I agree, the new UI needs a LOT of work before I consider it mainstream worthy. As was said the old UI was pretty much tailored by developers for developers. This new UI seems to be tailored in the opposite direction making the viewer barely usable for those of us accustomed to the old UI and content developers. The tweaks found at http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Viewer_2_Tweaks definitely improve things, but we really need a middle ground for end users and developers instead of a UI tailored for either extreme.
Ron Festa Virtual Worlds Admin Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY Phone: 732-474-8583 On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Mike Monkowski <monko...@fishkill.ibm.com>wrote: > Except for Merov's contributions, I don't think Snowglobe ever had a > planned direction. The direction was just the sum of the contributions > people made to it. And I expect it will continue that way. If someone > thinks that chat needs to be fixed and they have the time to fix it, > then they probably will. The real question is whether such a > contribution would be accepted. I happen to think it would be dangerous > to reject such a contribution. > > Mike > > Argent Stonecutter wrote: > > Where is Snowglobe 2.0 going with this? Where SHOUDL it go? Should it > > simplify the interface (or allow it to be simplified), restoring the > > sim name and location to the title bar, cleaning up the chat and > > message boxes, and so on? > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges >
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
