On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:24:48 -0700, Yoz Grahame wrote: > On 17 August 2010 02:44, Henri Beauchamp <sl...@free.fr> wrote: > > > On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 19:27:34 -0700, Yoz Grahame wrote: > > > > > Linden Lab has the final say in what goes into the Linden Lab viewer. A > > > third-party viewer team has the final say in what goes into their viewer. > > > > Indeed, but if LL is so close-minded as to reject any change to the UI > > that would allow v1 lovers to adopt v2, then there is no chance that > > any v1 developer will migrate to the v2 code base... > > > > That's not what I meant, and if I gave that impression, I apologise. > > Requests for well-specified elements of the v1.x UI, backed up by reasoned > arguments, are something we can put in the backlog for discussion. Requests > for either reverting the entire v2.x UI to that of v1.x, or keeping both > running in parallel, will not make it into the backlog; firstly because > neither is feasible for us, and secondly because such a request in no way > helps us to focus on what the specific UI problems are.
I tend to disagree strongly with the "non-feasability" of a dual-fold UI, especially when taken, element per element. As an example, I could take the pie menu: someone in this list (Aidan Thornton) gave damned good reasons for reverting the v2 UI context menus on avatars and objects to pie menus, which I would fully second. It is *perfectly* possible to let the user choose between both via an UI setting that when changed would take effect after a viewer restart (I implemented such settings for other UI elements in the Cool VL Viewer, so I know first hand what I'm speaking about here): this would make everyone happy and could be contributed to Snowtorm code base by open source developers. Now, think about your stance: if you keep refusing such changes on the pretext it's "not feasible", here is what will happen: - TPV developers will first stay with the v1.23/SG v1 viewer code base and will keep producing backport patches for the few new features of v2 that are necessary or useful to keep up using SL. To give you a little idea of how long this statu quo could last, I'll simply cite my own experience with the v1.19 code base: I could maintain it from november 2007 to this year, and only decided this year that I'll stop maintaining it (for the backports become more and more difficult and time consuming). QUESTION: Do you want to delay the contributions to Snowstorm by TPV developers by 2 years ? Sure, you might still be able to incorporate some of the new features developed in TPVs, but you will have to do it *yourself*, because no TPV developer will bother submiting patches for Snowstorm during this period ! - TPV developers will then finally (and reluctantly) migrate to the v2 code base and will concentrate their efforts on reverting all UI elements they know their users dislike (or simply can't accept !), which will hamper their ability to produce new useful features by consuming their time on things that could have been changed earlier (by spending the time they "lost" producing backports to implement the UI switches in Snowstorm instead). Also, they will change the UI in a way that doesn't preserve the v2 way of doing things, since I don't see anyone (but for Lindens...) bothering with something that 80% of the SL user base rejects. Instead of having the UI changes implemented as options in Snowstorm, you will then end up with radical and incompatible changes implemented in TPVs and as many forked v2 viewers that will keep attracting like magnets SL users, making Snowstorm look like the ugly duck. QUESTION: do you think it is at all producive ? For LL ? For us, OS developers ? The answer to the latter is "no, but we won't have a choice, it's LL's fault !". > There have been several hundred UI changes between 1.23 and 2.1.1, ranging > from the creation of the sidebar to individual checkbox relocation. Many of > those came from resident feedback, Oh ?... Where are the polls about the changes you made, behind the scene ? In fact this "resident feedback" is simply the result of a ridiculous minority of very vocal residents who took the time to give you *their* feedback. Don't you see the *REAL* feedback of your *CUTSOMERS BASE* as a *WHOLE* ?... just LOOK at the v2 usage stats on the grid, damned it, and stop the corporate lies, *pretty* please ! I can understand that LL is pissed off that the amount of money and time they spent in viewer 2 results in the end in 80% of their customers rejecting it, but I (and with me, 80% of the residents) *can't* understand your suicidal stance which consists on trying to force the new UI of viewer 2 down everyone's throat ! > or from many hours of user experience testing. Are you speaking about the closed beta testers who now complain that their feedback wasn't listened to and even less taken into account ? And how did you choose these few beta-testers ?... How would they represent the wide range of the SL user base anyway ? > If you want any of them reversed or changed, it's not unreasonable > that we require specifics and reasoning before we commit to the work. > Once you supply that, we can weigh up the pros and cons, maybe open > the question up to more feedback, and then make a decision. Such specifics were supplied COUNTLESS times via numerous channels, but LL keeps having the autistic behaviour it showed for now over 3 years... This is hopeless. :-( > We may, after consideration, ultimately decide against your suggestion. Yes, this is in fact what you are planing to do anyway. It's easier to sing "viewer 2 is marvellous" loud enough not to hear the complaints than to fix what was broken. I sincerely hope for you that you will not be part of the next 30% of the Lindens that will be fired in 2011 because of LL's decline... At least you seem ready to discuss about serious matters, so I'd prefer still having you around in 2011... > It's our right as the project owners. Some seem to interpret disagreement > as ignoring feedback. This is not the case, and our push for a more open > development process relies on participants being open to occasionally losing > arguments. We have far better things to do than spend weeks on a project > that's all about opening ourselves to more feedback purely so we can ignore > it. (Some might see it as a demented kind of fun for the first few hours > until the beer runs out, but we're not into those kinds of parties.) Frankly, I'd hope that you *will* finally turn those words into actual actions, because I (and many others with me) start feeling desesperate will LL's stubborness. In your turn, ask yourself why people such as myself are posting such desperate (and yes, vehement) calls for LL's attention on such primordial subjects as the viewer UI, the policies, the coming changes (teens on the grid, oh please, mercy ! Noooooooo !), etc... We spend significant part of our free time to produce code, to give feedback, to try and make SL better for *us all*, and we would LOVE to do it in harmony with LL. But instead, we have to quite literaly *fight* and *scream* to try and make ourselves heard, while the facts and statistics prove *we* are right and LL is wrong. SL has been on the down slope since the last quarter of 2007 (the "last logged in 60 days" figure on the login screen peaked at around 1 800 000 in 2007 and stayed below 1 500 000 ever since the end of 2007, under 1 400 000 right now, and as a merchant in SL, the end of 2007 was also the start of the correlated decline of my own incomes, and accelerated further by the adoption of the broken search engine, by the adult segregation policy, etc, to become what it is now: a quarter of the revenues I had in 2007 while I got 4 times more products for sale !), and this largely because of HUGE strategic mistakes, that MANY residents warned LL upon, just to be superbly ignored, their valid arguments wiped off disdainfully with the back of LL's hand with a "we, LL, know better because we are a multi-million dollar business". Know, I could sing in my turn "I told you the new groups architecture is broken and should be reverted back to what it was till you find a solution", "I told you the new search engine is broken and ruining many SL businesses", "I told you the adult segregation would make the user base and businesses go further down", because, you know... yes, I *did* tell you... But I don't want to tell you in a year or so, "I told you Snowstorm would be a failure" ! PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE, do NOT commit yet another mistake when you are SO CLOSE to doing "THE RIGHT THING" ! YES, Snowstorm is a GREAT opportunity, but please, don't stop in the middle of the river and let yourself swept by the stream: you NEED to go just a couple LITTLE steps farther to reach the bank of the Open Source Paradise. These steps are simply: - DO NOT HOLD PREJUDICE ABOUT PROPOSED UI CHANGES, even if it means "going backwards": you, LL do know better than us about the grid architecture and protocols, but we know better than you when it comes to the UI, because unlike you, WE ARE your user base, WE ARE the ones ACTUALLY using the viewer !!! - DO NOT SEGREGATE SUBMISSIONS: since you made Snowstorm LGPL, there is now *no more need* for the FLOSS exception and for contribution agreements (since you can take a snapshot of the Open Source viewer at anytime and incorporate them to your own closed source viewer, and this without any LGPL contributor additional permission). This will bring you a whole wealth of really useful patches (and I'm not speaking about the UI, here, but about many new features that were developed for TPVs) without forcing the OS developers to choose between endangering their real life by giving up privacy threatening details in a CA or not being able to contribute to Snowstorm. > Certainly, we've already had a large amount of feedback about what users > like and dislike. Much of the negative feedback, when reduced to actionable > specifics, focuses on a small number of high-profile changes; for example, > the sidebar. When examined further, many of the problems are around certain > aspects of those changes rather than the changes themselves; for example, > the sidebar's modality and non-detachability rather than its entire > existence. In all honesty, take every reproach done to the side bar, such as (non- exhaustive list): - The tools in the side bar are modal. - The tools in the side bar don't have a floater equivalent any more that I can move on the screen and resize like I want. - The tools in the side bar contain less info than what was available with the old floaters at a singe glance (the friends list, for example) - It eats up half of the window. - It prevents keeping some floater open on the surface that it eats up when open (the camera and movement controls, for example) since the floater are kept over it. - The side bar icons would be better replaced by text to be made more explicit... In fact, all icons in the side bar would be better replaced by buttons in the tool bar. - It shrinks down the chat input line when opened. - Add your own here... Now, take the solutions to address each of these reproachs. What do you think is the smallest common multiplier ? It's: get rid of the side bar altogether (or make it optional) ! > When focused in this way, the work required to give our mainline viewer far > wider approval becomes much more manageable than reverting the entire UI. > Some of it may involve bringing back aspects of v1, or coming up with > something new, or making certain elements more configurable, or simply > choosing better defaults. There's no single answer, but there is a single > goal: we want to make something that's better for everyone than anything > we've made before. The problem being (seconded by the very fact 80% of SL users don't want to use viewer v2): for now, the viewer 2 UI is about the worst thing LL ever produced... Facts do sound blunt, by they are facts and even LL cannot deny them. But as long as you will accept ammending (and yes, it might well mean reverting in some cases) the UI, there is still some hope we can end up with a consensual (if not perfect) viewer. > On a related note, Esbee's put up the backlog: > https://spreadsheets2.google.com/ccc?key=tCVGlO5ndR_oyrfKEC9CxKA&hl=en#gid=5 > If you think we've been ignoring negative feedback, please take a look. And > gosh, what's that at the very top? Question being: how can I (or any other resident) add my own feedback to this ????? Regards, Henri. _______________________________________________ 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
