SL going down again

Hmmmm, was the incredibly low personal (as opposed to sim fps) fps server-side? I think not... Or the shambolic texture loading? I think not.

The one thing I did notice about 1.7, and again now in 1.10, was that people with low end machines were fairly happy with things. Probably because their expectactions were quite low.

The people who took a hammering more than most were those unfortunate enough to have better specified machines - remember the 'I can't slice and dice a sim without moving any more and I can't move' rant from a certain rental land baron with a 7 series card and a powerful PC?

So, from that point of view it could be called client-side. If so, I really wish LL would post a 'Max supported spec' so people like myself could avoid wasting money on over speced machines that LL doesn't want to support.

Nice try though

I just wanted to say that aside from listed fixed many times Devs fix things they do not list. So in fact they listed only 2 items that were in the update happening today, however I'm pretty sure there's much more undocumented fixes that are in this too that didn't get a mention.

*huggles*
Savonah

Nope - just 'do it rght for a change'

COMMUNICATION...

craptop with Celery? lololol I love it!

I have 512 MB RAM and I don't even have the OPTION to turn shiny on. Never did. Not sure how it is you get to?

coco

It's much better than previous versions on both my Latitude laptop and Dell desktop (once I loaded the latest NVidea drivers).

I have no idea what's wrong with other people's systems, but it works very well for me.

It's a function of your video card, not your RAM.

Ok, so you have a computer made by you or a company, with several different componants all made by different manufacturers, running their own set of drivers, standard drivers, company drivers, 3rd party drivers and the rest - Then you do everything everyone else says to do, and everything else works fine - Then you play SL.

No one ever said being a developer was easy. I think LL are doing "ok", and by the sounds of it quite a few people are really happy with their latest release, great.

I feel sorry for someone like Doc Nielsen (who probably has more money than sense if those specs are right), who can probably play Fear at resolutions sharper than the eye can see, with more AA and FSA and everything else that you can possibly imagine at high and stable speeds. Then they get 15 FPS in SL, which will be comparable to my nearly 5 year old machine.

Then, before they get all those bugs sorted out they release even more complicated bells and whistles. I really wanted to update my machine for SL, but it's so big a mindfield I think I'd have better luck using a magic 8 ball to decide my specs for me. I wish I knew what worked

AMEN Doc. I couldn't believe that was the whole update, though I suspect more may be rolled in that they didn't mention.

Us Mac users are having fits over the new version, which also worked fine in 1.9. And we have many less hardware configs to worry about.

We pay for this??

(Ironically, the windows client works fine on my iMac in Windows. Go figure. That's a 128MB Radeon X1600 btw)

Yup, someone with a high end ATI in a PC commented on their system running really well under 1.10.
So it looks like something in 1.10 has improved the situation with ATI products quite a bit. I never had one, but I heard a lot of people moaning about ATI problems over the last year plus.

With no background info and only limited observations to go on it's difficult to even guess at what's been broken this time, but it's interesting that I was fine in Preview right up until they 'fixed' vertex shaders and the new hardware lighting by crippling most of the options.
That was the point where it all went horribly wrong for me.

At that point the low end users were quite unhappy about vertex shading and lighting. Well, killing most of it sorted them out, but certainly ruined things for me.
Why LL couldn't have organised things so that the graphics autodetect system enabled options on a per-card basis I have no idea.
Instead they seem to have opted for a 'one size fits no-one' strategy, best illustrated by the default draw distance of 128... And so far the only group really happy with the result seem to be those lucky 6600 users.
Ah well, IF the release notes announcement was a cock-up (perish the thought!) maybe there will be a fix in there. But IF they were fixing some of the more pressing issues you'd have thought they'd have mentioned it, rather than come out with that stunning list!

My computer is far from top-of-the-line, and updates always trip me up a little the first few days, but I make out okay and always have done. What's the big deal? Seriously!

Personally, I LOVE the new flexiprims and lighting options, and maybe whatever they're working on now will improve stability with them.

I have an ATI 9200 and I have been surprised at the fact I can still be on SL, a few ppl told me I would have alot of problems. The first update was pretty damn good, then the last one we had made my rezzing pretty slow with gray and white flashing textures in some areas. I am having building problems now: Texture repeats not staying, or even changing until I leave edit, prims disappearing while in or out of edit, and some crashing during edit. Not sure what was up with the last update but the first one wasn't bad for me. Hopefully this next one will be better. We can hope can't we...

Yes ... and I don't mean to be insensitive about it. People who are having real and BIG problems, like you, I do feel for. I just feel that a lot of complaining is just complaining and little more.

I love the look of 1.10. Visually there is a big difference and its gorgeous. With my fairly high-end graphics card and 'puter, I am getting reasonable fps & didn't wait, wait wait for textures to load like I had been before in 1.9. I am having fun with the new flexiprims and lighting and can't wait to see where this goes once its stable.

However-- I would get a lot more joy out of it if it didn't unceremoniously dump me back to my desktop every 10-30 minutes. Couple this with it often taking a long time to get back in, and I am a bit frustrated.

My fingers are crossed that this update fixes the crashing.

(someone call me a waaambulance, m'kay?)