Category: SL Tech

Rising from the ashes

Posted on by Inara Pey

As Phox/Fractured leads those who listen into self-immolation, a new Viewer rises from the ashes in the form of Phoenix.

As Jessica Lyon announced:

My name is Jessica Lyon. My goal during my time with the Emerald Project, was always to give the users what they want. That goal has never and will never change. I’m very happy to announce, it continues…

A few days ago, I assembled a team of developers to work on a new viewer. Some who were originally Emerald developers, some who were not. All are respected reputable residents in the SecondLife Community. The goal was simple, to provide users with what they want and do it transparently.

I’m am very proud to announce the launch of the Phoenix Viewer. This project, has started off simple, with it’s initial release of a safe clone of the Emerald viewer. Users want Emerald features, you shall have them. We have big plans to expand to the Snowstorm project as well. We have already applied for the TPVD, to which we have no doubt we will be accepted in a timely fashion. We have already started making in world groups for support, (Phoenix Viewer Support), beta testing etc. There is much more to do… however…

This Viewer is ready for use by you, right now!

For this project, I insist on, and everyone on this team insists on 100% public transparency in EVERYTHING we do. We have already established a public IRC Dev chat, public repo and are working on much much more.

Our developers are; (in alphabetical order), Dakun Flux, Dimentox Travanti, Jessica Lyon, Kitty Barnett, LordGregGreg Back, Techwolf Lupindo, Tonya Souther, Vortex Saito, Wickman Gibbs, with more to come.

Our Lead Developers are: Dimentox Travanti, LordGregGreg Back, Techwolf Lupindo, Tonya Souther.

Ed Merryman will be leading our support team: Aleia Sapphire, bee Baroque,  Damian Zhaoying, Ed Merryman,  Marybeth Oceanlane,  Mindy Spiritor,  Nisa Maverick, PixelProphet Lane,  Toy LaFollette, Vortex Saito, Whirly Fizzle, Wolfspirit Magic.

Our website is still in progress, however we have up the required links.
Downloads.
I am very pleased and excited about this project, and I hope that you will be too.

Sincerely,

Jessica Lyon and the Phoenix Viewer Development Team.
My personal blog: http://jessicalyons.wordpress.com

This is potentially momentous news. Phoenix looks to incorporate some worthy individuals: Jessica, LordGregGreg Back and Kitty Barnett of RLVa fame.

As Jessica’s note explains, this is an initial release, based on “safe” Emerald code. The current iteration lacks many of the options that can already be found in LGG’s Emergence, but doubtless these will come in time as Jessica states. Most interestingly, the group are stating they’ll be looking to work with the Snowstorm project.

Currently, Phoenix is not on the TPV List, but the paperwork has been submitted and there are also some issues around the code repository that need to be resolved – the links don’t currently work (20:00 BST, 3rd Sept). However, for all those worrying about the future – given that, despite what has happened, Emerald did have a highly-effective list of functions – it would appear a Viewer of equal capability is now available.

I, for one, wish it every success and a drama-free future!

Out with the globe, in with the storm

Posted on by Inara Pey

Note: Following this post being published, Esbee Linden made a formal blog on the subject on August 17th

In his address at SLCC 2010, Philip made mention of “standardising” the viewer platform. At the time I was curious as to what this might mean and asked a speculative question or two. Later, during SLCC 2010, Q Linden (whom I hope makes a full recovery from his stroke) and others gave more insight into what is going to be happening, and Oz Linden posted an announcement on the opensource dev list (thanks to Argent Stonecutter for the link).

Q’s opening of the SLCC presentation was somewhat enlightening, in that it confirmed many people’s views that Viewer 2.x proceeded along a development path that was simply far too rapid. In fact he candidly admits that it was developed and rolled out to meet a given schedule, rather than when it was “ready” (in November, for example, a meeting was held in which the “to do” list of outstanding work on the Viewer was cut down to a list of things that could be done in the remaining time frame prior to the release of the Viewer.

He also admits that Linden Lab erred when preparing the ground for Viewer 2, in that they didn’t create sufficient use cases to reflect how the Viewer is actually used in-world (that LL needed to “invent” user types in order to build the use cases in the first place also surprised me. After all, what are we out here, if not users?). The upshot of this is an admission that the overall capabilities of Viewer 2 are too narrowly focused.

This may sound like a “well, duh!” statement – but I think it fair to say that such an admission from the development team is somewhat refreshing. It’s not often the Lab or its employees own up to mistakes, and Q’s comments do add up to a strong admission of  having erred, and a hint that the lesson has been learned internally, “For marketing reasons we felt we wanted to keep it secret and we wanted to release it in a kind-of ‘ta-da!’…I think you won’t be seeing any more of that sort of behaviour from us any more! Yes, I hear the applause, thank you!”

Following this, Esbee went over the new methodology for Viewer development – Project Snowstorm, which has the core aim of rapid, effective deployment of new features and functionality. Essentially, and as hinted at by Philip, this will be achieved through meeting three goals:

  • Weekly, visible progress on the Viewer – which not so much is focused on weekly releases per se (although that is something Philip indicated he’d like to see), but more a case of making the development process more visible too all, including users being able to attend development meetings
  • Improving the user experience – hitting Philip’s requirements of Fast, Easy, Fun (a slogan I *still* loathe, but there you go)
  • Revitalising the open-source community

It is this last point that is the most interesting and – if carried through  – marks a radical change in Viewer development; one that would seem to have many potential benefits – and not just for Linden Lab.

The core of this new approach is that Viewer development will be somewhat streamlined, with LL themselves working on specific elements of the Viewer while leaving things open so that third-party developers can engage directly with the LL team and take on development of a given aspect or function within the Viewer, and developers with existing fixes or functions that could benefit the Viewer can deposit their work with the team for potential integration into the Viewer.

This effectively means the end of Snowglobe, the open source “version” of the Viewer code.  To quote Oz Linden, “The main Linden Viewer is now completely open source…the source code is available on a public repository…NOW!” What is more is that this repository is to be the central “integration repository” where all code from Linden Labs will go prior to integration into the Viewer.

Alongside of this is the re-licensing of the code from GPL to LGPL – which, if I am understanding things correctly, means that it will be both easier to incorporate the Viewer code into other Viewers (I assume those that can be used on OSGrids and the like) and – particularly from LL’s point of view – will make the licensing of the code for use in “closed” third-party Viewers significantly easier, potentially attracting other professional organisations towards developing their own Viewer systems without the “stigma” of being associated with open source code. Again, given LL’s stated desire to drive SL onto more mobile platforms – tools such as the iPhone, Droid, the iPad, etc. – this would seem to be a good move, as it will allow third-party organisations with the expertise LL lacks to develop the kind of functionality such tools will require if people are to use to them to access SL and use it for more than just chat and IM.

It’s not just developers who have the chance to be more directly engaged with Viewer development either. AS Esbee said, users will be able to get involved as well: iterative releases will be available bi-weekly or us to use and feed back upon, and even daily releases, or “project releases” covering specific features under development will be made available and user feedback encouraged.

From a non-technical perspective, this does seem to be a logical approach, and in some respects, it is a shame that, when they opened the Viewer code to the community, LL didn’t show foresight and put these measures in place then. Of course, the devil will be in the details – and there is much that will serve as either proof of the pudding or still needs to be addressed  / clarified. In listening to the presentation, a number of points occurred to me, some of which were echoed by others in the Q&A session.

One issue that springs to mind is who will, in the final analysis, determine what is “right” for integration into the Viewer, and will other agendas overrule the core goals – such as making SL Fast, Easy, Fun? “Linden knows best” has been very much a part of the Lab’s culture and has been seen time and again, particularly with the arbitrary closure of JIRAs or the turning of a deaf ear to valid user requests.  With the best will in the world, cultural behaviour is the hardest thing to fix in an organisation.

An extension of this concern comes down to user input actually being heard and acted upon. Q openly admitted at the start of the presentation that LL erred with Viewer 2 in not creating enough user cases on which to model the viewer. Now they seem to be swinging to the opposition end of the pendulum swing: seeking too much user input. There are – as Q and Esbee acknowledge – many diverse uses for SL, and as such diverse sets of users have diverse needs. Some are going to apposite in their aims, others opposite. How are filters going to be applied to stop all these calls simply swamping Snowstorm with the result that the individual internal dev teams beyond them simply cherry-pick or (again) turn a deaf ear?

So where does this leave the current crop of TPVs? Oz was pretty unequivocal on the matter: the Viewer 1 code base will not be developed any further by Linden Lab (Q also touched on the need to depreciate 1.23 in the future, simply due to security issues). Therefore, with the Viewer 2 code base becoming publicly accessible, the view seems to be that TPVs will be encouraged to continue – as well as give input to the new project – but will be expected to migrate to the Viewer 2 code base.  Certainly, there doesn’t seem a move on hand to proactively “shut down”  TPV development, but it is going to be interesting to see how this moves forward and who engages through Snowstorm as is intended, and who simply continue to work on their own Viewers utilising the now-available Viewer 2 code.

Overall, this move strikes me as positive. *IF* LL can carry through on this with the necessary internal cultural changes and if we all, developers and interested residents alike, engage with Snowstorm and LL constructively, positively and openly on our own part, then there is no reason why this project should give birth to something very worthwhile and which benefits us all.

Emerald: unfortunate developments

Posted on by Inara Pey

I’ve supported Emerald. I’ve been happy to use it for around 18 months. In that time a lot has been made about it being a malicious viewer, with many, many claims going around that it does everything from raiding your L$ balance to spying on your granny while she’s having a bath…and they all remain pretty unsubstantiated. Emerald has also come in for more than its share of people misrepresenting its capabilities (such as making your avatar “invisible” allows you to run around griefing people. If you’ve ever used the “invisible” function, you’ll appreciate how ludicrous these claims are).

However, there comes a time when one is forced to sit up and take notice of what is being said – and that time is when it is being said by one of the Emerald developers.

LordGregGreg Back is not someone I classify as an SL friend or even an acquaintance. Our dealings have always been at a distance, via IMs usually. BUT…throughout the time I’ve been using Emerald, I’ve never found him to be anything less than honest in his dealings with people. It has been because of his involvement (alongside that of Chalice Yao) that I’ve remained an Emerald user. Yes, both at times have had to do *some* verbal acrobatics when being pushed to defend the antics of others, and in doing so have potentially harmed their standing in the eyes of others. But just because they have, does not, and has not meant their efforts and work with regards to Emerald have been anything less than honest.

So when Greg up and publishes his own misgivings about Emerald, I admit I sit up and take notice.

The crux of the matter is the manner in which a .dll is being used – in this case emkdu.dll – which is related to texture loading and which allowed a viewer’s title bar and executable path to be broadcast in an obfuscated manner (and possibly recorded by other in-world devices). Despite promises the issue had been fixed, made to both Greg and Emerald support manager, Jessica Lyon, it wasn’t. Instead, encryption was used to further obfuscate what was going on, and further requests for the code to be cleaned up only increased the degree of encryption being applied.

The worrying this here is that the encryption meant that the code could not longer be properly vetted and verified – Greg’s role in the Emerald team. This, as Greg explains, undermines trust. Encryption  / obfuscation is suggestive of malign intent, whether or not it is in fact the case. So why do it? Probably because the individual responsible cannot help but jerk an immature middle finger at his detractors at the thought of them scrabbling around trying to prove the code is in fact malicious, then giggling himself to sleep at night.

But in doing so, the individual concerned pretty much jabs a finger vertically at the rest of the Emerald team with the result that those with a conscience feel they have no option but to gradually bow out. And this is a shame, as it lessens the value of Emerald while simultaneously enabling a further round of accusations and drama.

More than this, it leads to an undermining of faith in Emerald as held by existing users. After all, one developer is actively seeking to mask what the code is doing from his fellow developer and placing active barriers in the way of ensuring the code is properly verified as “clean” – so why on Earth should any of us continue to trust and use Emerald?

Wishful thinking and Viewer 2

Posted on by Inara Pey

On Monday, NWN confirmed that Tom (T Linden) Hale  had gone from Linden Lab. There was some confusion over this, as (at least for some of us) his in-world Profile (alongside that of Cyn (Linden) Skyberg, also laid-off last week) remained accessible when the likes of Pink Linden’s Profile poofed almost as the news of the lay-offs hit the wires.

Hale’s departure has prompted speculation that Viewer 2.0 is about to go the same way.

All I can say is, guess again, kids.

The basis for the speculation is that Hamlet, in his piece, cites “sources” who suggested a link between Hale’s departure and the “poor performance” of Viewer 2.

Now, whole I’m no great fan of Viewer 2 – I think it was released far to early in its development cycle and with far too many flaws that could have easily been addressed if the developers had been allowed to engage with residents properly and constructively as the Viewer went into the initial “closed Beta”. But, that said, I don’t go along with the idea that the Viewer is going to be scrapped – or even that it is a failure.

The fact of the matter is, it is still far too early to judge the Viewer dispassionately. This is for a number of reasons – some of which I’ve touched on before, but are worth repeating:

  • The viewer was released too early and with to many basic flaws / bugs (the god-awful sidebar behaviour; the myriad of search issues, etc.); as such, it was never going to find favour or popularity among a user base that has time and again proven itself somewhat “anti” change in SL whatever the colour of said change
  • The development / release cycle of Viewer 2 is improving; more to the point the likes of Kirstenlee Cinquetti are demonstrating to LL just what needs to be done to the Viewer 2 user interface to enable it to gain a broader foothold. And Linden Lab is actually listening. The 2.1 release addresses many of the UI shortfalls contained within the initial 2.0 releases and are, in themselves, making Viewer 2 far more user-friendly. What’s more they come on top of changes quickly rolled out in response to the initial “backlash” against other elements of UI functionality, demonstrating the LL are trying to get the balance right. So long as this continues, Viewer 2 will gain wider use
  • The Viewer, together with the New User Experience was intended to be the vanguard of a drive to generate a marked increase in new sign-ups. However, neither can exist in a vacuum – for either to have a major impact on the rate of flow of new users joining SL, they need to be coupled to more aggressive promotion of SL by Linden Lab. This hasn’t really happened. Ergo, both the Viewer and the NUE exist (again, as I’ve said before) in some kind of Costner-esque la-la land of “if you build it, they will come”.

As such, it is hard to see Viewer 2, even the degree of time, effort and money invested in it to date is simply going to vanish as a result of Hale’s departure. Rather the reverse would seem to be the case – as recent blog posts have indicated – the release cycle for Viewer 2 is going to increase, again indicating it is here to stay. I’d also lay odds on it being the foundation for the new “browser-based access” to SL that was announced alongside of the restructuring.

If Hale’s departure was connected in any way with the “poor performance” in Viewer 2’s uptake, I can only assume that it was because he was the one selected to fall on his sword (or tripped in the direction of his sword). Again, we’ve seen very little aggressive marketing from Linden Lab when it comes to getting users through the doors – either utilising Viewer 2 or the New User Experience. Some suggest the total growth in sign-ups since the release of both has been around the 50K, which is not a huge amount given SL’s user retention figures – and much of that influx seems to have been off the back of James Cameron’s Avatar rather than any sustained marketing strategy on the part of Linden Lab.

That there has been no sustained strategy (or any real marketing uptake – when was the last time Catherine (Smith) Linden was in the limelight?) tends to suggest that if Viewer 2’s take-up is already being looked at so critically that a sacrifice was warranted…then one cannot help but roll the word “scapegoat” around in an idle fashion.

Indeed, I’ve often found it interesting that LL have never considered the position of Director of Marketing as being a executive management post.

But to come back to the point: no – whatever the reason for Hale’s departure (including the merging of departments that effectively made his role somewhat redundant), it is not indicative that Viewer 2 is going anywhere other than forward in the immediate future.

What’s so bad about living on the web, eh?

Posted on by Inara Pey

I thought the idea behind the creation of time was to stop everything happening at once? If so, it’s not working for me!

This is probably old news to most of you, as Hamlet has had it over at NWN for a couple of days, but for once I failed to take a peek over there when the restructuring announcement hit the headlines. My thanks to the ever-hunky Ciaran Laval for turning my nose in the right direction…

In his piece, Hamlet not only agrees with the view that LL, in their announcement, in fact mean having a web-based means of accessing SL in addition to the current browser, rather than replacing it; he also cites an example of the same – put together in 2007 by a now-definct (it would seem) UK company called Pelican Crossing.

The browser tool, initially backed by IBM, apparently offered “most of” the functionality found within the Viewer (what was missing is unclear), and therefore would suggest that browser-based access to SL could be both lightweight and workable. Which as has been previously said, shouldn’t be sneezed at.

Pelican Crossing c. 2007 (with thanks to Hamlet Au and New World Notes)

Again, other that having the world-view somewhat reduced, and facing the browser tool and navigation bars, I’m not entirely seeing why people are hating the concept of browser-based access, if it is presented like this: with the necessary functionality to do things.  To me, accessing through a browser (especially if you’ve never downloaded a Viewer) wouldn’t be an issue. And if the “viewer” element could be “popped out” of the browser, even better.

Certainly, there is mileage in offering such an access option, as I’ve already mentioned.

Pelican Crossing may well have gone (or have been sucked into the Big Blue), but if they could do it in 2007….

Viewer 2 – getting there?

Posted on by Inara Pey

Linden Lab have released an “Alpha” of Viewer 2.1.

They’re making progress it seems – calling the release “Alpha” rather than trumpeting it as an “almost ready Beta”. Who sez they don’t listen?!

On a serious note, the new release (which admittedly, I have yet to download and try) brings with it several much-needed improvements – such as the bane of my life, the Sidebar, now “overlaying” the world-view as an option, rather than shunting it rudely off to the left. Why anyone would want the latter option constantly shattering their experience, I’ll never understand; but at least we now have the long-overdue option to get rid of it for something altogether smoother.

They’ve also finally got the message about camera controls – recombining things into a single pane (why, oh why were they ever split-off in the first place?), and they’ve made the bottom button bar somewhat more customisable to meet the needs of experienced users.

All this is very much to the good – although again points to a broken train of thought somewhere along the development trail, as all of these features should have been there from the get-go, and thank heavens for Kirstenlee Cinquetti for demonstrating to LL that all this and more could have been done from the get-go via her (still) infinitely superior S20 viewer.

Viewer 2.1 brings us a step closer to OpenID authentication for SL-related services. About time to.

A novel feature being introduced to Viewer 2.1 is Voice Morphing. Clearly, despite claims that we’ve already clocked up 28+ billion years of chat on Voice, not enough of us are using it. There are many reasons for this – some of which I’ve pointed to in that post.

Voice Morphing is an attempt to resolve some of these issues by providing the means for people to “sound like their avatar should sound” – with a range of robotic, furry and other voices – including the option to sound like a member of the opposite sex.

I have to admit that I’ve avoided Voice in the past in part because I simply don’t want my mental image of the people / creatures I’m interacting with shattered by hearing the real voice behind the avatar. It’s not the only reason I’ve largely steered clear of Voice after some early playing (and using it at a couple of OH meetings in-world), but it is one. As such, I’m going to be curious as to how the morphing tool is viewed / taken up.

On the one hand, I can see it being a lot of fun; on the other, I can seen some trying to use it for drama purposes (anyone using a female avatar and one of the female voices in place of their own must be a guy, for example). On the third hand (yes, I occasionally have Beeblebrox moments) I can see it not making an iota of difference all ways around.

The main reason for presenting the third hand is simply because a) people are slow to change their ways, and in terms of rp, where this has the biggest potential use, if it is not adopted by the many within a particular rp environment, the few won’t bother either; and b) it is, at the end of the day, a subscription service; and while “only” about $3 a month (L$750), given LL’s recent track record, doubtless many will avoid it simply because of the pleasure they’ll have in not giving LL more of their hard-earned  pennies. Especially when the voices are pre-packaged. If you only want a female voice – then it is “only” $3 a month. But if you vary from, say a male gladiator to a sci-fi robot to a furry according to your mood, then you’re looking at $9 a month to give all your forms a voice.

Mind you…I can see the MOTD promotion for Premium Accounts now: “Upgrade and (homes, support, blah, blah)…offset the cost of your in-world Voices with weekly stipends!”

All-in-all, however, the moves being made with Viewer 2.1 are welcome.