SL Target Audience (was RE: [sldev] branches/shadow-draft missingllrender.cpp)

[Vex Streeter]

Soft wrote:
> The Lab doesn't have every combination of hardware out there, and so
> far as I know WL performs similar to - or better than - previous
> viewers on the hardware we do have. Some specific benchmarks and test
> scenarios identifying specific rendering problems on hardware we don't
> have are guaranteed to help more than talking a graphics heavyweight
> off of heavyweight graphics work.
>   
A big part of the issue is, IMHO, a combination of marketing and UI 
choices leading to the generally false impression that WL is slower.  In 
particular, it might have been better to cause the WL upgrade to retain 
the same quality settings as the pre-WL viewer installs, and allow users 
to bump up their quality manually.  Instead, most users perceived a 
significant frame rate drop with similar *sounding* settings,  even if 
their visual quality dramatically improved.