Vote for prop 700 - No More Features !

I am not impressed. It is obvious that a few things are lacking. Regression testing, substantial in-house beta testing, software architecture experience for a project such as SL. Release after release, year after year it is the same thing.

No but I expect him to provide direction the development team. It is obvious that the direction is _not_ to fix bugs.

I totally agree with Chris Kuhr. I have worked in situations where QA was treated seriously but most companies either do not have QA or it is a weak after-thought.

Even in my current job my boss did not see the point in my automated test suite, did not see the point in the "edge" tests. Then he said that we were going to have a problem because we would have to completely re-test the firmware due to major changes. Then he realized that it was not going to be a problem because all that was needed was to run my test suite.

Way to many software developers have never worked in a large development environment where QA was treated seriously.

Just think of the outcome it Cory was in charge of the dispatch system for a railroad or airline.

Seems to me that the SL universe has become like the old Bell system was in Canada, i.e.: the only provider in it's class. Therefore, since people do not have any choice in provider, they are stuck with this one. What that does to the provider's way of operating is this: who cares what the customer's complaint is about, we are the only provider, so let them complaint until they turn blue in the face, we control the market in this service. They can quit if they want, they will be back because there is nowhere else they can get this kind of service...

Now, Bell is not alone in they field, and prices have gone down, and quality has gone up. Before, there was only one style of phone and only one color (black). You could not even buy it, it was rented. Now, you can buy phone everywhere, in any kind of shape and colors...

SL has a monopoly on this kind of platform, as they call it. Only when real competition start moving in on this market will the quality really improve. But that will take years, if ever. The reason there is no competition in sight is because this "platform" has not yet proven it's worth or shown any "killer application" other than allowing 20 people to play tringo together...LOL...

So what I mean to say with all of this is: what can we do as a collective of SL users to "really" put pressure on SL to fix all the bugs? Even if it was possible for the present 80,000+ users to give up and close their accounts, there would be 1000+ new users signing up tomorrow anyway... And where would we go to get our "fix" of virtual world?

Complaining will not make the job of debugging go faster. It just annoys the programmer. They need the facts. Just describe the bug with as much details as you can.

LL probably is rethinking the way they operate daily. But you can't keep changing the way you operate before you give a chance to the current system to prove itself.

There will come a point where LL may realise they can't improve. That when they will need new input from professionals. One person with a great vision can't progress past a certain point without some help from outsiders. And that needs supervision from above to coordinate everything. Can Phillip let go of his control if he realises that SL won't improve under it?

The opinion above may be disregarded if you don't agree with it, as I obviously don't know anything about running any type of business...

Welll, I shouldn't really have to say this, but you could all vote for #700 as I suggested in the first post of this thread!
While it may not directly make any difference, it will show Linden that we do NOT accept the current situation. See it as signing a petition.
If that vote suddenly have a few thousand votes, they'll HAVE to act on it.

ugh...there is so much wrong with that first statement that i don't know where to begin. first of all, who cares if a developer is annoyed? they get paid the same whether they're annoyed or not (and also whether the code they wrote works or not). we, the users of SL, pay NOT to be annoyed. and sometimes developers need to know just how annoyed they've made someone by screwing up. when the developer discounts the views and opinions of the end-users (the people for whom they ultimately work), they are going to have a hard time being effective. developers get annoyed by bugs, usually because it is a reflection of the quality of their work (individually or as a team). getting developers to understand that they, and the code they write, are not going to be perfect is a great place to start improving the software QA process.

i sincerely hope you're right on this next point, as software development in requires you to constantly evaluate how you're working. and yes, sometimes that means changing the way you operate. a key part of the iterative development process is gathering the lessons learned from prior phases. if it's broke you have to fix it, otherwise it will stay broke. that's not to say that the current system is a complete failure, but that there may be things within it that can be tweaked to make the overall process better.

in no way am i trying to malign your business acumen, but i do know that LL needs some help. yes, the resumes for the guys/gals running the show are pretty impressive. they all seem to be visionaries in their field. but visionaries are nice to have when building a better mousetrap, give me a back-alley mechanic to keep it catching mice.

Ah, now I think you've really hit the nail on the head.

Like you, I never wish to insult or cause problems for anyone... especially LL. But I do see strong evidence of "visionary ineptitude" here. Usually, in most businesses, they keep the visionaries separate from the working folks. Why? Because although the visionaries are brilliant-- they tend to lack common sense. LOL

A visionary designs, thinks, pursues... then the folks with skill take over. Visionaries are often blue-sky, and they sometimes can't tell where that sky ends and the void of space begins. You *never* allow a visionary to program. They'll screw it up every time. And you never let them go without guidance / restraint. Same results.

Visionaries provide basic ideas, and they have extreme value in a company because they'll take it directions never before thought possible. They'll push past the boundaries and create new concepts. But like you said, the mechanics make those ideas work. They're the ones that say, "No, that silly 10-vote voting system isn't going to help at all" or "Right now might not be the best time to implement an SL video function. Let's implement group communications instead." (so instead of nice group communications ability-- we have buggy video that no one really cares about).

Let the visionaries present ideas, then the implementers take over. Want to know why Quake, Unreal and other games work pretty much flawlessly? Because the visionaries aren't in charge. The businessmen are... and if someone screws up, he either gets smart real fast or he's fired. There are things implemented on SL every month that just make no sense whatsoever from a computer/business standpoint and that people just hate. There are bugs on the system that have remained unfixed for months, perhaps even years. And I think you're 100% right... SL is too much in the control of the visionaries. What SL really needs is a tad bit more common sense... especially in the area of responsibility to the clients.

There are only a few things I would like to see/want to know about:

1) Are there any plans or possibility of an increased compatability with ATI video cards, and why is SL so unfriendly towards them?

This actually deals with SL in general, not just the update, but I think it's important. If the program supported a few more video cards/drivers, then it would run a lot better in general, and that in and of itself would quiet a lot of people's complaints. My card has AGP 8x, but due to a lack of compatability, I can't use it, making it run slower than it needs to and causing frequent crashes.

2) Is it the system or the server that is to blame for texture related problems?

Someone earlier said they would devote 60-70 gb (!) to textures... While I don't claim that I could do the same, he did make a valid point in that it maybe should be up to the user to set their limits, thus allowing faster loads. As long as someone has the space and the interest in using it, why not allow them to, and take some of the burden off the server, reducing the number of downloads pre player?

3) An odd thing; not sure if it's 1.7 related or not...

I notice that when you try to dig down on a patch of land, it's always slightly angled; one end will be lower than another on a hole of any size. Is this a part of the general setup of the world, or can it be fixed? Also, I think a nice geometric digging tool that just lets you cut neat blocks out of the ground would be nice; even spheres and triangles. Being able to make a true cavern in the ground would be a nice touch as well, I think; a passage that leads to a open, hollowed out area underground. Increasing the digging depth would be a nice addition in a future update.

I have a few other things that bother me, but other than those three, are really too minor to mention. The first one is of the most concern, and I would really like to see it adressed.

Yes, ati compatability is something that should be worked on because a lot of people use it to game. I'm kind of surprised that LL wouldn't want to make it work. It makes me wonder if they're only testing primarily on the software they've designated for the game, instead of testing for a wide range of software and computers.

Regarding ATI compatibility...

This may be an uphill fight. I have owned something like 6-8 graphics cards in the past 5 years, about half of them ATI, about half of them Nvidia drivers.

I have had endless, continual problems with ATI. I've had problems with drivers not even loading properly, drivers not running major-title games, drivers messing with the rest of my system. And when I tried to remove ATI.. it was a nightmare. (which is why I never recommend AOL to clients-- ever try to remove that thing? grrrr.).

I have never, to my memory, had a problem with Nvidia. Not once, with anything.

I have heard this finding repeated by tech after tech after tech. I've asked computer stores what they recommend. Sometimes a salesman will say "Oh, I have ATI" and the salesman right next to him will say, "No no no no"... LOL.

Now I know some people have good results with ATI and they love their graphics card. If it works for them, it works. Can't argue with success. Obviously ATI is a major company. But it is known that their drivers have been (are they still?) flaky. So I think that perhaps compatibility with ATI is not so much LL's fault.. as it is ATIs. And I think that those who use SL all the time and have ATI cards might want to consider switching to an Nvidia. I just recently bought an Nvidia 6600 256meg PCIx for $129. It rocks.