Firstly, HUGE THANKS TO Lae Ming for her amazing analysis and comparison
from a place of expertise! That analysis blew me away.
Ric - thanks for your thoughts. I think we appreciate the fact that this is
not a 'smack-down' WWE where we are putting them together. Point taken even
before posting this question ;-) The post question is, of course, a
contrived framework with which to do what is a comparative analysis since
both environments have many similar issues. This is not like comparing Word
and Excel or Unity3D and Hipstamatic for iPhone. I think Lae Ming's answer
proves that point and that discussants are familiar with the overall intent
and goals of each environment. The point is that these environments are on
converging paths overall and borrow ideas back and fourth. The "open"
movement and the more commercial industry solutions from the e-learming,
virtual worlds, game, social, mobile, music, video and animation world as
well as the revolution on hardware platforms (which is mostly mobile and
which is what 2/3's of humanity will carry around in their pockets in the
next 2-3 years, not PCs with 'downloadable propriety clients' but
essentially mobile pocket super-computers) are all huge. In the end, this
is, in fact, one space and everyone gets that. We will find that "World of
Warcraft" probably will be as big a factor on things as much as the
now-niche tools being adopted because they are free.
On another issue, personally, I think what will be perhaps the most
interesting thing to watch in immersive worlds is the influence of the
traditional "heavy lifting" industrial strength game development and
animation tools in making these immersive worlds more interactive, more HD
quality "real" and immersive, and much richer (e.g., Unity3D, 3DStudioMax,
Maya, etc.) as well as the creative design thinking and "experience design"
and interactive "engagement" expertise which traditional game companies
bring to the table. Educators and corporate trainers seem to have a
traditional "pedagogical" approach which only slightly mimics techniques
which are 10,000 years old... "show, tell, discuss, quiz". The history of
failed e-learning in the early part of this decade proves that. Most of the
immersive world product I see in those sectors is not well thought out and
deadening. Yet the audience for this stuff is GameGen users. The average
"hard core" gamer is now 38 years of age. Everyone in the learning and
training space grew up on deeply immersive worlds or at least Nintendo and
Super Mario. So those users walk into a funeral parlor of uninspiring
pedantic output in most immersive world settings today. That is why the
capabilities of these tools is so important. And the issue that will win
the days is convenience of use, accessibility and depth and breadth of
immersive experience provided. If one looks toward the "players" who will
drive this, I see Linden Labs in one small area yet see the HUGE US
government pouring billions of dollars into this space; the US Defense
Department alone spent $5BBUS on building simulations. They seem to have a
bias towards OpenSim. I am no spring chicken and I remember the last time
they threw that kind of money at something, we got the Internet out of it
all.
Thanks for you insights!
As for your father, Mr. Moore's quote on stupidity and ignorance, I would
offer one I have come across recently as useful from the Persian poet Rumi:
"Sell your cleverness and buy bewilderment." I think he would agree. This
new world which is happening before our very eyes requires that!
> - Open Wonderland vs. OpenSim As Immersive Worlds<#1384f5c6cfebae64_group_thread_0>[4 Updates]
> - Web site update <#1384f5c6cfebae64_group_thread_1> [1 Update]
> I would like input on the pros/cons people have experienced with Open
> Wonderland vs. OpenSim. If I get enough input, I will publish my
> findings
> and send you a copy. My email is
> bholly...@digitalentertainmentalliance.com.
> *The basic question is*:* if you had to pick one approach would it be
> Open
> Wonderland or OpenSIM? *Aside from the obvious fact that it is free
> (vs.
> Second Life), I am interested in actual user perspectives &
> experiences
> (pro/con) on OW vs. OS with facts and personal hands-on experiences in
> the
> following areas:
> - General code stability and maturity of each offer
> - Ease of development and required level of expertise
> - Which will "win out" in the long run (given the US Govt.'s support
> for
> OpenSim initiatives)
> - Amount and quality of free assets/objects to builders (e.g.,
> avatars,
> textures, buildings, PowerPoint players, Video players, , etc.)
> - Viewers/Clients which work best and why (e.g. Imprudence, Firestorm,
> SL
> Viewers, etc.)
> - Level of voice support services for Chat and IM
> - Status of MESH support and OARS,
> - Depth and scope of related tools for import/export use (e.g.,
> 3DStudio
> Max, Maya, Unity3D, Daz3D Revit and Collada file support, etc.)
> - Amount of community support and User Help
> - Existence of inter-Grid connections and directory services
> - Ease of development for building & textures and "sculpties" as well
> as
> scripting capabilities
> - Adequacy for scripted and specifically- structured simulations with
> scripted event-triggered "robotic" avatars (.e.g., where a specific
> procedure is shown in a training application)
> - Technical expertise required in each and how expensive
> - Hosting tips and problems/challenges
> - Abundance/dearth of great examples in each environment and examples,
> where applicable
> - Integration with SCORM and other LMS environments
> - Integration with gesture communication inputs such as MS's Kinnect
> and AR
> devices now on the market
> - Other
> I have a lot more experience with SecondLife/OpenSim than
> OpenWonderland as I
> am just getting started with OW after hitting too many limitations
> with OS. I
> can comment on these SL/OS limitations a lot more authoritively than
> on any
> similar issues I am yet to encounter in OW (answeres inlined below):
> On Wednesday July 4 2012 05:36:52 Burnes Hollyman wrote:
> > (pro/con) on OW vs. OS with facts and personal hands-on experiences
> in the
> > following areas:
> > - General code stability and maturity of each offer
> The version numbers of both OS and OW (0.7.x and 0.5.x respectively)
> are a
> pretty accurate representation on their code maturity and stability.
> Both
> work well enough, neither are really production-environment-ready. OS
> is a bit
> ahead on both fronts, I feel, but not by much and OW gives me the
> impression
> of more long-term potential.
> > - Ease of development and required level of expertise
> Can't comment as I am very much on the content-creation side rather
> than in
> the base code. My chances of making useful additions to the underlying
> code
> are much more likely in OW, though (there are some ideas I have that
> are
> unsuited to a scripted-object environment but I may be able to pull
> off as an
> OW module, while SL-viewer there is no chance at all for me achieving
> this).
> > - Which will "win out" in the long run (given the US Govt.'s support
> for
> > OpenSim initiatives)
> Would love to know the answer to this. :-) I view SL as being like the
> Windows
> 3.1 of VR. Which I guess makes OS freedos? :-D So even if if it 'wins
> out' it
> means 2 things: a) It won't necessarily be the best solution, b) there
> will
> still be room for a 'Linux'.
> > - Amount and quality of free assets/objects to builders (e.g.,
> avatars,
> > textures, buildings, PowerPoint players, Video players, , etc.)
> SL/OS has an advantage of time here as far as installed user base.
> There are
> some nifty modules available for OW that achieve things I can't see
> happening
> in OS any time soon. The modular nature of OW is a big advantage
> longer-term.
> > - Viewers/Clients which work best and why (e.g. Imprudence,
> Firestorm, SL
> > Viewers, etc.)
> I have become increasingly frustrated with the SL/OS viewers.
> LindenLabs and
> the OSS community have a bit of a push-me-pull-me relationship and
> bounce off
> each other a bit more than is probably good for them.
> On the other hand I am not yet convinced that having all the client
> code
> pulled down from server-side at start-of-session as in OW is the best
> way: I
> lean towards a fixed client that is always present client-side but
> able to pull
> in world-specific modules for additional functionaliy. I can think of
> some
> valid arguments on both sides of this, though.
> > - Level of voice support services for Chat and IM
> Haven't used this in either environment.
> > - Status of MESH support and OARS,
> > - Depth and scope of related tools for import/export use (e.g.,
> 3DStudio
> > Max, Maya, Unity3D, Daz3D Revit and Collada file support, etc.)
> Both support mesh, though SL/OS is a bit more finnicky about the
> format (I
> notice Blender now has a
On 07/05/2012 02:57 PM, Burnes Hollyman wrote:
Educators and corporate
> trainers seem to have a traditional "pedagogical" approach which only
> slightly mimics techniques which are 10,000 years old... "show, tell,
> discuss, quiz". The history of failed e-learning in the early part of
> this decade proves that. Most of the immersive world product I see in
> those sectors is not well thought out and deadening. Yet the audience
> for this stuff is GameGen users.
The other point of failure is in picking the target audience. Those that achieve well in live learning are probably best left to that setting, with the net as a reference tool. But, not everyone on this planet learns in the traditional European classroom setting. Some learn better with "hands on", such as vocational training, and "Listening", especially among those who don't acquire reading/writing skills. Most of our prison population falls into that latter camp. None are "dumb" and most are highly intelligent enough to plan schemes to achieve a goal ...like your wallet. :)
Plus there is the shame factor, where they do not participate in rehab programs as that is just another opportunity to be seen as "stupid" or "dumb". So, I'm using OWL as a "clothespin" and as a vehicle. The "clothespin", in advert circles is; "Do you want to play a game?" "Sure!" Then through the "game", live audio/video is piped that delivers lessons no more than 3-4 minutes long, that illustrates one of the "Elements of Criminal Thinking". My goal is to have inmates write their own scripts and then re-enact them for the videos. 100% buy in when there isn't some Donny & Marie types preaching AT them. In short, the inmates will run the asylum. The recidivism rate, of the program I base this on, is less than 3%, over a period of 10 years. That is nothing short of a blooming miracle.
But, if I wanted flying Pink Unicorns, I'd use OpenSim hands down. To me it is much more of a social gathering vehicle, suited for the purpose of individual expression in a graphical environment. To me OWL is better suited to deliver EDU content where an individual avatar's appearance is less important than the group goals. There is only so much bandwidth available and how it is used by each seems to me different. So, the end goals, from my perspectives, is different. Ric
-- My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html
> On 07/05/2012 02:57 PM, Burnes Hollyman wrote:
> Educators and corporate
>> trainers seem to have a traditional "pedagogical" approach which only
>> slightly mimics techniques which are 10,000 years old... "show, tell,
>> discuss, quiz". The history of failed e-learning in the early part of
>> this decade proves that. Most of the immersive world product I see in
>> those sectors is not well thought out and deadening. Yet the audience
>> for this stuff is GameGen users.
> The other point of failure is in picking the target audience. Those > that achieve well in live learning are probably best left to that > setting, with the net as a reference tool. But, not everyone on this > planet learns in the traditional European classroom setting. Some > learn better with "hands on", such as vocational training, and > "Listening", especially among those who don't acquire reading/writing > skills. Most of our prison population falls into that latter camp. > None are "dumb" and most are highly intelligent enough to plan schemes > to achieve a goal ...like your wallet. :)
> Plus there is the shame factor, where they do not participate in rehab > programs as that is just another opportunity to be seen as "stupid" or > "dumb". So, I'm using OWL as a "clothespin" and as a vehicle. The > "clothespin", in advert circles is; "Do you want to play a game?" > "Sure!" Then through the "game", live audio/video is piped that > delivers lessons no more than 3-4 minutes long, that illustrates one > of the "Elements of Criminal Thinking". My goal is to have inmates > write their own scripts and then re-enact them for the videos. 100% > buy in when there isn't some Donny & Marie types preaching AT them. In > short, the inmates will run the asylum. The recidivism rate, of the > program I base this on, is less than 3%, over a period of 10 years. > That is nothing short of a blooming miracle.
> But, if I wanted flying Pink Unicorns, I'd use OpenSim hands down. To > me it is much more of a social gathering vehicle, suited for the > purpose of individual expression in a graphical environment. To me OWL > is better suited to deliver EDU content where an individual avatar's > appearance is less important than the group goals. There is only so > much bandwidth available and how it is used by each seems to me > different. So, the end goals, from my perspectives, is different. Ric
> Well said, Ric, I wonder how Burnes Hollyman will receive so much
> disruptive information in such a short time.
> Roland
Talk about disruptive, try doing anything within a prison system. You can bet it happens in a short time, too! BAM! Man down!. The funniest thing I ever witnessed was during chow, one guy was being pepper sprayed by multiple guards for doing something unusually stupid. One guy sitting nearby waved his piece of baked chicken in the floating pepper spray mist "to give it some flavor"! with tears in his eyes.
It pays to maintain a sense of humor. I'd give anything to have robot avatars re-enact that one with some sort of logic where behavior outside of the "norm" attracts the guard robots. Good first day lesson right there. If you can't BE normal, at least look and act normal.
<grins hugely> Ric
p/s I'll have to claim "Prior Art", under the GPL, if someone tries to patent that!
-- My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html
