March 15, 2010

Viewer2.0 beta: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly and the Odd

Posted in Musings, SecondLife, Viewer 2.0 at 10:38 am by zhaewry

The Good, the Bad, The Ugly and the Odd

Linden Lab released the first wide beta of the 2.0 viewer a few weeks ago. I’ve been using the beta as my primary viewer since then. I don’t think you can fairly make sense of a new user interface through a hit and run experience. What is my impression? Well, it’s a work in progress. There is much to like. There is some to dislike, one or two things which are really bad, and a range of things which make you scratch your head and go “How on earth did that end up in a user interface?”

As I stressed in my previous note about the client, this is BETA code. The reason one does a beta is to find problems when you think you’re getting close to what you want. With user interface code, this means actually getting it in the hands of real users and then seeing how they manage.  So, one assumes this isn’t the fully baked version that will be 2.0. At the same time, it’s close enough to what Linden is likely to ship that its worth some serious critique about the parts which are broken.

This post represents my personal experience and my personal reaction. User interface is a mater of taste. Tastes vary, so you may not agree with some or possibly all of my specific issues. I welcome feedback and other people’s insights.

After a quick overall impression, I’m going to proceed to highlight a series of themed issues. I’m then going to list off a collection of specific smaller issues, and finally close with some suggestions on how to improve the user’s experiences with the client.

This entire post is intended to be constructive. User interface building is hard. Changing a large body of code is hard. There is a lot of potential in the 2.0 client. There are also a lot of rough edges. I hope this posts highlights some of the rough edges, and more importantly, offers some suggestions to smooth them off.


I like the basic approach. While Second Life isn’t the web and has some very different user interface challenges, starting new users with an environment which looks like one they know fairly well is clever. In many ways, this is both a strength and a weakness of the approach. Its strong when the metaphor works and in particular, when the client acts in ways which make sense to people who are familiar with web browsers. Looking like a web browsers works quite badly when the client looks like a web browser but doesn’t do what you expect of a web browser. It works even less well, when you say to yourself “Well, heck, it could do it in the obvious way.”

The “web like” framing metaphor is a starting point. Unlike a web browser, the Second Life Client actually is a set of tools for a number of  very different tasks. The core task of the client is to immerse the user in the virtual world.  This doesn’t simply mean showing the world. It also means making it easy to interact with the world.  This has several parts. First, making it easy to do tasks you need to do, second doing so in a minimally obtrusive fashion. Third, not hiding information which aids immersion from the user.

A good user interface needs to present information in an attractive and consistent fashion. It should also do so in a fashion which accommodates people on a variety of screen sizes and users with a variety of visual challenges.  The current user interface as presented in the 2.0 beta fails this test in significant ways. Good interfaces don’t waste space. The beta client often has acres of space which is unused while cramming elements into tiny spaces.

Good user interfaces try to avoid “modal” behavior, where things behave differently based on where you are in the interface. The 2.0 interface is modal in a number of frustrating ways. The Camera widget is painfully modal, requiring clicks to change the effect of clicking on the arrows within the widget. The Audio controls are obscure in similar ways.

The right hand dock

One of the major new elements in the 2.0 beta is the right hand dock. One stop shopping for a lot of information? Perhaps. But at the moment its also a highly modal tangle of user interface elements. The tab slides away to clean up the screen while holding context, which is nice. But, the tab can’t be resized, nor can it be torn off. This means that all the uses of the tab are forced to share a vertical format. It also means that you get to see one, and only one type of information in the client at a time. You can’t see your friends list while browsing a profile. You can’t see nearby people while looking at notices. You can’t  use the inventory at the same time as seeing any of the above information. (You can, oddly, pop up the old 1.23 style inventory floater, if you know the obscure keystrokes, but all the other elements are pinned into the modal dock.)

Making the dock unsizable makes it painfully hard to use nested inventory folders, as you’re never able to see all of the names of nested folders without constant mouse motion. Making the dock modal means you end up constantly clicking between things in the dock and losing any context you had in a task. Making the dock handle so many type of information leads to odd little left and right arrows which hide and expose other information.


Notifications are a promising element, but they don’t quite work. For one, the things being shoved into the notification box are of several types. Some are group notices. These are rarely items you need to address in a hurry. Mixed in are events from scripts, teleport offers, texture offers and online/offline status updates. online/offline updates are especially bizarre. They go away without a trace. If you are not at your screen, you will miss them. They do not go to the chat history, they do not go to the IM history they are gone.

Mixing real time and notice style IMs in one play is awkward. Its easy to mistake the one for the other. Having that space combined with the sometimes redundant, sometimes needed IM popups is also remarkably busy.

The notifications are small by default . On top of this, every single one begins “topic:”   Using up 7 characters in an already too small field is simply adding insult to injury.  You can resize (and even tear off) the notification cluster, but it chews up space, and you soon get into scrolling even so. Even if you expand notifications to the point there is extra space, you still need to click through them to the popup to actually get the full content.

The “This group has traffic” chiclets rapidly end up with a hard to notice scroll bar and useful element out of sight. Yes, you can resize and float these, but again, it tends to end up with scrolling and active window management.

Chat, IM context switching and all that jazz

The 2.0 beta separates chat from IM (both group and private) This leads to two totally disjoint text steams and two separate input areas. In my personal use, this is very frustrating. I am often (almost always when I’m in a public space) using both IMs and chat. Often to people in the same space. Public chat for the social conversation in the space, IM for a quiet word with a friend to share a thought or insight. Group IM, because a relevant topic has come up. Having the two streams fully disjointed means I need to hop between two input areas. The ability to merge the streams in the 1.23 client is sorely missed.

For added frustration, there is a quick keyboard shortcut to the local chat area (enter will do if you’re not in an input area, escape, followed by enter if you are) I haven’t found one to take you back to the conversation box. Flipping the mouse back and forth is tedious. For added difficulty, the very hard to notice update of IM tabs while you’re looking at text chat makes it very easy to totally miss someone speaking to you in IM.

To Link, or Not to Link

The beta is very inconsistent about what’s a “link.” This breaks the metaphor of a web client approach in a number of frustrating ways. In a lot of places where you could just have a link there is a TINY little (i) which you can click. Most of these lead to an odd intermediate visual element and clicks there take you to the information you want.  If this is a web like client, the model for links is well understood. You make the element that comprises a link visually distinguished, and clicking on it takes you to the information. Web browsers rarely have little tiny icons you have to locate and then click.

The intermediate element approach shows up in a lot of places. See someone’s name in chat? You get this odd “not a profile” not a link thing.  Touch one of the notification chiclets,and you get a new thing, where most likely you can finally click what you want. Hover an item, and you get a very lightweight info box, which is far less informative than the 1.23 style hovertip. Again, you get to click that if you want the real information about the item. If the Lab is concerned that the current hovertips are too complex for beginning users, make level of detail a choice.

Windows/Floaters land all over the place

When you close a floater/window in the current 2.0 beta, its destination ranges from stacking up in very transparent boxes on the upper left, to docking with the bottom chat bar to just vanishing. How you restore a window you had up is equally variable. You can tear off both the notify stack and the conversation update stack, and they dock back to the bottom. This is a lot of places for windows to be going.  If you do tear off the two notify/conversation update windows, they no longer re-arrange when you open and close the right side dock.


A ton of digital ink has been splashed on search. The current 2.0 beta search tool fails in almost every way imaginable. On head to head tests, the previous interface requires fewer clicks, finds far more material in a direct and accurate fashion and doesn’t require trying to speak directly to the underlying search code for simple searches. Event searches spanning multiple days don’t work. Avatar and group searches where the names include common terms require horrible contortions to avoid getting off topic results. The top search field is almost entirely useless. Almost every search entered there leads to slogging through the full search interface.

Just plain unattractive


Profiles, Profile Pictures and the whole use of the right hand dock to present these elements in the current beta is just a mess. The profile has historically been an important element in connecting users. Looking at people’s profiles in social settings is a routine behavior of many residents. In  the 1.23 client, profile information is presented in a floater, with significantly more text in each element displayed. The way picks and classifieds are presented is especially well worked out. Each pick stands on its own with a picture, text and location. In the beta,  The profile is mashed into a smaller space. The primary profile picture competes with the First life picture for screen real estate, shrinking both to postage stamp size. The text for both is truncated, requiring clicking more to see it and then hiding other parts of the profile.  Putting both first life and second life profile components side by side makes each seem less important.  The phrase “real life” muddies the water significantly, especially as there is no actual validation of any of the real life information.

Groups are shoved into a list of links flowed into a very hard to read hodge podge. If you click on a group to see what it’s about, you don’t get a floater, instead the profile is overlayed by the group information. At this point, clicking back takes you to…  Umm. The friend’s list. Exploring a persons profile groups is remarkably painful.

Picks are similarly mangled. Tiny postage stamp photos, “more” buttons hiding most of people’s text, and painfully small fonts. Classifeds get the same treatment, with a small entry at the bottom of the screen to clue you into their existence.  Picks and classifieds  retain a link to a location. You might expect this to be a clickable field. It is not. You cannot click it. You cannot drag it to your landmarks or the favorites bar. This is a direct violation of the web metaphor. In most web browsers, you can click on a link, and drag it directly to anyplace which takes a link and saves it.

The admittedly quirky interests tab is gone. This sort of puzzles, as Second Life is actually actively promoting Europe and other places where English isn’t the customary language, and yet the place in the profile letting people know which languages you speak has been removed.

Shoving profiles into the sidebar also eliminates the possibility of having more than one profile visible at a time. This is a real annoyance when talking to multiple people.  It also eliminates looking at your friends list while looking at a profile. I routinely stack up several profiles of people I’ve talked to, or content creators who’s content I’ve noticed to one side in the client. Removing this ability requires me to pause and copy/past or otherwise manage content, rather than letting the client for me. Again, being able to drag “links” would help here.

Ugly and Odd, point by point

This section enumerates bits of poor fit and finish. Some of these issues look like bugs/poor implementation of good ideas. Some of them look like more serious design choice issues. For each I’ll try to explain my concern and tie it to one of the themes from above.

Close, Minimize, Dock or whatever

When you have several windows up in the beta, you will be faced with a lovely selection of icons to dismiss a window. Some things have tiny little circular (x) tags. Some have more traditional boxed [x] elements. Some have little “_” elements which minimize them. Two almost identical items, the Conversation float and the chat history share the same element, but use totally different hiding mechanisms, and require a different way to restore them. Ctrl-p brings UP the preferences tab. Ctrl-h beings up (and minimizes) the local chat history. NOTHING on the keyboard seems to bring up the conversation floater. Some things are dismissed within the right hand dock by little top arrow clicks. The History chat adds to the mix by having a special little down arrow icon which redocks it onto the bottom text input area.

This hodge podge is inconsistent.  Users can’t learn what to look for, because the answer is different in most of the dialogs. User’s can’t develop a consistent expectation for keystrokes which bring windows up and down, because the answer is different for each type of dialog.

Cog or Plus or “advanced” or “right click” or…”More>>>” or “>>>”

The beta viewer has at least four ways and places to tweak things. A bunch of elements have little tiny “*” cogs on them. They show up at the bottom of the volume slider, the bottom of various bits of the right hand dock, and in the edit floaters at various times. They also can be found on the Inventory Floater. A number of elements have “+” icons which expose more functon. Some elements respond to right (context) clicks. In the graphic’s bit of the preferences profile we come across the “Advanced” button which exposes all the graphics tweakery which used to be revealed by clicking “custom” .  This is dead next to the “hardware” button which pops up a seperate little floater.

Colors, Contrast and Size

Those with even slightly long memories will recall much unhappy howling when the labs reskinned the client a while ago. One of the loudest complaints was that the lab imposed a color scheme which was very low contrast, thus making it hard on older eyes, or those with visual challenges.  The lab seems to have fully forgotten this outcry.  The beta client is full of low contrast elements. My personal dislikes include the dark green on gray, and the extremely tiny links to groups in profiles. In general, the client feels as it it was primarily developed and tested on people with 30 inch displays, and 30 year old eyes. Running it on my 16 inch laptop with nearly 50 year old eyes, it becomes unreadable on a regular basis.

In the 1.23 client, an unfocused floater becomes  transparent. Transparent floaters allow you to see more of the actual world. The 2.0 beta doesn’t include this feature.  Because floaters are more obtrusive when unfocused,  they can be lest around longer. The blocking effect of unfocused floaters leads to more clicking to minimize them, and then more clicking to return them when they are wanted again.

The Conversation box details

Tabs on the conversation box are just odd. No matter how much screen real estate is available they don’t show full group names. Nor do those tabs act as link elements. They also blink in an incredibly soft and easy to miss fashion and highlight new content very poorly (Having new content highlighted in an area far away which I need to click to see the details of is no help here at all. The fact that if you’re *in* a tab you get one behavior and not *in* a tab another is just bewildering. For the record if you left focus on a conversation box tab, you will not get any notice of the new content except for the actual text showing. The talk count on the bottom doesn’t go up and the window tab doesn’t highlight. If you focus away from SL and come back, you aren’t given any cue you should look other than the actual new content (if you can remember what was last said)

The “People” tab

The 1.23 “Contacts”  list is sucked into the right hand dock. As mentioned above this means it keeps getting lost as  you use the dock for other features. The list  has lost its direct access to tick boxes for “see me”, “map me” and “modify my objects.” This makes managing these properties much harder, as you can no longer sort by them, nor quickly see them. These status bits are hidden, two clicks away, inside people’s profile, on the “status and notes” tab.

The people list displays twice, first as “Online” then again as “All” which you can sort multiple ways, through the odd cog control at the bottom of the tab.  This is  redundant, and only serves as a tease, showing how nice it might be to to put people in folders of the user’s choosing.  Pretty much every IM client I use has folders I can manage. The lack of same in Second Life has been glaring for years. The added visual teaser here only highlights the absence.

Camera Controls

The camera controls are wildly modal and deeply confusing. I almost never used them in the 1.23 client. I simply cannot use them in the 2.0 beta. Having to constantly click between pan, tilt and zoom is just baffling. Its modal  in the very worst sense of modal.

Audio controls

First, the audio controls are hidden. The tiny little play and speaker icon are subtle beyond redemption. Second, I think they include the densest mix of overlapping elements in the entire new user interface. If you hover over the little speaker icon you get a little drop down master slider. If you click it, it mutes/un mutes the master volume. If you hover in the area you get a dark gray tiny bar with a button, a cog/tiny down triangle button and a “More>>” button which hovertips “Advanced controls” and gives you another complex little box. Viewer 2.0 adds a lot of added media context. Well and good, but this set of controls is massively more complicated than the 1.23 audio controls, dumps you to the middle of the preferences floater for some tasks and is diagonally across the screen from the voice controls. It is significantly harder to fine tune the mix of multiple speakers, background stream and sounds. The full up preferences screen us huge and much less useful than the previous small adjustment panel.

Making it better

Sort out the right hand dock

Fix the right hand dock. Make it sizable. Make it tear off. Don’t try to cram stuff into the straight jacket of a single fixed sized bar. Allow multiple torn off floaters of any item which is docked. Create a simple, consistent scheme by which they can be dismissed or minimized back to the dock.  Make the dock a place where things start, but recognize that it has limits. You don’t see every sub-window in a browser inside a single sidebar —  don’t do that in the client.  Think about providing a simple pattern for people to pull content back to the dock and then off the screen. One possibility would be a button which would redock floaters, another to pull the dock in. Think about making the metaphor as consistent as possible. Don’t minimize windows into multiple separate places without a very good reason.

Sort out notifications

Fix notifications. Stop letting some information vanish without a trace. Lower the click count needed to do routine tasks with notifications. Figure out how to highlight realtime interactive notifications. Scripts wanting user input are very different from a notice of an event four hours or days in the future.

Fix the chat/IM separation. People use chat and IM at the same time. Forcing people to mouse between them breaks immersion and complicates everyone’s life.

Improve consistency

Pick a single visual element for each major task, and make sure you use them consistently. Pick consistent keystroke behavior to match and make sure you can raise and dismiss stuff in a consistent and easy fashion.

Make hovertips match your metaphor and if you want very simple ones for beginning users, make the level of details and click through needed user controllable.  Make context clicking available universally rather than in select places. Make the meaning of left click and right click consistent across all the client’s elements, and make that match common web client practice. The new context menus allow more information to be displayed. Take advantage of this to minimize the number of clicks needed to access information. If this feels like it may overwhelm new users, include an option to either consolidate or cascade advanced information.

Make the client visually friendly and accessible

Allow serious, easy skinning of color. Allow easy font adjustments. Package at least one high contrast scheme. Avoid tiny window controls. They are hard to see, they are hard to mouse over and they are a nightmare to describe to people. Follow the web metaphor and make “link” and “click” areas large and easy to spot. Allow hovertips on them to help cue people. Avoid effects which blink. Avoid things you cannot turn off which are likely to trigger migraines and worse.  Run the client on laptops. Run it on small screens. Find some testers with older eyes. Find some testers with less than 20 20 vision. Make sure that its easy to spot key windows when new information is available. This may require customization so people can have as strong or light a cue as needed.

Avoid modal elements unless you have no choice

Modal elements are widely viewed as problematic in user interface design. The current viewer and the 2.0 beta are filled with them. As much as possible, ask whether they are making the user’s life better or worse. This is especially cogent in widgets like the camera controls. It is equally relevant in couplings between which tab is selected and what things do and don’t blink on other parts of the screen.

Revist widgets and block elements

Look hard at the various controls such as camera and moving. Simple is good. Modal is bad. Getting down to as few elements as possible is good, but not if it requires constant mouse motion to switch between modes.  Really look at the bulkier dialog elements and floaters. Look at how many different metaphors  and modes are in use and ask if that is useful.

Listen to the community and your users about search

It doesn’t work. Look at search in 1.23 and make sure that what replaces it works  as well or better. Search is an important part of the process of connecting users to users, and users to events. Broken search is really bad.  Its been said before. I’m saying it again. Find out how people are actually using search and figure out how to get them the same results or better. This is the base expectation. Taking away function is bad.

Make the web metaphor meaningful

Web browsers have a consistent pattern for links, hover tips and context menus. They have a consistent pattern for what you can drop/drag and where and why. The client ought to look at best practices in the major clients and follow them. Let people drag folders of bookmarks to the favorites bar. Make names and other elements real links, and make them behave that way. Two small examples. Dragging someone’s name out of chat to the people bar should generate a “friendship offer”  and put it up for you to click send on. Dragging someone’s name out of chat or IM to a group ought to do the same  in generating a group offer.

Worry about pretty

Make sure profiles, groups and the various things users see on a regular basis look pretty and polished. Pictures need to be big enough to see nicely. Text should be easy to read. Stuff which logically belongs together ought to stay together.Icons need to be big, pretty and consistent. Look at how other applications are doing these elements and emulate the pretty ones.

Second life is a very visual place. When the client frames rich 3d content in idiosyncratic, clunky visually obscuring ways, it breaks immersion and it creates a poor setting for users expecting a highly visual experience. Fit and finish matters a lot. Pretty matters a lot.  Think about how to make elements unobtrusive when they are not in use. Transparency should be settable for all elements, including whether they fade at all, fade on loss of focus, and how far they fade.

Missing bits

There are things which seem to be simply impossible to do in the 2.0 client. You can’t search for who’s permitted to modify your objects or map you. With large friend’s lists, these become serious annoyances. The very rudimentary skinning available in 1.23 is missing. Hovertips don’t show up for a lot of items and the ones which do take you through another link to the full information, which still seems less than was in 1.23.  Anything which simply can’t be done at all in 2.0 but can in 1.23 ought to be sorted out before the code is considered done.

The people tab  hints at nested folders for your contacts, but doesn’t deliver, instead showing an odd redundant pair of lists.  Fix thisand make it easy for people to manage contacts in ways which make sense to them.

There are a number of good ideas in the third party viewers which have not made it into 2.0 beta. quick access to Windlight presets is one of the biggest. There are a bunch of small but useful ideas to make it easier to tweak preferences without needing to visit the full preferences panel. The list goes on. The 2.0 team ought to be asking “Which of these belong in the mainline client?”

Closing thoughts

The 2.0 beta introduces a lot of new ideas. Some work, some don’t. The client is clearly among other tasks, aimed at improving first hour and new user experiences. The web client look helps with that, but the current fit and finish does not. I’ve offered one set of thoughts about what’s not working. I’ve tried to make this constructive and thoughtful. I look forward to seeing future versions of the 2.0 code. I don’t expect it all to get better at once. But.. At the moment, the sharp edges are all over the place. The ugly is pretty directly in front of people. Take the time to get the fit and finish right. Take the time to think through where you’ve over used new elements and where you don’t use them enough.



  1. Sean McPherson said,

    Thank you for pulling all of this together. Great suggestions and observations. I expect to bounce a lot of folks over here who ask me what I think about it, as you’ve summed up many of my frustrations and hopes all in one easy-to-read, sensible article.

  2. lufpleh said,

    Great post, by far the most thoughtful & constructive analysis of Viewer 2 I have read.
    I like Viewer 2 but as you clearly say it has a lot of rough edges and problems. If Viewer 2 is to be successful in its goal to ease the introduction of new users & improve retention rates, LL need to listen & follow your sensible advice.

  3. Harper Beresford said,

    I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment, Zha. The idea of making the UI into a more web-like experience was a good one; the implementation has been not-so-great. Thanks for enunciating your thoughts (which are, for the most part, mine as well).

  4. Lalo Telling said,

    Possibly the best comprehensive review of 2.0 beta I’ve read. I’m also glad you focused on the User Interface, and didn’t distract with mention of the other co-released new features. If we cannot become comfortably ‘second-nature’ with basic functions like communicating, searching, and changing POV with the camera, of what use are alpha-layering and “HMTL on a prim”?

  5. Perrie Juran said,

    Thank you for this great review. I have not used the new viewer and the more I read about it the less likely I am to try it.

    In one of the blogs Phillip Linden did state that the target audience for 2.0 was corporate users. In other words it is meant to be enterprise software. I am in SL to socialize, not for business purposes.

    Supposedly this new viewer is supposed to make the first hour experience of new users easier. How can this be when seasoned users are having trouble with it?

    Linden Labs needs to take lessons from the Emerald developers! What has made Emerald so popular is that it put some essential controls at my fingertips without interfering with the immersive nature of SL. And while I know not everyone has this experience, Emerald does run faster on both my desk top and my lap top!

  6. Dio said,

    nicely done Zha. That all made a whole lot of sense. Lalo is right–probably the best, most carefully constructed commentary on viewer 2 so far

  7. Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by ZhaEwry: I’ve blogged Fairly in depth thoughts about the Second Life 2.0 beta client….

  8. […] Viewer2.0 beta: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly and the Odd « Zha’s Virtual Musings […]

  9. You have written a great review Zha, I hope it will be picked up by the developers.

  10. quadrapop said,

    High Five Zha… like the other comments above you have expressed my thoughts (and more) on Viewer 2.0 – expect more links and views via me, will be pointing many to this as a succinct, useful review of the new Beta Viewer.

  11. Doreen Garrigus said,

    Bravo! This is a gorgeous review. Thanks for writing it.

  12. Ace Albion said,

    A lot of good comments and points, but I have to say I think we’re basically going to get what we have now with some minor tweaks. Things like redoing the whole sidebar seem like going back to square one, and whether you or I feel that is necessary, I just cannot see Linden Lab tearing down what they’ve done so far.

    Outright bugs will probably be fixed, but the rest will probably be considered “good enough”.

  13. Lalo Telling said,

    1. This review is getting rave reviews in the comments at New World Notes:

    2. Read (and groan at) Q Linden’s comments in this JIRA:

    Pure Nixonian stonewall.

  14. Sean Gorham said,

    An excellent review, Zha. I agree with most of it, having used the new viewer myself since it first came out. LL really, really needs to give this a read and take it to heart. Sadly, the cynical part of me thinks LL will ignore the whole thing and just keep on stumbling along.

  15. Hi Zae,

    Stumbled upon your blog as I was reading NWN. Great analysis even though some of them got lost in me as I’m not too technical a user despite my 3 years of being in SL. I am not abuilder nor a scripter, but I tend to dabble on the intermediate functions of Viewer 1.23, so I would leave the other commentary or posts of agreement to the rest who get to use the viewer more exhaustively.

    Overall, I feel the same way you did. I like the Viewer, there are a couple of really bad things that I hate, but it’s still a work in progress so hopefully LL picks things up and read your post so they can look into improving the viewer more.

    I agree whole heartedly with your opinion about the right hand dock. It is a waste of space that could’ve have been used to open things that would normally need a new window/browser for. There are a lot of possibilities for the dock for integration, I would love the dock’s purpose to be boosted further by making tabs in the dock such as Destination Guide fully accessible inside the dock. Putting that much space out and opening Destination Guide and STILL need to open a new window makes it look cluttered. If LL wants people to really explore SL, they must not make the whole experience cluttered. People shouldn’t need to open a new browser just to teleport or read about place information about places IN SECOND LIFE.

    Destination Guide is just the start. XstreetSL integration is next. Put XstreetSL microsite in the dock with its own tab. Then the website and all it’s tools, and we’re golden.

    Looks like a lot of work.

    Anyway, thanks a lot for your insight regarding the new viewer. I’m praying LL picks this up. Your voice deserves to be heard.

  16. […] While Second Life isn’t the web and has some very different user interface challenges, startin… […]

  17. Dolly Deathwish said,

    Still not a patch on Emerald.

  18. Ziki Questi said,

    Thanks, Zha! This is by far the best and most comprehensive review of v2 I’ve yet seen.

  19. brinda allen said,

    Certainly one of the criteria for how good and honest a post is concerns how many negative comments are attached………Hmm….seeing none I have to agree that your take and suggestions are well said.

    My fear is that since *The Benevolent Monarchy* has spent so much time and money they won’t listen.
    Not being a “geek” but being an immersionist sounds like what we would really like is 1.23.5 with new stuff added.
    Emerald anyone?

  20. I think the best path would be to modify the current beta 2.0 viewer and remove the worst pains. It expect it would be easier to maintain, new linden updates should be less work to incorporate, then it would be to keep trying to back port new updates to the 1.23 branch.

  21. valentina kendal said,

    thank you so much for the time and effort to put so much of what I vaguely felt into articulate form. I think one of the most serious problems right now is their biggest – as you put it, fitting everything into the right hand dock, visible one window at a time, even if it breaks elements very important to the ned user like Profiles. And it bothers me to no end that the Dock pushes the world when it slides open – old windows didn’t do that – it totally ruins the immersive experience! Thank you!

  22. You did a great job with this review Zha. This is the type of feedback every good BETA Manager dreams of!

    I am one of the people who is so excited by the promise of Shared Media, I have possibly been too lenient in my objective evaluation of the new UI. As I read your analysis I found myself nodding in agreement with many of your points.

    Since the release of the new viewer, I have been pleased with the Lab’s efforts to field questions, listen to user input and make changes that the community identified as serious functionality / security concerns. I hope they continue to accept feedback like this revue and the release candidate of the V2.x client offers all the functionality and usability we need.

  23. Sven Pertelson said,

    Good review – hope someone at LL reads and digests it. I still wonder how any one can get paid to build a user interface and get very basic things wrong. How about the audio button – normal convention press the > button to play, press the || button to pause – not in this viewer!

  24. Transparent Banshee said,

    Ty for doing this, it’s great. I have a feeling (and I have sent my thoughts to LL) that this release have been subjected to a someone that has “change for whatever reason” as a motto. I also strongly object to the idea of doing this as
    “webbish” as possible…The obvious thing to do is to do a client as easy to handle and as effective as possible, not to make it look as a web browser..

  25. Connie Sec said,

    Sorry..Second Life is NOT a web page. The IDEA behind making it easy for a first time user to interact is a good one..but the meme of “this is the future of the web” has been taken to its illogical conclusion. SL is a place where people do things from communicating to building..amongst many. Much like the computer is a machine that does many differing tasks, so should the UI in SL go with this concept. Make it windows, or Mac…not some bastard child of Firefox. So what happens when cloud serving of programs becomes ubiquitous?..A browser within a browser?..I think not.

  26. Ted said,


    I tried beta 2.0 and didn’t like it at all. I agree with all the menu point and click non sense to do what the old client does with a single click.

    We can only hope that Linden will “NEVER” make this client a mandatory client for access to SL. It’s bloated, it’s slow (far slower than the old client), and personally, unattractive was putting it nicely.

    The old client is far better for builders, scripters, or anyone else who wants to actually get something done.

    People will leave SL if that client ever becomes the only option.
    I just cannot work with it.

  27. Wiz Nordberg said,

    Excellent point-by-point analysis Zha. Thank you. Reminded me, in one place, of all the little details that combine to make the V2 experience less than I hoped for.

    If I were to coalesce all the details into one simple problem, I believe they missed the opportunity to “simplify”, and instead, merely rearranged and repainted.

    Simplification was what the viewer needed, reducing the myriads of concepts into fewer, more consistent, more powerful ones. Communication is one case-in-point. In the old viewer, there was local chat, group chat, group notices, region-wide notices, inventory offers, and server messages. All of these are essentially the same: communication to you, about something, with an option to respond or interact. Viewer 2 actually complicated rather than simplified this. While it might appear that “notifications” are useful, they are really nothing more than a band-aid to try to repair the problem. Notifications add yet another “communication component”, and when you click them, you are taken into at least 3 different kinds of communication environments, all different. Ultimately, you need to understand everything you did in Viewer 1, plus now you need to know how notifications will launch those various communication facilities.

    Why not instead fold all communication into a single “communication window” which, like Inventory, could have clonable panes for power users, and keep things solid and centralized for new users? Local chat, inventory offers, and region notices come from users, group chat comes from group owners, region notices come from the system. Somehow, I have to believe that a consistent “inbox” metaphor (a familiar one to many people), flattening all these into one interface, would have reduced the number of concepts significantly, reduced the clutter, and cut down significantly on the learning curve.

    That is just a case-in-point and I believe each aspect of the Second Life experience needed more of a “meta-view” of what really is going on, to reduce not just the menu options, not to just hide them, but to complete eliminate the need for many options and combine them into simpler more powerful interfaces.

    To me, that is the biggest need, and biggest missed opportunity in Viewer 2.

  28. Zi Ree said,

    Thank you so much for this article! You picked up a lot of points I found problematic with the new viewer and explained the reasons why they are problematic in a very clear and elaborate way. I tried to compile a list of things that keep me from using the 2.0 beta, but I failed because the list became so long, and I was getting annoyed beyond belief with the viewer. I sincerely hope that the people at the Lab will look at this article and actually read and unserstand it.

  29. Lamorna Proctor said,

    This is by far the best and most comprehensive review of Viewer 2.0 that I have read, and I agree with almost everything that you have said. I hope Linden Lab hire you as a consultant!

    As a Second Life resident of about three and a half years standing, I used Viewer 2.0 exclusively for a month after it was released. I resisted the temptation to get annoyed by the fact that things were different, and tried really hard to get used to the new ways. I also played with some of the new features, such as the alpha layer on avatars and shared media on a prim, and I can see how useful they will be (notwithstanding security concerns regarding the latter).

    However, last Monday I somewhat regretfully made the decision to abandon Viewer 2.0, at least in its current form, and go back to Emerald. Even allowing for the initial learning curve, I found that my productivity as a designer and scripter had gone down dramatically. I also continued to have difficulty using the UI in simple social situations.

    Maybe the old UI is so ingrained into me that I will never learn to love the new one, but at the very least they have to fix the camera controls and the modal sidebar before I will consider using Viewer 2.0 again.

    I am personally very committed to Second Life, and I hope Linden Lab don’t ruin it for me and many others. I really hope they take notice of this excellent review and the many issues that have been raised in the PJIRA before shoving Viewer 2.0 down the throats of existing residents. I’m not even sure it will meet their goal of attracting new residents, at least not in its current form. If they continue down the current track and keep believing their own propaganda, they are in danger of having a re-run in miniature of the New Coke fiasco.

    /me signs off now with a long sigh…

  30. iSkye Silverweb said,

    EXCELLENT review! Expressed all the things I hate about SLV2 and wish they’d done right in the first place instead of pushing it out as beta to everybody and then declaring it “full release, TA DA!’ without really making any serious changes that were responsive to users’ concerns.

    I tried it and my very first reaction was, “Damn, this is too dark.” I felt claustrophobic, and even sleepy. I didn’t feel like I was seeing the world I was supposed to be interacting with, I was seeing this dark environment with a bunch of windows that constantly popped up and a pushy, oversized sidebar – those simply got in my way, I couldn’t see the world for all those windows! Those pop-ups separated me from that world. I want to see the avatars I’m interacting with, the sims I am moving through and objects I’m interacting with. And where do I find the building controls so i can build stuff? Editing content is an exhausting experience.

    Zha was totally on-the-nose with everything, just great.

    Additionally, SLV2 has my computer running way too hot…and I’m not alone in reporting this: .

  31. Finned Tigerfish said,

    They need someone who understands intuitive GUI – someone from Apple. This thing is a disaster!

    • Beeflin Grut said,

      Exactly! If Apple analysed its look-and-feel they would gag on their own laughter.

  32. Astrin Few said,

    Excellent work, Zha!

  33. JudgeDread said,

    Great comprehensive review of Viewer 2.0.
    Hopefully it will end up in most people’s Recycle Bin where it belongs, if this is going the final bones of the LL Viewer.

  34. Beeflin Grut said,

    I’m afraid I haven’t got beyond the five-minutes-and-end-up-screaming stage, so not much chance of an immersion test for me! But it is incredibly lacking in functionality and feel considering it’s supposed to be an upgrade, for all the reasons you mention. I have no confidence in the team developing it at all, since it fails to improve on Viewer 1 in any way as far as I can see and makes it impossible for 1 & 2 equipped people to communicate about how to do things. One specific point however is that my disabled (epileptic) partner finds it very visually disturbing, partly because of the inferior system font (why??), partly the low contrast and mostly because of the difficulty of keeping SL feeling real through a very 2D frame. SL was always much more like a fantasy game than a web browser, suiting the clear and solid-looking button style, whereas the browser concept is a dumb and unoriginal starting point, in my view, which will never work. I am hoping rather desperately that teams like Emerald will be able to continue to develop the v1 client. I do *not* need it to be “improved” with any of 2.0’s new ideas, and what I do need has not been addressed. E.g. hair not falling through shoulders…

  35. […] well, stubborn, I just downloaded the current official viewer 2.1 client to play with. I’ve blogged at length about what I think needs to be fixed in 2.0 I had hoped that one of the clear messages in that post was that the 2.0 approach of making people […]

  36. […] Viewer2.0 beta: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly and the Odd « Zha’s …Mar 15, 2010 … Lamorna Proctor said,. March 25, 2010 at 8:34 am. This is by far the best and most comprehensive review of Viewer 2.0 that I have read, and I … […]

  37. They additionally bring a variety of saddle coverings for individuals aiming to keep the steed warm and comfortable or dry while under severe working out conditions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: