxQgodRxIANw Do the same thing......pick a base machine and customize. The customization software for Portatech is a little easier to use since, according to what you change or add, it gives recommendations. The only thing about that is that some of recommendations might be a little over the top (price wise). The total cost for the work-ups I did a few days ago were pretty much the same. I know Micro Magic is reliable and there service is excellent.......but no experience with Portatech (I'm sure they are good too....they ain't fly by nights).

It's a mid-range graphics adapter which means it will probably run SL fairly well for most purposes.........high settings with a compromise on texture lag would be expected. Shadows is going to give that card fits.....I think you are going to be disappointed running that feature. Not very many desktops that are not pretty high end (gaming rigs or very close) can run shadows without significant texture issues........and even fewer laptops. To get a laptop that will run SL at high and shadows you're going to have to lay out some substanial USD ($1500 would not surprise me for a laptop that barely runs shadows). http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-7520G.71728.0.html

And to take it a step further you don't need your surroundings to rezz at all if all you are doing is inventory stuff.......though if you set the bandwidth low before your inventory loads that might cause headaches. But, no matter what you don't need to have your draw distance set to 256 meters either......64 should be fine.

Organizing your inventory is going to take time in-world....that will increase your bandwidth usage (just being in-world requires data sent back and forth from and to your computer). But the actual "moving" of files around in your inventory will not use up much at all..........probably none, actually.

The numbers you stated are really sort of confusing........and conflicting. What I read is that your frame rate is decent (30 FPS is pretty good), but the bandwidth and ping are horrendous. I assume that "6" is 6 kbps (6,000 bits per second) and that speed is much too slow to maintain a reliable connection to the servers (I would guess you get a lot of disconnects). And a ping of 800 ms is showing it takes over 1/2 of a full second for data to reach your computer (8/10 or 4/5 of a second). Both those numbers make me wonder how you maintain a connection to the servers at all. There's something wrong with either the sim you are experiencing this problem on or your coonection to the servers (that can be your computer, your modem/router, your ISP, the Internet proper). You can't do anything about the Internet and your ISP is the only one who can do anything about a problem in that part of the connection (you'll have to call them). If the problem is on the sim then you can request a sim restart. For a private sim (region) contact the owner or administrator). For a mainland sim you need to contact LL via a support ticket (or, if you are premium, you can contact Live Chat). And if the problem is on your end you will have to fix it. The first step I would recommend is to reboot your modem (and router if you have one). It's simple to do......unplug from the electrical source and wait for 3 to 5 minutes then plug back in. Once the lights settle to the normal blinking routine reboot your computer......try SL again. If you are using a wireless connection, change to a wired connection using a Cat 5e Ethernet cable.

The poster who made the claim that he has 2 690's in his computer has made numerous outrageous claims in the past. His credibility with me is next to non-existant. No one in their right mind would install 2 $1000 cards in a computer unless they knew what those cards are going to do for them..........and this poster has shown me that he doesn't know a thing about what it takes to render the simplist of scenes. And make a note..........I'm no expert by anyone's definition. All I know is what I've learned by reading (both here on the forums and Internet research), experience (by building my own machines), and a hefty dose of common sense.

Any object (or texture) in SL is dynamic as you say. The server code sends the data to your viewer that is within your viewing distance set in preferences with the focus on what is directly within the viewing angle........but all the data is in the pipeline or has been cached to your computer's viewer cache file. Stand still and if nothing changed then everything is static. Turn your camera view or turn your avatar, walk, fly or otherwise do something the change position the content becomes dynamic......it changes due to someone physically changing texture, moving the object (scripts can do that) or you simply moved to another spot where what you see is now different from what you saw before the changes happened. In a video game where all that content you see on the monitor is stored on your hard drive and that content is set in stone about what it contains (for a cube it has 6, and only 6, potential textures).........that will not change until some game update is done and the textures are changed (you don't do that on the fly as you do in SL). In SL nothing is set in stone........it is all subject to change at any time (unpredictable) so the content has to be constantly checked for any changes (wait a full minute, or even 5 seconds, can product some very irritating lag issues). Just because it hasn't changed in a year does not mean the servers can just assume it won't change in the next second. There is no predictability for the content like in a video game.....it's impossible due to the design of SL. It's also what makes SL unique in the area of content (besides it being user created). If you give it much thought, it's pretty amazing that SL works at all. People seem to think it's all pretty mundane and easy to fix something like lag. If you visit some of the Open Sim grids I think you might see that those grids are having issues that SL experienced a few years ago..........and they got a head start with the reverse engineered server code they started out with. It's complicated. And it's so much better than just a year or so ago. You should have seen it in 2005......but we loved it for the lag, worn prims shoved up your backside, avatar folded in half, the "missing image" skin, and the frumpy little female runt of an avatar (named "Ruth").

What happens when you wear a posing stand? I have a few dozen in my inventory and might give it a try........if it's fun.

To tell you the truth (and I think you know this as well as do) SL would probably be "laggy" even on the superous of the super computers. It's the unoptimized content that fills the Second Life grid. As long as Linden Lab allows users to create content for SL it's going to be slower than any other 3D environment in existance. Now, if LL decided to no longer allow user content, and removed all the existing user created content (which is starting from scratch because 99.9% of everthing that makes SL what it is would have to be removed and replaced) Second Life would no longer be Second Life.......just some weird online video game without a purpose to exist. How many people would use a game like that? You wouldn't, I wouldn't, and niether would 99.9% of the users. I'm sure you know that....but if you don't then I really wonder about the reason you're still here. I've read your comments so many times and every time you say the same things over and over again....each time it shows absolute ignorance on your part about what the heck you are talking about (where I come from, most people would call that stupidity). PS.......... A GTX 690 card is a $1000 video card. And you have 2? With your knowledge of computers I highly doubt that.