[sldev] Cache politics: performance vs obfuscation

[Loom]

On 11/06/2008, Matthew Underwood <sakkaku at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Loom <loom at loomiverse.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/06/2008, Ann Otoole <missannotoole at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Let us ensure we have the priorities straight.
> >> With Time Warner and other cable modem service providers preparing to
> >> implement bytes transferred caps it is imperative that the cache
> operation
> >> overall be improved to ensure there is no repetitive downloading of
> bytes.
> >>
> >> It simply will not matter if the bytes are obfuscated if the population
> of
> >> Secondlife is gutted by a large scale *perceived inability* to afford to
> >> participate.
> >>
> >> Save SL first. Then worry about the rest.
> >> If SL dies because of consumers *not being aware of their choices in
> >> service providers* then nothing really matters does it?
> >
> > I realise that you have used the word "perceived" in there but I would
> like
> > to suggest that usage caps are not going to kill secondlife.
> >
> > Personally, I don't agree with the idea of usage caps, however in
> Australia
> > we have lived with them for quite a while.
> >
> > From the march 2008 economic stats, there were 12,245 active Australian
> > users or about 0.057% of the population, who clocked up an average of 47
> > hours each - using usage capped internet connections.
> >
> > Compare that with the US where 194,899 active users (0.064% of the
> > population) clocked up an average of 59 hours each.
> >
> > At worst, SL may take a hit in usage, but suggesting that it will die is
> > imho an extreme view which is more in the line of fearmongering than
> > rational analysis.
> >
> > Loom
>
>
> The idea is to plan ahead to avoid running full on into a wall.  There
> is no point in bickering over weather or not people are able to play
> SL, it is to realize that people ARE capped and MAY be impaired by SL.
>   Why not improve the caching such that the asset servers are hammered
> less, people have to use less bandwidth and therefor have a more
> enjoyable experience.
>
> No argument there, I'm simply point out that an "OMG usage caps will kill
SL" attitude is not necessarliy a reasonable stance to take.

A simple and I believe strong argument for both better cache and texture
decoding code is that it has to be faster than downloading an asset from
somewhere else on the internet every single time it is needed.  The fatser
the code, the better the SL experience for anyone.  In a sense, the paranoia
about caps being introduced in the US will potentially make SL better for
everyone if it means that cache performance is improved.

Loom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20080611/0a205fab/attachment.htm