Friday, 3 February 2012

Conspiracy theories or just passing time..


So mooching about SL and watching its slow decay into obscurity, which is entertaining in its own right.
What complete and utter dogshit the current viewer is..  strange I really can't think of much else to say about it.

OK I just thought of something really fun I will ask a seemingly simple question and you guys try to come up with the most insightful ( Not necessarily the most obvious) response. 

Why did Linden Lab Opensource the client code? 

Now extra brownie points for the most outlandish ( and probably closest to the truth response ) 

Love KL 

26 comments:

  1. Seriously? You didn't get crowd funded so now SL is fading away and the best you can think up to post is how shit the viewer is.

    We're all doing fine btw, Love SL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No one gives a shit about the viewer now answer the question dammit

      Delete
    2. The only viewer i ever give a damm for was KV.... And will use it until LL kill it then i may move to opensim definitively.

      Delete
    3. *facepalm* kill the troll please...

      I have been on SL since the beta, and yes SL is far less atractive now than before it look "empty" now, i have known it growing with people and idea.
      Despite i love SL too, SL is slowy fading out and it is not only KL who say it, look at all forum about it.

      KL is no more viewer developper (only for it own, as i am), just a poster.
      So this is not about "crowfunder" or KL viewer no more.

      Sooo: Out of subject

      Delete
  2. Sorry, but despite of the graphics changes and some improvements and features from others viewers, Kirsten Viewer was same or even worse than the original SL2. I use Kirsten viewer just for the graphics, but never for the UI wich werent so good at all. Just like a modfied version of SL2 but not too different at all. I even get to manage better SL2 while testing the beta mesh.
    The actual viewer (SL3), is far from perfect and have some things I really dislike. But is a way very customizable, wich isnt bad at all.
    If LL did the viewer Open Source was to make able to users to expand the viewer in a more fast way. Its kinda like let others to do your job, then you take note and import others ideas to your viewer. That kinda sound unfair, but isnt if at the end the ones to get benefits of it is the end user.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I give you a C- for effort, and no opensourcing or the reasons for it were Nothing to do with others doing code for nothing. What was the REAL motive behind the move...

      Delete
  3. I have a good system but just cant run the beta or released LL viewer it crashes after 10 minutes! Now i have the advantage of KL sitting next to me so we can have a look IF my system has the fault but it does not (he build my pc). How about others who are not technical in any way, or new residents who dont even know about 3rd party viewers?
    There is nothing wrong with the UI of the viewer, it feels good and if you are used to V2 you adapt in a flash to it. Its just too crashy for me.....

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'll take a stab at the question. I think that the reason LL made the code Open Source is so they could harvest the talent of 3rd party developers for free to create a better viewer. As a side benefit, it makes it look like they are being up front by make the code behind the viewer available for all to see.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have just read the other replies and noticed that a similar suggestion only rated a C-. So, I'm thinking I must be wrong in my guess at the reason behind making the client code open source.

      Ok, here is another thought. Licensing/copyright/royalty type issues with maybe some tie in to global distribution?

      If that isn't it, then maybe lack of forethought, or oversight?

      Yep, I'm grasping at straws now. I give in. I've not had much time to rub elbows with the Lindens so I curtsey to Kirstenlee in hopes that knowledge and wisdom will be shared with the humble followers.

      Delete
  5. Think more from a business perspective perhaps.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ok, here are some ideas, feel free to shoot them all down.

    - Developers word of mouth advertising?
    - Invoke the feeling of community involvement "Your world, Your viewer"?
    - Trust us, we have nothing to hide?
    - Psychic told them to do it?
    - Some how/way this reduces cost/liability?

    /me shrugs

    ReplyDelete
  7. B+ for the Psychic theory, not reducing cost / liability but reducing .... XXX :D

    ReplyDelete
  8. Reducing is a key? How about reducing negative karma in Philip Rosedale's life?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Kewl answer perhaps in a way it may have been, Phil Rosedale is a nice chap and certainly no fool when it comes to these matters. Consider the possible reason was to reduce competition? now before you shoot that idea down just think about whats occurred in the past, and the idea may not sound so outlandish.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I certainly wouldn't have picked 'reducing competition' as a reason, but with some effort I can see that as a possible reason.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am not saying that its 100% cast iron, but the idea is certainly not without some merit. Think what would have occurred if the viewer remained closed and the protocol had been reverse engineered without any LL input, competitors would have from the start be forced to create clients. As it was LL worked with opensim etc up to a point until it became not within the best interests to continue then things like cross grid TP dissapear up in smoke.. the idea that the client was opensourced too keep possible rivals busy chasing tails is not beyond the realms.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Speaking of cross grid, I thought about the advantages of open sourcing the sim software. The virtual worlds would be similar if not identical in capabilities, so the end user could easily transverse the virtual worlds if they were connected to a common grid with little to no learning curve. Of course there are two problems there, IP rights are not so diligently protected on other grids and the cost of SL tiers compared to open sim tiers is vastly out of proportion and land owning avatars would be jumping ship in droves if they could just take their inventory with them. That is one of the reasons I don't care to visit the other open sims, as all the time I spent getting 'me' to look the way I do is totally lost on an open sim and all my purchases can't travel with me. It's like having an out of body experience, very creepy. It's a good business model until you hit those snags, and I can understand why SL stopped their involvement in OpenSim.

    ReplyDelete
  13. A wise man once told me that he did not care to see LL server code as it was probably as crap as opensim , and that the only thing that was worth anything was probably the script engine that was gold.. server software pfft no biggy. LL may yet opensource the serverside if they can corner some exclusives like economy, or as the future suggests they start producing other products :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. SL is less and less populated by premium user, mainland are less and less populated (and suffer of lag much more than sim), so there is less incoming $ but running cost stay the same.
    to be "IN" you must make your product evolve.

    when you are only business man as LL OpenSource the client code is nice to:
    -push client where you couldn't event think of it without spending a penny :)
    -make economy by reducing own support (as it is 3rd party now :) )
    -keep your current basis of user with (fake) new stuff :D

    As all in the world it is all about the $ (not L$ of course).

    by the way there was grid crossing viewer (tp from SL to other grid in and out) already, but there is now issues

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... and i forget: it permit to correct bug without spending money :D
      as dolphin and firestorm do with V3 lol

      Delete
  15. Hi Kirsten, Do you still have that blog post you did about the best graphic cards for SL? Looking all over and can't find it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If you are talking about "Kirstens GPU Awards for 2011!", I saved a copy of that blog and emailed it to my self as I eventually plan on getting a more worthy computer.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Why they open sourced the code... I think it was purely to get some viral enthusiasm from the geeks. Frankly, there was very little to no real use of the code from the TPV projects and it looked like Snowglobe etc. were minimally participated in. Sure the code was OSS, but the development model was structured in a proprietary fashion. The other possibility was along similar lines pertaining to the viral ability of geeks, and that is that it helps to assure the enthusiastic Linux users keep working viewers for their various distributions... thus making LL look Linux friendly and reducing their costs for Linux (BSD, etc.) support.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which reminds me, we actually have several RPM viewers in our software.opensuse.org site. You can find Dolphin, Phoenix, and others there available for openSUSE.

      Delete
  18. It was a lot simpler than all of you have made it out to be. The reason behind open-sourcing the viewer was to make it the standard by which all others would follow. Look at the viewers that OpenSim has now...all of them based off of Linden Labs work. They created exactly what they wanted: a standard, a legend.
    They wanted to become the Microsoft/IBM/Apple/Google/Facebook of the 3D internet, plain and simple.

    To my knowledge, only one company saw the writing on the wall and broke away from LL-centric platform and viewer technology - RealXtend - with their all new Tundra 2 platform.

    I have been trying to drum up support for someone to make an OpenSim compatible version of the Tundra viewer (which, due to it modular design, the RealXtend devs think is very do-able but are a bit too focused on their own projects to work on it themselves much, but seem willing to help with it) so that there will be an alternative to LL-centric ones.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Well, as time goes on, I learn more things,such as...RealXtend's Tundra 2 Platform is just that, a platform, not a grid, like SL or OpenSim. Much like OpenCobalt, OpenWonderland, and Sirikata are just platforms. They all could be used to start a new grid but they are mostly designed, it seems, to be platforms for individual companies to use for in-house networks or just a virtual space for something like a conference.

    Meanwhile, I've noticed some open-sourced MMORPG's platforms like Worldforge and Ryzom Core..all with their own viewers. This leads me to believe that nearly any of them could be modified to become a non-SL centric basis for an OpenSim viewer. They all seem to use many of the same dependencies, and languages in their coding. Is this correct ?

    ReplyDelete