GoldieFawn Fielding
Registered User
Join date: 16 May 2005
Posts: 114
|
11-21-2005 16:19
Like the old saying goes...."If somethin aint broke dont fix it"
sooo i need reminding please. why 1.7.6 (.1.2.3.999099 v3)?? why did we have the update and what was its positive difference?
because i am only noticing slow texture uploads, see through building, lots of bumps and bruises from running into object that havent rezzed.
and.."I SEE GREY PEOPLE"
GoldieFawn
|
Resuna Oddfellow
Registered User
Join date: 19 Sep 2005
Posts: 13
|
OK, I'll be the straightman...
11-23-2005 05:49
From: GoldieFawn Fielding "I SEE GREY PEOPLE" Where do you see them?
|
Striker Wolfe
.
Join date: 11 Dec 2004
Posts: 355
|
11-29-2005 15:14
This topic has been braught up and a lot (including me) are getting fed up, join in if you have some free time. /142/ed/74325/1.html#post772780/142/ed/74325/1.html#post772780
|
Torley Linden
Enlightenment!
Join date: 15 Sep 2004
Posts: 16,530
|
11-29-2005 16:02
From: GoldieFawn Fielding Like the old saying goes...."If somethin aint broke dont fix it" A lot was broken in 1.6 and got fixed. Single-select in Inventory was CRAP—we FINALLY have multiselect after so many years, something every modern OS has. Longtime Resis know this pain so badly. Another was the damn convoluted way to open boxes, and the mishmash of manualism you'd have to go through to Clear Cache. Absurd! AND THOSE DAMN FOOT SHADOWS! Well, I'm glad they're somewhat better. When checking how rational my opinions are, I often ask elderly Residents of Second Life who've been here since, well, older versions than I was around for. Like beta. And I'm always fascinated by new peeps upon these shores. That's a richness of perspective. Textureloading for me was also significantly worse in 1.6. And you weren't here for 1.5, but I came after the cusp of that. I was told "1.5 is the most buggy release ever!" but since I arrived in around like, 1.5.3, I didn't live through the initial brunt of the pain. Upon the release of 1.6, the same attitudes flared. History repeats, rhymes, etc. I'm having some of these same problems in 1.7, but instead of going back to 1.6.x, going forward to 1.7.14 is prolly the better thing to do, if history that's already happened is any indication. 
|
Tony Tigereye
Registered User
Join date: 4 Sep 2003
Posts: 165
|
11-29-2005 18:10
I agree that going back to 1.6 is not the right answer, but how about reverting all of the Sim FPS limitation code so that it behaves more like 1.6 in the next 1.7 update? This is unacceptable.
|
Torley Linden
Enlightenment!
Join date: 15 Sep 2004
Posts: 16,530
|
11-29-2005 18:24
From: Tony Tigereye I agree that going back to 1.6 is not the right answer, but how about reverting all of the Sim FPS limitation code so that it behaves more like 1.6 in the next 1.7 update? This is unacceptable. Ooo what specific aspect are you referring to? How was it better in 1.6 for you?
|
Tony Tigereye
Registered User
Join date: 4 Sep 2003
Posts: 165
|
11-30-2005 14:16
From: Torley Torgeson Ooo what specific aspect are you referring to? How was it better in 1.6 for you? In general, scripts just run much slower than they did in 1.6. Specifically, I am talking about the "feature" they added to not run the sims at 100% CPU capacity and instead always try to run them at 45fps. It's just not working as well as I think we were all hoping. Sim stability is reduced as a result (noticed by big drops in Time Dilation) and overall, all scripts are just running waaaaay slower than they used to in 1.6. Basically, it's no longer a viable script-development platform. Might be worth checking out again in a couple of years when they upgrade all the SIM CPUs.
|