Elf Clan Social Network

Second Life is curently facing a plethora of bugs the likes of which are unheard of in its history. Without going into extreme detail, these bugs include:

* Failure of textures to load within any concept of reasonable time
* Failure of sculpties to rez
* Faiure of avatars to rez
* Inventory loss / database loss
* Client-side cache issues that are creating a delay-of-service attack on LL's own servers
* Prims that suddenly self-locomote off the sim and self-destruct, destroying existing builds
* Cumbersome, bulky and slow asset server system
* "Ghosted" scripts (scripts that remain on a sim when the accompanying prims are deleted)
* Company profiteering (evinced never so much as with the unwarranted OpenSpace sim price hike fiasco that cost the grid over 5,500 sims)
* Poor employee attitude and customer abuse
* Extreme and inexcusable lag

Linden Lab claims many of these problems are caused by failure of SL to "scale" to current membership needs. Thus, we have to ask: Whose fault is it that Second Life is failing to scale? That's surely no excuse. Did the company think their membership was going to grow to 20,000 people and then stop?

When growth didn't stop, when it got to 50,000... 100,000... one million... why weren't they taking steps years ago to re-code and scale to the expected millions that would obviously be using the system? Why didn't they code to expected scale from the very beginning?

Plainly speaking, someone dropped the ball. As a result of these things, Second Life is performing worse as each month passes. For the first time in history, I have had to drop my draw distance to 128m (from the past 256m) just to be able to move around. It's not my computer (quad core), it's not my RAM (3 gigs), it's not my graphics card (Nvidia 9800 GTX) and it's not my connection (high speed cable). The culprit is clearly that of degrading Second Life performance.

Currently Linden Lab is charging some $1000 setup fee and $295 a month to operate a sim. These are frankly absurd prices-- profiteering to the max. Not that such is ethically or legally wrong; if they can get that price, more power to them. But it costs an average of about $20 to $30 to acquire server space for a sim. I think we can be confident Linden Lab pays as little as possible.

But in return for such fees, we expect the performance such price warrants. That means instead of being slammed four sims to a server box, all sharing common bus, hard drive and network card-- a little bit more "under the hood" should be delivered. For $295 a month, EACH SIM should be on its own separate deck. That deck should boast at the very least a duo-core (which would probably suffice) or even a quad-core processor (yes, to run a single sim). Each sim should have its own separate hard drive, its own network access, its own separate internal bus. In short, if Linden Lab is going to charge Porche prices... they should deliver a Porche, not a Volkswagen Beetle.

It is obvious that the current architecture of Second Life is bogging down. It became obvious in early 2005 when Linden Lab switched from single-core server boxes to quad-core stacked boxes-- and sim performance immediately dropped through the floor. The prices Linden Lab charges to run a sim server are ridiculous, to say the least. It's been said before: for what Linden Lab charges for a single sim... we could lease a new car. Literally. For such prices... a totally dedicated server box is warranted.

Current performance levels are inexcusable-- and unacceptable. Their asset system is bogging down. Individual sim servers are bogging down. Linden Lab has unwisely continued to burden the graphics system (flexis, sculpties... and now the upcoming shadows) until performance is just dragging. When it takes the most powerful computer systems on the market just to handle what SL throws at us-- it becomes obvious that stacking four sims to a server box is not the answer. It becomes obvious that giving customers their money's worth is the solution to many of these issues.

If Linden Lab were charging $75 per sim like the OpenSim grids then sure... stack sims four to a quad-core box. But when a company is charging $295 for a single sim (at a profit of some $260+ per sim)... then it should be expected that they would provide the hardware backing to warrant such price. In addition, evidence indicates LL is cutting corners on areas such as network bandwidth and asset server ratio. Cutting services while charging excessively high prices is not a smart way to run business.

The alternative: the first company that comes along and implements such concepts, that offers a good product with acceptable performance at reasonable prices-- and Linden Lab is going to quickly discover the ultimate cost of charging premium prices while delivering fourth-rate, shoddy product.


Views: 12

Comment by Zauber Paracelsus on June 28, 2009 at 10:09am
"Prims that suddenly self-locomote off the sim and self-destruct, destroying existing builds"

I haven't seen that one before >_>
Comment by Wayfinder Wishbringer on June 28, 2009 at 11:00am
It's a fairly common and old bug. Fortunately though common, it doesn't happen often. It's been reported in JIRA for years-- and just happened yesterday to both Edward and Cinnamon, in separate locations. It's quite irritating; for no reason at all, a totally stationary sim will just pull up roots and decide to travel. I've actually seen them move right before my eyes... and saunter right off the edge of the sim pretty as you please (where of course, they self-destruct).
Comment by Wayfinder Wishbringer on June 29, 2009 at 12:56am
All very good points JD.

The "profit" I spoke of was that over basic server costs. It costs $20 to $30 to run a full-bore server, much less if a company charters server service en-masse-- or provide their own servers. That means Linden Lab is pulling down some 1,500% profit over base costs.

Yes, they do have overhead. They have coder fees, support staff, their building and energy needs, etc. But ALL companies have such costs. All companies have employees and buildings and insurance cost and taxes and all of that. But not all companies pull down 1,500% profit over cost of production.

Consider: Linden Lab has some 25,000+ sims (possibly considerbly less now after the OpenSpace stunt). But if they only had 10,000 sims... at $260 profit per sim, their monthly net income after server costs would be $2.6 million. One can pay a whole lot of overhead costs on 2.6 million a month. But by most evidence, Linden Lab has an income of somewhere between $5 and $7 million a month (conservative estimates). They had no warrant in raising full sim prices from $195 to $295 (their reason: "Because we believe we can get it")... and they had no warrant to raise OpenSpace prices... especially when such a price hike meant the forced shutdown of thousands of sims. They were heartless and callous... and totally profit-oriented.

I'm not cursing them for their prices (although they are surely excessive). If they can get $295 a month and can provide a service worth that $295 a month, that's how business works. But when they charge such prices for an unstable platform, eye-candy gimmicks rather than a functional database and software, when they charge premium prices for shoddy-performance, faulty product-- and further, when they treat their customers like dirt and even have the nerve to blame their customers for supposed "asset burdening" (as you pointed out, that has pretty much been proved a complete lie)-- that's where I find fault with such company. They appear to be 100% money oriented-- even to the point of intentional harm of their customers. I've got news for them: money can disappear almost overnight. It is an illusion that often betrays. Linden Lab has one of the worst reputations of any computer company I've ever seen. After their "glory days" are ended-- it is that reputation that will stick with Philip Rosedale the rest of his life.

I honestly question even Elf Clan's investment in Linden Lab-- (which btw, is now half what it was this time last year. We have LL to thank for that. Good job, people!) Although we have a large group and can distribute our costs out over many people-- still it does gall to pay such fees to a company that is so self-focused. They treat their customers with disdain, they lie to us on a regular basis, they go back on their agreements and use their TOS solely for their advantage rather than protection and benefit of the customer. Their employees are abusive, their system performance-- after nine years of coding-- inexcusably poor. It gets to the point one wonders if it is at all worth it, even for groups such as ours.

Once other companies become stable and equal or surpass the performance of Second LIfe... I suspect a lot of people will be asking themselves the same question.
Comment by Schlitzie Martini on June 29, 2009 at 9:50am
"In short, if Linden Lab is going to charge Porche prices... they should deliver a Porche, not a Volkswagen Beetle."

Hey now, VW Bugs are decent cars that run well....SL is more like a Ford Pinto!
Comment by Wayfinder Wishbringer on June 30, 2009 at 4:08pm
LOL that reminds me of that old satire: Top Secret. Remember the Pinto that was "tink" rear-ended, and KABLOOOIE!!!

Makes me wonder exactly what's going to rear-end SL... and if it will be one of LL's own decisions that does so. Poetic justice happens more than people care to admit.


You need to be a member of Elf Clan Social Network to add comments!

Join Elf Clan Social Network

© 2017   Created by Wayfinder Wishbringer.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service