|
Threads
View context
https://www.centos.org/download/ CentOS for Free, please download your ISO also from torrent.
I'm sorry for you, but I honestly use WordPress for free. I use it for various purposes, and I also have many plugins that are free in their basic version.
All GNU/Linux distributions are free, that's what the license says. If it weren't the case, it would violate the license terms.
What you pay for in relation to Linux software are: proprietary software if included (not all, for example, you don't pay for Nvidia drivers), advanced support services for individuals and businesses, services to assist businesses in developing their infrastructure (whether it's servers or desktops).
Canonical has never asked me for money for Ubuntu, the same goes for Linux Mint and other distributions. They all have a free counterpart because someone has questioned Redhat. It should be known that Redhat has Fedora as a free distribution, and it's clearly stated on their website.
Stop trying to convince people that they have to pay for good things.
Without going into technical details, GNU/Linux distributions are free. What you pay for in various forms, such as Pro versions, Advanced versions, or Enterprise versions, are proprietary software and extended support, as I explained earlier.
I have never paid, except voluntarily donating what I could, to use Filezilla, Clonezilla, Gimp, Libreoffice, or other development tools, just as I have not paid for WordPress, which I use and configure daily, and many other pieces of software. Like me, many others here haven't had to pay to get their viewer, to create their own grid.
If you have paid, I'm sorry for you. You should have carefully considered your choices, unless you are a company with special support needs or specific software requirements for your distribution.
The problem here is different. They are seeking money for something that doesn't exist, that has never been presented, not even in a minimally functional alpha state. Here, we're talking about someone who created a viewer for Opensimulator based on the old, no longer updated Alchemy Viewer, and is asking for money for it. It would be more appropriate to directly fund the Alchemy team, like all the programmers who work for FREE on Opensimulator development.
If we are going to support someone, let's support those who dedicate themselves and deliver results, not those who ask for money by selling illusions.
like(0)
I'm sorry for you, but I honestly use WordPress for free. I use it for various purposes, and I also have many plugins that are free in their basic version.
All GNU/Linux distributions are free, that's what the license says. If it weren't the case, it would violate the license terms.
What you pay for in relation to Linux software are: proprietary software if included (not all, for example, you don't pay for Nvidia drivers), advanced support services for individuals and businesses, services to assist businesses in developing their infrastructure (whether it's servers or desktops).
Canonical has never asked me for money for Ubuntu, the same goes for Linux Mint and other distributions. They all have a free counterpart because someone has questioned Redhat. It should be known that Redhat has Fedora as a free distribution, and it's clearly stated on their website.
Stop trying to convince people that they have to pay for good things.
Without going into technical details, GNU/Linux distributions are free. What you pay for in various forms, such as Pro versions, Advanced versions, or Enterprise versions, are proprietary software and extended support, as I explained earlier.
I have never paid, except voluntarily donating what I could, to use Filezilla, Clonezilla, Gimp, Libreoffice, or other development tools, just as I have not paid for WordPress, which I use and configure daily, and many other pieces of software. Like me, many others here haven't had to pay to get their viewer, to create their own grid.
If you have paid, I'm sorry for you. You should have carefully considered your choices, unless you are a company with special support needs or specific software requirements for your distribution.
The problem here is different. They are seeking money for something that doesn't exist, that has never been presented, not even in a minimally functional alpha state. Here, we're talking about someone who created a viewer for Opensimulator based on the old, no longer updated Alchemy Viewer, and is asking for money for it. It would be more appropriate to directly fund the Alchemy team, like all the programmers who work for FREE on Opensimulator development.
If we are going to support someone, let's support those who dedicate themselves and deliver results, not those who ask for money by selling illusions.
"CentOS (/ˈsɛntɒs/, from Community Enterprise Operating System; also known as CentOS Linux)[5][6] is a discontinued Linux distribution that provided a free and open-source community-supported computing platform, functionally compatible with its upstream source, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)." (wikipedia)
Irrespective of its development tier, it was and still is available for free, much like Fedora. An abandoned project doesn't imply that it wasn't free. Please try to provide a well-relevant response, staying on topic. It's important not to stray too far off-topic.
like(0)
Irrespective of its development tier, it was and still is available for free, much like Fedora. An abandoned project doesn't imply that it wasn't free. Please try to provide a well-relevant response, staying on topic. It's important not to stray too far off-topic.
View context
I don't donate to those who don't build anything and don't demonstrate at least a solid and valid starting point, a well-defined process. Furthermore, I don't want to throw my money at those who have taken it before and wasted it because they never managed to complete a project. Additionally, they continue to tell lies upon lies, such as the claim that RedHat doesn't have a free counterpart, when we know that Fedora Linux exists. The same goes for Suse. So they're lying, knowing they're lying, and this doesn't provide a real choice. A smart person excludes projects from these individuals from the outset. I want to emphasize again the viewer they came up with, a poorly done simple revision of Alchemy Viewer, and they took money for it, only to abandon it. It doesn't seem normal. I would prefer to fund the designers of Alchemy Viewer to bring it back to Opensimulator. I want to pay Ubit, Fred, and others to introduce important features. This is about Opensimulator.
like(2)
Of course this is about OS. I agree, alternatives to tools such as browsers are needed. People like Fred, Ubit, etc. have other career or life issues that require more attention. Unless someone is getting paid, the rate things are or will be developed (as in my case) is based necessity or payment. Most will not put an unpaid project ahead of a paid one or paying career. For alot involved in OS, it is a hobby and the rate of production is well below the rate of demand.
liked(1)
View context
Start by paying Ubit, Fred, and all the Opensimulator contributors, then. Here, it seems like all you're doing is asking for money. Regarding the concept of "crudeness" in the software environment, the fact is that Linux distributions, Libreoffice, and many other tools are FREE. They are free, and if you want extra services, you pay for them. It seems that EchoVoice and IMA are just another scam like other things. After all, they worked on a viewer that was eventually abandoned at version 1.0.0.0, derived from Alchemy Viewer, no less! So, before writing nonsense, do your research. Pay the authors of Firestorm before making unfounded claims about programmers. Pay Ubit, pay Fred, pay all the developers who donate their time to keep you in Opensimulator. Pay for this site regularly, just pay! Then, when you show me that you've paid all these people at least $2 each every month and all the producers of free software you use, websites, and more, then maybe I'll believe the words of people who promote non-scientific or "physical" payment projects. I won't tolerate comments asking people for money anymore; it's disgraceful. If people knew about EchoVoice and didn't donate until the fundraising campaign was closed, it means they're not interested. $60,000 for a project? Are we kidding? A programmer doesn't get $60,000 for a project, and there aren't many details on the IMA website.
like(1)
I think you must really just like to hear yourself talk. Mostly your just speaking nonsense. Firstly, I'm not asking for money. Possible you didnt mean that but you did say it in a response to my message. And it's you who are making unfounded claims about an industry you're clearly ignorant of. Take a look on a job board. An entry level developer just out of college could very well make $60k a year and that doesn't include the cost of benefits and so on. Someone with the kind of experience to work on OpenSim or a spatialized voice project would likely be compensated quite a bit more. If what you mean to say is you don't think that a commercial development approach should be used to enhance OpenSim, well then, I'd say you get what you pay for. But shooting your mouth off and pretending there is some ethical issue with a person asking for money to fund a project of this nature is wrong headed. And again just a case of you wanting to bitch about something to hear yourself talk.
As I said, the IMA folks were perhaps naive when they chose to take a commercial development funding approach to getting this project done. But unless you have a stack of developers who all love to work for free. Thats not likely to happen. OpenSim users as I said don't feel they should have to pay for anything. Or at least enough do that the environment is toxic when it comes to things like this. Getting any kind of serious funding for OpenSim is essentially impossible. Its not taken seriously. So on my fork I work on it as my time permits and perhaps one day the software quality and stability will be there, and it will be possible to get it funded.
So basically give it a rest. IMA can at worst be accused of being Naive. At least they aren't subjecting everyone here to ridiculous uninformed rants because they like to hear themselves talk. I'd say in my book thats the bigger crime.
liked(1)
As I said, the IMA folks were perhaps naive when they chose to take a commercial development funding approach to getting this project done. But unless you have a stack of developers who all love to work for free. Thats not likely to happen. OpenSim users as I said don't feel they should have to pay for anything. Or at least enough do that the environment is toxic when it comes to things like this. Getting any kind of serious funding for OpenSim is essentially impossible. Its not taken seriously. So on my fork I work on it as my time permits and perhaps one day the software quality and stability will be there, and it will be possible to get it funded.
So basically give it a rest. IMA can at worst be accused of being Naive. At least they aren't subjecting everyone here to ridiculous uninformed rants because they like to hear themselves talk. I'd say in my book thats the bigger crime.
I don't even read your entire comment, you are a person who is part of a for-profit activity, so IMA, consequently, being created for the purpose of profiting from its "users" or "customers" (whichever you prefer), must operate to make a profit. This is logical, and you can make up anything you want, but the rest of the comments from those who have experience with IMA demonstrate that YOU HAVE NEVER DONE ANYTHING REALLY USEFUL, not even a project that is genuinely highlighted on your poor and poorly updated website.
So, if I have to decide who to fund for a complex project like the Voice dedicated exclusively to Opensimulator among for-profit companies, I choose a company that has a well-stocked portfolio of work and offers guarantees, is serious and experienced in the field.
How can you expect to ask for money for a "charitable" purpose when your Home Page clearly states that you are a for-profit company? Do you know how companies work? They invest and sell products; you should do the same, bring something concrete and sell your product.
Everything you write (which I didn't even read in full, the first few lines where you claim to be IMA and represent it were enough for me) is certainly the usual words used in certain product sales strategies to convince people to pay.
That's not what Opensimulator needs. I'll let the comments of people who have had direct experience with you and IMA speak for themselves. I repeat, from your poor website, where you declare yourself for-profit, there is no valid project, and nothing on that site is useful for the Opensimulator community. So I may say silly things, as you claim, but I base my opinions on facts, and the facts are these: you are asking for money for something that DOES NOT EXIST and has already been rejected by Opensimulator users because you didn't reach the required quota (fortunately).
By the way, what happened to the $750 previously raised?
like(0)
So, if I have to decide who to fund for a complex project like the Voice dedicated exclusively to Opensimulator among for-profit companies, I choose a company that has a well-stocked portfolio of work and offers guarantees, is serious and experienced in the field.
How can you expect to ask for money for a "charitable" purpose when your Home Page clearly states that you are a for-profit company? Do you know how companies work? They invest and sell products; you should do the same, bring something concrete and sell your product.
Everything you write (which I didn't even read in full, the first few lines where you claim to be IMA and represent it were enough for me) is certainly the usual words used in certain product sales strategies to convince people to pay.
That's not what Opensimulator needs. I'll let the comments of people who have had direct experience with you and IMA speak for themselves. I repeat, from your poor website, where you declare yourself for-profit, there is no valid project, and nothing on that site is useful for the Opensimulator community. So I may say silly things, as you claim, but I base my opinions on facts, and the facts are these: you are asking for money for something that DOES NOT EXIST and has already been rejected by Opensimulator users because you didn't reach the required quota (fortunately).
By the way, what happened to the $750 previously raised?
I would like to clarify a bit on the ScenGate viewer project, no money RL$$ was ever asked to be donated for the completion of this ill fated IMA OS based viewer. Shelenn Ayres ran it as an experiment with a college class she was currently teaching. Her students did the majority of the coding. To be honest with you the end result was not the success hoped for.
like(0)
You can ask the perpetrators themselves in person virtually every Wednesday night EST at 8:00pm, they regularly advertise the weekly IMA meeting of the minds here, on OpenSimWorld.
It's worth a visit, and to clarify the situation a bit further, Maria of HG Business was totally against publishing or promoting the IMA's EchoVoice project. It took much badgering by Shelenn Ayres, and her cohort Seth the two figureheads of the IMA that I am familiar with, to finally convince her to do so.
like(0)
It's worth a visit, and to clarify the situation a bit further, Maria of HG Business was totally against publishing or promoting the IMA's EchoVoice project. It took much badgering by Shelenn Ayres, and her cohort Seth the two figureheads of the IMA that I am familiar with, to finally convince her to do so.
8pm EST is my 2am in EU pfff.. We had IMA in metropolis grid back then...Just blabla without any increasing anything to Opensim. This is just a waste of time. Maria has a long story of journalism. I better trust her than this IMA thing! And if that fundraising would have beeen a serious thing: Why didnt they explain that in HG business what they did with the money? They never did and kept that approx 725$ for themselves. So bottom of line: another cheating to get money from good believing people! Forget IMA shit
liked(2)
I don't know what happened to that money. I can only speculate as to whether it was returned or not, no proof or interest in proving one way or another. I am just happy that I was not the person to initiate this entire "InfinateMetaverseAlliace" scam conversation here. I did feel a need to state the facts as I see them.
like(0)
Thank you for clarifying Scenegate. Maria, except for trusting individuals like Boam... for the rest, she's a smart enough woman to sense if something is fishy. That's probably why she didn't want to talk about EchoVoice; it didn't convince her then, and perhaps it still doesn't. The fact remains that it's an openly profit-driven company, so why should I give them my money? There are thousands out there that can meet the requirements and have a rich portfolio of successful, non-failed projects, unlike theirs.
liked(1)
View context
I don't like people asking for money, and you are doing it. START MAKING OFFERS AND CONTRIBUTING FINANCIALLY TO THE WORK OF UBIT AND FRED THEN, AND START PAYING FOR CONTENT IN OPENSIMULATOR AS YOU REASON, DON'T JUST ASK FOR MONEY FOR YOUR IMA PROJECTS. What you are asking for is absurd, I will not accept any more comments from those shamelessly asking for money without considering other solutions that are accessible to everyone. The initiatives here are carried out by volunteers; go work in LL if you want to earn money, respect all users.
like(2)
IM not asking for any money!! You also need to re-read my comment as to where I specifically state I am happy to support OS projects. I also often do pay for content in OS and ON Kitley. If someone offers a good product here then we should encourage them.
liked(1)
View context
I genuinely ask this as a person who is unaware of the facts. It seems that many individuals who have been part of Opensim for many years (people from 3DRockGrid but not only them, also individuals from Kitely and other historical grids, as well as various developers I've spoken to in private messages), view IMA as a kind of company (which describes itself as for-profit on its Home page) and consider it a sort of scam. They believe that many users have donated without ever seeing projects actually completed. Can you explain your perspective on IMA and why it's being seen this way? I truly mean this; I was unaware of its existence before this post. What I've always disliked is when people try to convince others by injecting the fear factor of "You won't be able to do or have anymore" or the dreadful "You'll never have." Let's be clear, a platform has its features, and if there are additional ones, that's great. If there aren't, well, there's not much to be done except adapting to what is available.
like(1)
Sadly I can speak from experience, The IMA is not to be trusted, the projects I have been witness too are mostly a con game, followed by countless excuses for the project(s) delay, or they need more money to complete it. I do agree with the need for an OS specific voice module's development. These folks at the IMA are not the people for this job.
liked(1)
View context
http://infinitemetaverse.com/news-and-events/ima-blog hmmm i think EchoVoice is part of IMA...
like(1)
View context
There's a strange persistence in asking for money for a project that actually could be developed differently. This is what I've noticed. Furthermore, it's not true that GNU/Linux is paid; every paid distribution (for the included services) has its free base. Red Hat has Fedora, and so on... So, honestly, I'm not convinced by the argument being made, which is also quite aggressive, trying to persuade people that they have to make a living with that money. I don't like it.
I don't know the history of the Infinite Metaverse Alliance, can you please explain it to me? :) Thank you.
like(0)
I don't know the history of the Infinite Metaverse Alliance, can you please explain it to me? :) Thank you.
You can look up the web site here :: http://infinitemetaverse.com/ I repeat my warning, "Do Not Trust These People" and certainly do not pay them any RL$$, unless you are willing to hear one excuse after another on why the project has become delayed, or they need more money. It's a Con.
liked(2)
View context
I understand. It has happened in my posts as well – blocking those who are offensive. It doesn't make sense to comment in an offensive manner, even when there are differences of opinion. However, I don't share your viewpoint on this project, as I explained in the comments further below.
like(1)
View context
Ok, but why do they want these MONEY? Everything could be done opensource, allowing users and opensimulator grid operators to host their own voice servers on their machines, just like with freeswitch. All of this could be achieved through opensource. Why do they want these money? And then what do they do? Do they become a company and sell their project while keeping it free for the OS community? This isn't the right path. There's another way. The truth is that we lack developers who are uninterested in money but still accept the challenge. The ones who are interested ask for MONEY, and that's not okay. Your response doesn't explain to me why they're asking for money. I understand your concern, but you're only suggesting how to support them, not how to guide them towards a different and OPEN SOURCE path like OPENSIMULATOR (which would also create a parallel and perhaps lasting project that progresses alongside this), and most importantly, it doesn't explain to me why they're asking for this money. :)
like(1)
Will you please learn: opensource does not necessarily mean it's free of cost to develop. All projects have at least server costs, and some projects pay their coders. Some opensource applications or operating systems charge for the software, and all opensource means in any real sense is that the code is open for everyone to read, modify, change, make sure there are no nasties hiding in it etc.
EchoVoice is an opensource project, but in order to actually get the project delivered before we all shuttle of our mortal coils professional coders need to be engaged, contracted to do the work, and PAID.There are also other costs, such as running servers etc.
liked(2)
EchoVoice is an opensource project, but in order to actually get the project delivered before we all shuttle of our mortal coils professional coders need to be engaged, contracted to do the work, and PAID.There are also other costs, such as running servers etc.
Sure, open source means everything you've mentioned. However, it largely depends on the usage license with which the software is initiated. Anyway, I don't see it being useful to pay for a startup that will eventually become a competitor to Vivox. I find a project in the style of FreeSWITCH more useful – open source – where, just like with OpenSimulator, anyone can download the code and reshape it to fit their needs. This would attract a large number of free and interested programmers, much like what happens with many Unix or GNU/Linux-based software.
The server wouldn't be centralized, but each user would have their own, independent from others. So, each grid would have its own voice server. This doesn't incur development costs because I can manage the repositories from my PC, make changes from my PC, and test the software on my PC without requiring sums like $60,000 – and this would be multiplied by the many contributing users. If someone is needed to do this, so be it.
If FreeSWITCH were simpler, it would be ideal to pursue that project. I tried to run it on a Windows server, but with very limited results. Adapting a voice service for viewers isn't simple, but in my opinion, the best solution remains starting with a solid open-source software under the GPL license, integrating the necessary modules (and if needed, moving towards LGPL). This way, everyone can host their own voice server on their machine, decentralized from the rest. Instead of giving money to a project that centralizes voice servers, it creates a completely different type of project and supports a startup that, no matter how open their code might be, aims to have control over the users of its services. OpenSimulator is not like this. If I had to choose, I'd prefer to pay for services from a company like Vivox; at least I know it's reputable and already present in various gaming services, including professional tournaments and Second Life.
However, fundamentally, all GNU/Linux systems are free – they're all cost-free. What you pay for is consultancy and support in the pro versions. GPL licenses are genuinely respected there :)
like(0)
The server wouldn't be centralized, but each user would have their own, independent from others. So, each grid would have its own voice server. This doesn't incur development costs because I can manage the repositories from my PC, make changes from my PC, and test the software on my PC without requiring sums like $60,000 – and this would be multiplied by the many contributing users. If someone is needed to do this, so be it.
If FreeSWITCH were simpler, it would be ideal to pursue that project. I tried to run it on a Windows server, but with very limited results. Adapting a voice service for viewers isn't simple, but in my opinion, the best solution remains starting with a solid open-source software under the GPL license, integrating the necessary modules (and if needed, moving towards LGPL). This way, everyone can host their own voice server on their machine, decentralized from the rest. Instead of giving money to a project that centralizes voice servers, it creates a completely different type of project and supports a startup that, no matter how open their code might be, aims to have control over the users of its services. OpenSimulator is not like this. If I had to choose, I'd prefer to pay for services from a company like Vivox; at least I know it's reputable and already present in various gaming services, including professional tournaments and Second Life.
However, fundamentally, all GNU/Linux systems are free – they're all cost-free. What you pay for is consultancy and support in the pro versions. GPL licenses are genuinely respected there :)
The server wouldn't be centralised with EchoVoice or a project based on that as Mumble is a voice server that is run independently as a service by each grid wanting that particular voice solution.
You could set up a voice project tomorrow, and you might, if you were very lucky, attract some interest, but finding people who are ready and willing to code for free will be the difficult bit. Most GNU/Linux distros have a handful of coders who do the work. Only the distros that are backed by major corporate players (IBM, Red Hat, Mandriva and a few others) have significant numbers of coders working on the code as they can afford to pay them.
And whilst there are projects that are, as you say, driven by passion, most of those projects are also pretty up front in letting people know that financial contributions help to allow them to do more work in the project they are passionate about and less working for an employer on stuff they do just to make enough to pay the bills. Maybe if we, the users were a little bit more passionate about making a small donation every time we download and install some of their software they'd be able to give up the day job and concentrate on doing what they are passionate about, and delivering us super and well updated new versions of the software we love? By not contributing when we are able we're basically expecting the developers to pay for the software we use. It might be free to us, but it costs them a considerable amount. Most of the projects run purely on passion have just one person behind them, usually doing a mountain of work and struggling to keep up. Opensim has just one developer when not so very long ago there was a team of developers. There are various reasons for that, some of them social, but I would think that the need to make a living and have a life outside of the day job have a lot to do with the scarcity of people developing independent modules for Opensim.
The healthcare most people in the UK receive is free (at point of need) but that doesn't mean it's without cost. We all pay for it from our taxation, and it's a really good deal, and everyone has comprehensive health cover.
like(0)
You could set up a voice project tomorrow, and you might, if you were very lucky, attract some interest, but finding people who are ready and willing to code for free will be the difficult bit. Most GNU/Linux distros have a handful of coders who do the work. Only the distros that are backed by major corporate players (IBM, Red Hat, Mandriva and a few others) have significant numbers of coders working on the code as they can afford to pay them.
And whilst there are projects that are, as you say, driven by passion, most of those projects are also pretty up front in letting people know that financial contributions help to allow them to do more work in the project they are passionate about and less working for an employer on stuff they do just to make enough to pay the bills. Maybe if we, the users were a little bit more passionate about making a small donation every time we download and install some of their software they'd be able to give up the day job and concentrate on doing what they are passionate about, and delivering us super and well updated new versions of the software we love? By not contributing when we are able we're basically expecting the developers to pay for the software we use. It might be free to us, but it costs them a considerable amount. Most of the projects run purely on passion have just one person behind them, usually doing a mountain of work and struggling to keep up. Opensim has just one developer when not so very long ago there was a team of developers. There are various reasons for that, some of them social, but I would think that the need to make a living and have a life outside of the day job have a lot to do with the scarcity of people developing independent modules for Opensim.
The healthcare most people in the UK receive is free (at point of need) but that doesn't mean it's without cost. We all pay for it from our taxation, and it's a really good deal, and everyone has comprehensive health cover.
Great comments and I agree! In theory, this would be awesome to be done through open source.
And my comments were merely meant as an example to show how easy it is to raise “impossible “ sums of money, should that be needed.
liked(2)
And my comments were merely meant as an example to show how easy it is to raise “impossible “ sums of money, should that be needed.
View context
Why are they asking for $60,000? I mean, have they clearly explained what those funds are for and how they will be invested?
One thing that many people get wrong is that OS has never had its own Viewer, correct me if I'm wrong.
OS had its own viewer in the past (I can't remember the name now) and it might have another one, of course, it must stem from the official LL viewer directly or indirectly through third-party viewers due to protocol issues. Let's be clear, even though OS does its own thing, it's actually becoming a platform that largely aims to be in line with SL. For example, YEngine (which will be the only one available starting from release 0.9.3) is still focused on making LSL scripts work just like in Second Life.
The fact is that as soon as Firestorm updates a version following the progress of SL and LL, these "updates" also end up in FirestormOS. Look at the story of profiles no longer being compatible with the current OS releases. Instead of adapting FirestormOS to the OpenSim platform release, the opposite happens – a new OS release adapts to FirestormOS. Is this a common occurrence or am I mistaken? (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong).
The point is, I know of a grid that has its own viewer, organized in menus and login screens in a way that removes almost all references to SL. Even the support team appears with the project's name instead of "Linden" in various options. So a good level of customization can be achieved, even in a concrete way. Furthermore, this viewer allows users to log in only to the platform it's intended for, which greatly simplifies things for novice users.
In reality, this is the only platform (that uses an engine derived from OS and isn't enabled for Hypergrid) yet it has a functional viewer. The other viewers are just tampered executables with simple programs to change their names and nothing else. They are outdated versions of Firestorm that are far from secure and don't even comply with usage licenses. (For example, AviWorlds has a manipulated viewer that doesn't even install properly! Neverworld is another grid that has an unsettling viewer, but there are other grids that adopt this non-functional and unsafe system. By modifying executables with Notepad++ or other programs and decompilers, you can't release the source code, which violates usage licenses and isn't reassuring at all!).
Daiturn was a viewer dedicated to OS that many avoided because it was too similar to the SL viewer, but the author was actually working on it a lot. Now it has become a viewer for SL, and all the major teams except Firestorm are now leaning towards SL.
Then I'd like to understand, why is payment necessary? Opensimulator originates from open source, just like freeswitch, and they don't require payment, yet they're still developed. Why do these projects ask for money? Couldn't they open up on GitHub or wherever they prefer and start an open project for the development of an "Open Source Voice Service"?
like(0)
One thing that many people get wrong is that OS has never had its own Viewer, correct me if I'm wrong.
OS had its own viewer in the past (I can't remember the name now) and it might have another one, of course, it must stem from the official LL viewer directly or indirectly through third-party viewers due to protocol issues. Let's be clear, even though OS does its own thing, it's actually becoming a platform that largely aims to be in line with SL. For example, YEngine (which will be the only one available starting from release 0.9.3) is still focused on making LSL scripts work just like in Second Life.
The fact is that as soon as Firestorm updates a version following the progress of SL and LL, these "updates" also end up in FirestormOS. Look at the story of profiles no longer being compatible with the current OS releases. Instead of adapting FirestormOS to the OpenSim platform release, the opposite happens – a new OS release adapts to FirestormOS. Is this a common occurrence or am I mistaken? (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong).
The point is, I know of a grid that has its own viewer, organized in menus and login screens in a way that removes almost all references to SL. Even the support team appears with the project's name instead of "Linden" in various options. So a good level of customization can be achieved, even in a concrete way. Furthermore, this viewer allows users to log in only to the platform it's intended for, which greatly simplifies things for novice users.
In reality, this is the only platform (that uses an engine derived from OS and isn't enabled for Hypergrid) yet it has a functional viewer. The other viewers are just tampered executables with simple programs to change their names and nothing else. They are outdated versions of Firestorm that are far from secure and don't even comply with usage licenses. (For example, AviWorlds has a manipulated viewer that doesn't even install properly! Neverworld is another grid that has an unsettling viewer, but there are other grids that adopt this non-functional and unsafe system. By modifying executables with Notepad++ or other programs and decompilers, you can't release the source code, which violates usage licenses and isn't reassuring at all!).
Daiturn was a viewer dedicated to OS that many avoided because it was too similar to the SL viewer, but the author was actually working on it a lot. Now it has become a viewer for SL, and all the major teams except Firestorm are now leaning towards SL.
Then I'd like to understand, why is payment necessary? Opensimulator originates from open source, just like freeswitch, and they don't require payment, yet they're still developed. Why do these projects ask for money? Couldn't they open up on GitHub or wherever they prefer and start an open project for the development of an "Open Source Voice Service"?
To cut a long story short: because they need someone to code it. They can't do it themselves.
They've got two options. Option one, find someone who's willing to do it for free in their spare time. If this worked, they wouldn't have to raise money now. So it obviously doesn't.
Option two, hire a professional software developer to do it and pay them for it. Sorry to say, but if you absolutely need it done, that's the only way to go. And that costs money.
Now, paying for development will not mean that EchoVoice will become a proprietary, non-free, closed-source, copyrighted binary blob offered as commercial payware. They can just as well pay someone 60 grand to develop something and then make it open-source and publish it under the GPL or the BSD license. It's their decision. And if they pay the developer through donations, EchoVoice won't have to make any money anyway because it is already fully paid for.
liked(3)
They've got two options. Option one, find someone who's willing to do it for free in their spare time. If this worked, they wouldn't have to raise money now. So it obviously doesn't.
Option two, hire a professional software developer to do it and pay them for it. Sorry to say, but if you absolutely need it done, that's the only way to go. And that costs money.
Now, paying for development will not mean that EchoVoice will become a proprietary, non-free, closed-source, copyrighted binary blob offered as commercial payware. They can just as well pay someone 60 grand to develop something and then make it open-source and publish it under the GPL or the BSD license. It's their decision. And if they pay the developer through donations, EchoVoice won't have to make any money anyway because it is already fully paid for.
I understand, Giove. Your explanation is, as always, very simple, direct, and clear. However, I still maintain that the project should be an initiative of contributors and experienced open-source programmers. Otherwise, wouldn't there be a risk that every update needs to be funded again? Ubit, Fred, and other contributors don't support their families with open-source work; they do it out of passion, and updates, bug fixes, etc., are always present.
like(0)
Well, it has to be developed from the ground up. But I'd say that once it's up and running, keeping it maintained should be fairly easy if the code is good. And if they hire an experienced open-source programmer, the code will be good. Better than OpenSim itself by magnitudes, I dare say.
liked(2)
I understand... what can I say? It seems difficult to go from $800 a year to $60,000. Giove, however, Ruth RC#3 and Roth RC#1 with the updated HUDs and BoM are well-made, and honestly, there's more satisfaction in presenting your grid cleanly. You've been truly valuable throughout all of this. Apologies for going off-topic, but I'll take the opportunity to thank you again.
like(0)
I think Jupiter covered that with his Option one - basically it ain't happening, there are no opensource programmers out there willing to work on this project. So the only viable option is to pay for a project.
liked(1)
Well, there might be open-source programmers willing to work on this, but the professional kind who demands payment. Just because they're paid, doesn't mean their code will be proprietary and closed-source. Novell has paid devs, Red Hat has paid devs, Mozilla has paid devs, Canonical has paid devs...
What you're unlikely to find is a spare-time hobbyist dev willing to develop something like this from scratch for zilch. Maybe if they're passionate about it. But seriously, OpenSim is completely unknown in the open-source community.
like(0)
What you're unlikely to find is a spare-time hobbyist dev willing to develop something like this from scratch for zilch. Maybe if they're passionate about it. But seriously, OpenSim is completely unknown in the open-source community.
And if this is the only solution, I'm afraid that with each update, there will be a need for payment. Without contributors who are free from economic ties and are driven by passion, every update will always require an expert. Essentially, we'd be funding a company rather than a project – a company that hires an employee, and for what? To have a voice channel in OpenSim that might not work correctly after the first viewer update. It might be better to try with FreeSWITCH at this point.
like(0)
The viewer issue would remain even if FreeSwitch were used, and good luck finding anyone willing to sort that mess out.
There is no reason why, once a voice module were developed that it couldn't be maintained and updated as and when needed. That might well require some payment for the person doing the work, what would be so wrong with that? No one is free from economic ties, we all have bills to pay etc. Even if someone could be found to do it just for the kudos and because they operate solely on passion, they would still only be able to devote some of their leisure time to it, so it would likely a) take a very long time to get to a working stage and b) any updates, bug squashing etc would likely become very delayed, And then what about the documentation?
Passion can't be eaten, and doesn't pay the bills!
like(0)
There is no reason why, once a voice module were developed that it couldn't be maintained and updated as and when needed. That might well require some payment for the person doing the work, what would be so wrong with that? No one is free from economic ties, we all have bills to pay etc. Even if someone could be found to do it just for the kudos and because they operate solely on passion, they would still only be able to devote some of their leisure time to it, so it would likely a) take a very long time to get to a working stage and b) any updates, bug squashing etc would likely become very delayed, And then what about the documentation?
Passion can't be eaten, and doesn't pay the bills!
The breakdown of what the $60,000 will achieve is outlined on the EchoVoice project webpage. It seems a lot, but professional coders cost money and the only certain way to get anything done in good time is by paying people properly and them working as per contract. And that $60k is just initial funding, it would require more to fine tune the project.
Payment is necessary because people have rent to pay, food to buy and kids to support. You seem to misunderstand what opensource is about. The app developed by the various projects might be free of cost to you the end user, but they are not free in the sense that people have to be paid, and servers also cost money. The opensource definition of free is more in the sense of liberty rather than free of cost. There are many paid for opensource projects, amonsgt them Red Hat Linux, Mandriva Linux and many other applications. And as far as Opensim is concerned, IBM was quite heavily involved in the early days, and their developers most certainly don't work for nothing!
Finally, sure, a voice module could be developed through voluntary effort, but that begs the question, why hasn't it already been done? The answer to that is largely because Vivox was the go to for most who wanted to use voice because it is 'free' and relatively easy to set up. Part of the reason why Opensim isn't as developed as it could be is because it's not paid for, and thus far any attempt to set up a scheme to put the project on a more planned footing with a roadmap and proper funding has been stymied by the complainers who begrudge coughing up a small amount of cash.
liked(2)
Payment is necessary because people have rent to pay, food to buy and kids to support. You seem to misunderstand what opensource is about. The app developed by the various projects might be free of cost to you the end user, but they are not free in the sense that people have to be paid, and servers also cost money. The opensource definition of free is more in the sense of liberty rather than free of cost. There are many paid for opensource projects, amonsgt them Red Hat Linux, Mandriva Linux and many other applications. And as far as Opensim is concerned, IBM was quite heavily involved in the early days, and their developers most certainly don't work for nothing!
Finally, sure, a voice module could be developed through voluntary effort, but that begs the question, why hasn't it already been done? The answer to that is largely because Vivox was the go to for most who wanted to use voice because it is 'free' and relatively easy to set up. Part of the reason why Opensim isn't as developed as it could be is because it's not paid for, and thus far any attempt to set up a scheme to put the project on a more planned footing with a roadmap and proper funding has been stymied by the complainers who begrudge coughing up a small amount of cash.
View context
I goggle for my textures.. There are a few good sites out there that have all 3 textures for here. the texture, a normal/bump texture, and a shine layer texture. my Adobe used to be able to make mesh for me but since having to change my mobo I haven't been able to do that. I am more of a prim builder, but there are ways to turn prim builds into mesh.
liked(1)
View context
Although I used the word in my comment, I can't claim to be a builder, really. I know how to push prims around, but these days, that is no longer good enough. I guess the right term for what I do is "design." For example, I don't create clothing. I create a look. (See oh HELLO). I might modify mesh buildings and such, but again. I'm using existing content to make something new. These days, I'm pushing mesh around into pleasing arrangements. My inspiration is my imagination. (See Aether). And I approach virtual life now with a spirit of pure play, without making it a game.
liked(1)
I build on necessity. As do most builders whether in OS or SL. The reason I stopped building in SL, they OWN every single thing you build there. As goes with uploads like images, textures, animations, etc. Once I learned about that in SL TOS, I never built anything again there and only build my stuff in OS.
liked(1)
View context
I don't know this, I do know that in some grids I frequent, child vatars are banned, and users with classic avatars like mine which is at a relatively "real" height (to compare with reality) have had no problems. Personally I don't like to see child avatars controlled by adults, I don't see the point. but I repeat, I don't have the problem because I use heights varying between 1.80mt in some grids and 1.90 in others, never touched 2mt personally.
like(0)
View context
I also set a realistic height my avatar, and you are right, there are giant women who want me to raise the height of the avatar.
I've noticed that I interact better with vehicles and other home furnishings, but I've also noticed that some classic avatars are made with super tall shapes, such as some ReactOS classics that I have in inventory are super tall.
In theory everything should be made with the actual proportions, in mt or feet as you want for your national unit of measurement. But still I notice that having an avi with proportions closer to reality seems to be a chore for interacting with some objects.
But it is true, there is no correct height, you made a very sensible point, there are huge chairs and "normal" chairs.
this thing drives me crazy! :)
like(2)
I've noticed that I interact better with vehicles and other home furnishings, but I've also noticed that some classic avatars are made with super tall shapes, such as some ReactOS classics that I have in inventory are super tall.
In theory everything should be made with the actual proportions, in mt or feet as you want for your national unit of measurement. But still I notice that having an avi with proportions closer to reality seems to be a chore for interacting with some objects.
But it is true, there is no correct height, you made a very sensible point, there are huge chairs and "normal" chairs.
this thing drives me crazy! :)
View context
when you don't know what to say, you use the easy way by accusing on improbable and nonv eritious things, which however attract people's negative thinking because people pay more attention to negative things than positive thoughts by their nature, play on this you who never know what to say and how to counter a reality.
I don't know avitron's numbers, I have never seen the code but for sure it made a lot more users than AviWorlds, for a long time AviWorlds numbers were bogus, or at least not in line with the connected users, it would report in the old LoginScreen up to 140 and sometimes it would exceed that, but in the world about 10 people or maybe 15 were connected. As of today the numbers seem more realistic, and in fact they are few, excluding duplicates. anyway, you make me laugh too much by saying I am Ferraris hahahaha or my god what a laugh hahahaha
You are a programmer, so am I... you want to talk about technical stuff? let's talk about it... ;) hmm wait a minute, then you risk to prove that Ferraris has technical skills maybe superior to yours... that he studied in European universities of computer science... he yeah, are you still convinced that I am ferraris? you make me laugh so much hahahahah
but relax... and honestly live your projects.
like(0)
I don't know avitron's numbers, I have never seen the code but for sure it made a lot more users than AviWorlds, for a long time AviWorlds numbers were bogus, or at least not in line with the connected users, it would report in the old LoginScreen up to 140 and sometimes it would exceed that, but in the world about 10 people or maybe 15 were connected. As of today the numbers seem more realistic, and in fact they are few, excluding duplicates. anyway, you make me laugh too much by saying I am Ferraris hahahaha or my god what a laugh hahahaha
You are a programmer, so am I... you want to talk about technical stuff? let's talk about it... ;) hmm wait a minute, then you risk to prove that Ferraris has technical skills maybe superior to yours... that he studied in European universities of computer science... he yeah, are you still convinced that I am ferraris? you make me laugh so much hahahahah
but relax... and honestly live your projects.
View context
For Chris84, you deserve to know who you and all the others are, I am....
I am...
Philip Rosedal!!!
yes that's right, no I am Elon Musk, and now I will adopt the X here as my profile picture! Long live the X!
but please, but relax instead of talking nonsense, how you like to spout nonsense thinking you are smart and trying to show you are smart, and serious people instead laugh at this nonsense you say.
like(0)
I am...
Philip Rosedal!!!
yes that's right, no I am Elon Musk, and now I will adopt the X here as my profile picture! Long live the X!
but please, but relax instead of talking nonsense, how you like to spout nonsense thinking you are smart and trying to show you are smart, and serious people instead laugh at this nonsense you say.