[sldev] Re: OS-SL Development Issues (was Upcoming viewer releases)

[Kelly Linden]

Dale Glass wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 10:29:02AM -0500, Argent Stonecutter wrote:
>   
>> But *right now* what we have in SL groups isn't usable for this kind  
>> of collaboration. Mailing lists are. SL is good for virtual face to  
>> face, but it's not for discussions like this, and I'm not sure that  
>> even with all of the above it should be.
>>     
> But I wasn't talking about the mailing list, I was talking about IRC.
> Although a newsgroup in SL would be nice to have.
>
> My point is: SL group IM is pretty much identical to IRC. In fact in
> some respects, IMO much better. Excepting the horrible performance we're
> having lately, of course.
>
> So why add the need to run an extra program and make people have to keep
> up with what's going there when the functionality already present in SL
> could be used instead?
>
>   
I disagree.  In bullet form to be more easily refuted:
* When developing SL especially, running a *second* instance of the
viewer for communication is non trivial load.  "Lite" clients off set
this somewhat, currently in exchange for some amount of complexity and
robustness.  IRC clients have been around for well over a decade while
lite SL clients have been around less than a year (I think).

* Forced chat join.  When anyone sends an IM to a group in SL it forces
every member to join the chat.  I would rather specifically choose which
chats to join and when, and only receive the messages for those chats I
already have open.

* Name and keyword notification.  I rely heavily in IRC on the visual
indicators (bouncing dock, highlighted text) when someone mentions my name.

* Performance and reliability (already mentioned)

It isn't far from competing, but I don't think it is 'pretty much
identical'.  :)

 - Kelly
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070829/ba041ba5/attachment-0001.htm