SLUniverse Forums

Psyke Phaeton

__________________

Kristian

I hate Sametime with the passion of 10,000 burning suns. It's terrible. If I could install software here I'd have gone to Pidgin long ago.

Lucifer Baphomet

That was as exiting as watching paint dry

__________________

CaleVinson

Marginal misfit !!!!!!!1111!!!!!!


***************

Its probably unfair of me to read too much into a proof-of-concept. But I still can't help but wonder whether they're missing the point. What "value-adding" was achieved by having the avatars? What did having a full-blown virtual world add, that would not have been there if one guy had a 3D model of the server on his PC, and the other guy could see it via a desktop-sharing type application?

Macphisto Angelus

hahahaha The slide mentioned Lotus.

__________________
Mah OpenLife blahg

Malachi

Or even a 2D drawing wouldn't have been less informative.

It's what is called "a solution in search of a problem".

Jessica Robertson

IBM sees big business in selling the hardware and possibly the services necessary for virtual worlds and virtual world hosting. It makes sense that they are trying to find business uses for it.

Samantha Fuller

How useful this kind of thing will be depends almost entirely on the accuracy of the 3D models, The problem with most documentation is the practice of shoveling the schematics for 20 different models and variations on to the same doc and reusing it across the board. If using 3d worlds highlights and causes that to stop it will be helpful. if not then you will have a case where they get the 3d model half disassembled and suddenly someone will say "You idiot this is the wrong model"

Rema Quandry

Here's my take on this:


If the two people aren't located in the same physical location in RL, the Virtual World approach--if used extensively--might actually significantly reduce a company's telecom expenses. It'd be--I think--cheaper than other communication alternatives.

The virtual world approach would also allow on-the-spot, detailed explanations, impromptu examination of alternative solutions to problems, and would help make sure that there were no miscommunications during the process (you'd have a "show" with a "tell", instead of a "tell" alone).

The flexibility of the virtual world approach represents its main value.

A 3D model on the server of a person's PC doesn't usually enable a person to easily "pull out the rack" and see inside . . . or virtually manipulate what's inside. Also, most organizations would easily be able to use the virtual world stuff, whereas, not every organization can afford the kind of people or software needed to develop a good, flexible PC-based 3D model.

Anyway, that's what I get out of this.

--- Rema

CaleVinson

Absolutely. All I'm saying is that you don't necessarily need a full-blown virtual-world to get the benefit of cheaper communication.

Mmm, I'm not so sure. You have to build your model of a server in either case, whether that's inside SL or inside a modelling program. Its not obvious to me that there was anything important in that demo that couldn't be done by sharing the desktop of someone running a 3D modelling program - don't all such programs come with physics nowadays? Blender does, for example. I can't think of anything in SL that gives it an advantage in *physical simulation* - heck, its the modelling programs that have inbuilt fluid-simulation-capability, not SL.

And again, I ask - what did having the avatars and a persistent world contribute to that example?

Rema Quandry

The virtual world won't be costing IBM nearly as much as travel expenses for personnel--especially with air fares and gas prices being what they are. SL provides the same advantages as video conferencing at a significantly less cost.

The advantage of the virtual world is the same as the advantages provided by distance learning venues . . . with some other "kickers".

The "immediacy" of the virtual world (its ability to "engage" the student") may provide a significant kick to learning over and above that normally experienced in any distance learning situation.

Another advantage is running voice in the virtual world. Again, that increases "immediacy", makes the participants seem more "real", etc., (with no wait time for typing or crazy typing animations). Also, if IBM were to run lots of courses, meetings, etc. in a sim on SL, SL would become a familiar, comfortable place to learn (beats sitting in auditorium or conference room chairs . . . and with no lost employee time as they go to an fro from their workstations).

If I worked for IBM, particularly as an instructor, I'd really like to try this rather than experiencing all the wear-and-tear and lost time (and hotel/food expenses) of traveling all over the country training people. I'd also find it easier--and more fun--than setting up the various alternatives for "live conferencing" available under educational computer systems like Blackboard and its ilk.

As far as the 3D model is concerned, chances are that the model can be imported into a SL venue . . . particularly if it exists already in some other graphics program (and it probably does if it's of more recent design). It's just a question--at worst--of translation into a form palatable to SL. The minute a .dxf or .obj file can be translated into an SL form, they'd be good to go. That's the most significant problem I see with IBM's proposal.

As a digital artist, if I could import certain types of files--like an .obj file--directly into SL, I'd be ecstatic. I could use my RL tools to build stuff. That would be really wonderful.

--Rema

Macphisto Angelus

From the looks of the OP, IBM is looking at OpenSim and not Second Life to do this. I think even they see that LL and SL are just not needed in the mix. Woah, LL are marginal misfits.

Samantha Fuller

One improvement that will help a lot would be for the editing particle effect beam to target the spot on the surface of the object last clicked on with the cursor instead of the center of the prim. Until recently the infrastructure pluming for that didn't exist, with the new LLTouchPosition command it probably dose (hint, hint, client developers). That and adjustable beam visibility would help teachers a lot.

CaleVinson

To my knowledge, LL have only just started to ask the question of whether they should add an ability to import arbitrary meshes into SL - there's a thread on this in the content-creation sub-forum. Is there anyone here bold enough to suggest that we'll get mesh import inside SL in under a year?

Mesh support exists in Blender et al, now. SL mesh support may still be messier in comparison, if a complete mesh has to be cut up into multiple pieces of a capped number of vertices each.

That said, and picking up on Mac's comments, perhaps that's one of the reasons IBM are going OpenSim rather than SL - independance from LL's development path/priorities.