Day: June 9, 2010

This popped its head up today – and is now being reported on in the blogrum. And it sent some familiar alarm bells clanging.

The 30% staffing reductions aren’t surprising – worrying yes, but not surprising – given the recent high degree of staff “bleed” right across all levels of the organisation, as anyone who track these things will be only too aware.

The two core elements of the announcement that have everyone a-lather are cited together: First, the company aims to create a browser-based virtual world experience, eliminating the need to download software. Secondly, Linden Lab will look to extend the Second Life experience into popular social networks.

Both statements are indeed worrying on a first read. But are they indicative of anything that traumatic? I’m actually going to remain somewhat positive on both at this point – although with the caveat that this just could finally be the tip of the iceberg breaking the surface.

First off, the company aims to create a browser-based virtual word experience, eliminating the need to download software. Note the emphasis. This is not saying that Linden Lab are eliminating downloadable viewers (such as TPVs or the new Viewer 2). Rather, it is stating they are looking to develop the means to access Second Life through means that do not require people to download dedicated software in order to access the world if they themselves do not wish to.

This is  an important distinction; one I would respectfully suggest those already rending their garments would well to consider. Far from forcing everyone to move to some kind of browser-based means of accessing Second Life, this statement suggests that LL will be developing such a mode of access to work alongside the existing Viewer iterations.

Why do this? Simply because there are doubtless many people who are put off from using Second Life simply because it does require them to download, install and maintain a local client – and like it or not, there is a huge potential audience for Second Life out there who a) are not games players; and / or b) are dubious about downloading software who might very well leap at the opportunity to at least try this wonderful “new” medium if it can be accessed directly from their favourite web browser.

Of course, this does open the debate as to exactly what their in-world experience would be, whether they’d be able to create rich content through the browser (or browser applet?), etc., – but if it can be done, and achieve a further influx of users who can at least explore and potential invest in SL monetarily – that could be a very good thing.

And if the world can be made to function as it does now, but through a browser interface, is that such a bad thing? As long as we can readily access the tools we need to interact, to build, to play, to do business, etc., without having to mentally pretzel our thinking processes or risk carpel tunnel syndrome attempting to defeat an interface better suited to someone with four tentacles and three eyes – then surely moving the interface to the web might at some point benefit us all. (I readily and freely admit that this particular *if* is a whopper, so don’t beat me up about it, as I for one am actually not holding my breath on it.)

Further, browser-based access likely equally applies to mobile devices. Again, LL haven’t exactly hidden the desire to make SL accessible from such devices in some dank cupboard under the proverbial staircase to the basement. While SLIM may have gone (and the dressing-up of its departure the butt of deserved jokes) – the fact is there were and are better tools available from TPVs to access SL via mobile devices and indeed, there is something of a demand for such tools. Ergo, it makes perfect sense for LL to start looking to develop tools for themselves – or at least in cooperation with others (Judy Wade’s Hands-On, anyone?).

Of course, there could be some madcap desire to simply do away with the Viewer completely; but when one steps back an looks at things objectively, such a move wouldn’t make sense. Not yet. LL have made a massive investment in Viewer 2. I’m not saying they got it right – but it is an investment, and I cannot see them simply throwing it over the parapet. And if rich content is not on the cards (as in all the speculation that they wish to reduce SL to a simplistic web-based “world”) – why all the effort to finally get full mesh support up and running, etc?

So, while it is true this goal needs to be looked at cautiously, I really don’t think it is indicative that LL are planning something overly “nasty”.

Which brings me to Linden Lab will look to extend the Second Life experience into popular social networks. Again, why all the wailing? This is hardly new. Linking SL to social network environments has been on the card since last year. Am I in favour? No, not entirely; not at all if it means that SL is going to be steadily sanitised and watered down to the point where it is a pale. bland shadow of its former self.

But again, I don’t think that is what is meant here. Mark Kingdon is already on record as stating (several times each) that a) social network environments again offer a potentially massive audience for SL and the means to both increase user levels and user involvement in SL. He’s also made it clear that links with social networking sites will not automatically lead to the “outing” of human identities behind avatars; nor will it require the loss of anonymity for those who do not wish it. So again, while I may not like it, so long as it doesn’t infringe on the freedoms we all take for granted within SL – I really don’t see the point of getting worked up about it. And I’ve yet to see anything from the likes of Kingdon himself that suggests any of the nightmare scenarios of avatar outing, etc., are anything more than speculation.

This move will continue to be the subject of much debate for a while to come. And while I may well be proven wrong down the road, right now I don’t feel it is the Portent of Doom some are claiming. What, to me at least, is of greater interest is whether the two stated goals of the release (browser-based option for accessing SL and links with social networks) justify the degree of change  / cutbacks that are being implied within the announcement.

As I said earlier, staff cutbacks have been going on for the last two or three months with both notables and not-so-notables vanishing, seemingly without replacement. Whether the mentioned figure of 30% includes those already gone or not is unclear (and this announcement was coupled with the departure of several more “leading Lindens” – including none other than the former head of commerce, Pink Linden). BUT…”strategic restructures” and “staffing cutbacks”, however they are dressed up, tend to be indicative of one things no matter what business one is in: the need to save money. Fast.

If fiscal issues should lie (in part) behind staff cutbacks, the closure of the Singapore office, the apparent re-trenchment away from Europe at the moment; then one has to ask is it because LL are, like everyone else, feeling the economic pinch. Or is it because of something possibly deeper within the organisation that may be in part connected to why the senior management don’t always appear to understand their own customers.

So I do indeed wonder if there is more going on here than meets the eye – although not in the way others might be questioning things.

ADDNDUM

After writing this, the official word finally popped up in the LL blog for me….