Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Lively Review

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago | from the deja-what-now dept.

Social Networks 205

joc1985 writes "An objective review of Google Lively after a few hours of playing around. It seems to be a bad copy of Second Life. Somehow all the rooms are crowded, and porn has made its way in there already"

cancel ×

205 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Why am I not impressed? (5, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135209)

Billions of dollars in capital and they give us a retread of AlphaWorld [digitalspace.com] from 1996? What's next, GoogleMUD?

Re:Why am I not impressed? (4, Funny)

Minupla (62455) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135787)

That'd be cool. GoogleMUSH! @desc me=A grue. He is likely to eat you.;@adesc me=@emit The Grue pours water on your lantern.

You obviously don't work for Google! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136749)

@desc me=A grue [google.co.uk] . He is likely to eat you.;@adesc me=@emit The Grue [google.co.uk] pours water [google.co.uk] on your lantern [google.co.uk] .

Re:Why am I not impressed? (1)

Ngarrang (1023425) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135867)

Billions of dollars in capital and they give us a retread of AlphaWorld [digitalspace.com] from 1996? What's next, GoogleMUD?

A MUD hosted by Google...that would be so retro-awesome! I still have a copy of TinyFugue laying around.

Re:Why am I not impressed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136433)

Yes please. Muds are awesome.

FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135215)

first post!

Re:FP (4, Interesting)

Ron_Fitzgerald (1101005) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135375)

Goatse I guess I can understand, Rick Rolls are damn funny but really, is there a huge endorphin rush that comes from saying 'first post' that I am missing? I would think that after the first thousand times it really would not be fun for even the most childish of people.

Re:FP (2, Insightful)

rubberglove (1066394) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135767)

That assumes that there some limit to the supply of easily excitable, childish people out there.

Re:FP (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136675)

First posting is like popping a girl's cherry. Or something slashdot readers might understand, it's like a computer with a fresh and pristine copy of windows.

Re:FP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136993)

First posting is like popping a girl's cherry. Or something slashdot readers might understand, it's like a computer with a fresh and pristine copy of windows.

If you'd said Linux, you'd have 10000 nerds nodding their heads simultaneously. Instead, as it is written, they are scratching their bald heads in the dark of their moms basement. Maybe you should have tried a car analogy instead. Everyone has a car - not everyone has windows (either in their basement, nor on their computers).

      Marc

An opinionated an biased review (4, Insightful)

MLopat (848735) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135227)

This is hardly an objective review. Then again the Slashdot submitter is also the author of the blog...

When you read comments like "if it wasn't for the logo at the top left you wouldn't even know it was owned and operated by Google. The page is blend with no much color or style" it really makes you wonder. Does it matter that Google didn't brand it everywhere they could like other companies? In classical Google fashion, they took a simplified approach, which itself is a form of Google branding (just look at google.com)

Then the reviewer goes on "It is 100% centered around the mouse, this for me is a horrible defect that must be solved immediately. I happen to know every keyboard shortcut known to man kind (sic) and I absolutely hate the mouse. I am sure there are many people like me out there. " Well good for you buddy. And great research you've done there in assuming that everyone else is just like you.

Finally he concludes with saying he found "several Sex oriented rooms". A quick glance through the room index shows maybe a dozen of the 1000+ rooms that are listed there have a sexual theme. Seems like a pretty good ratio considering the amount of porn to be found on the internet and people's computers in relationship to the rest of the content on the web.

But then again, remember this blog is from "The Random thoughts of a Christian IT Professional."

Re:An opinionated an biased review (3, Insightful)

Wooky_linuxer (685371) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135357)

He has a point on porn: the terms of service forbid it, much to my dismay, I must say. But then, it is open for anyone older than 13 so I see no way Google could get around that.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (5, Insightful)

Phurge (1112105) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135609)

too funny. Google censoring porn? Google is the gateway to internet porno.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (4, Funny)

Crayon Kid (700279) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135805)

Are you kidding me? Porn the ultimate mark of success. The fact that Lively has it before it has even taken off properly makes it like an uber stamp of approval. Yes yes.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (3, Insightful)

Otter (3800) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135493)

Besides the fact that guy obviously isn't a native English speaker, "several" and "maybe a dozen" seem pretty in line to me. His point seems to be that Google isn't being as tight with it as they are with YouTube, which is certainly true (although I'd suspect that's a result of pre-takeover YouTube policies being carried on by Google). It's not a matter of any concern to me, but its his opinion. And it's not like adding keyboard shortcuts would eliminate mouse usage, as you seem to think.

Youtube what? (3, Insightful)

ArIck (203) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135679)

Not as tight as Youtube policy? The only region where they may be 'tight' is in removing copyrighted material.... nothing else..... Just look at the recently uploaded, most viewed by day, week or maybe even month.... more than half of them involve some almost naked girl in the preview and sex based themes (although they may not contain actual sex scenes) but that still is not tight implementation....

Re:Youtube what? (4, Insightful)

xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D (1160707) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136255)

Maybe I'm missing something, but that sounds like an extremely tight implementation. It sounds to me like "draw the line distinctly and allow everything up to that line". You said it yourself: " almost naked girl" with no actual sex scenes. It looks like they're allowing everything up to, but not over, the line.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (3, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135803)

I'd suspect that's a result of pre-takeover YouTube policies being carried on by Google

If that were true, what's the reason for the Google Video [google.com] policies, then?

I suspect the reason for filtering adult material has more to do with good business sense than anything else. If you allow adult materials, then your site is likely to become a haven for such materials rather than achieving its original goal. Sort of like how the various free internet backup and file sharing solutions became havens for warez rather than achieving a solid business goal.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (2, Interesting)

ndansmith (582590) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135621)

But then again, remember this blog is from "The Random thoughts of a Christian IT Professional."

Hey! I'm a Christian IT Professional, you insensitive clod!

Re:An opinionated an biased review (5, Funny)

digitig (1056110) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135709)

But are your thoughts random?

Re:An opinionated an biased review (5, Funny)

Anonymous Crobar (1143477) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136013)

But are your thoughts random?

Depends on the seed.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (4, Funny)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136075)

Check out that moose.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136403)

Don't squeeze the pancake batter.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136563)

A moose once bit my sister...

No realli! She was Karving her initials on the moose with the sharpened end
of an interspace toothbrush given her by Svenge - her brother-in-law - an
Oslo
dentist and star of many Norwegian movies: "The Hot Hands of an Oslo
Dentist",
"Fillings of Passion", "The Huge Molars of Horst Nordfink"...

Mynd you, moose bites Kan be pretti nasti...

Re:An opinionated an biased review (3, Funny)

Inner_Child (946194) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136691)

Not if he's Debian-based.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135785)

Does that mean when your build fails, praying and hitting rebuild actually makes a difference?

Re:An opinionated an biased review (4, Funny)

ndansmith (582590) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135893)

Yes, but not until about 3 days goes by.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (-1, Flamebait)

mc900ftjesus (671151) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135917)

Aren't Christians supposed to give up their possessions and teach the word of Jesus? Unless "screwing around in virtual worlds looking for pron" was added to the Bible, you might want to quit pretending to be a Christian.

I'm no Christian, but apparently most of you so-called Christians know less about your religion than I do. Why don't you go pretend to be persecuted some more.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (1)

Digital Vomit (891734) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136351)

Aren't Christians supposed to give up their possessions and teach the word of Jesus?

No.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136115)

Fuck off you porntard Google ass kisser scum

Re:An opinionated an biased review (1, Insightful)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136163)

This is a gimmicky marketing toy, not a tool. As a gimmicky toy, the most practical use for it is websites intended for a younger audience. I spent half the day yesterday looking at how this could be exploited for that purpose. The fact that there is porn on there already means that there is no way we're going to be able to trust this enough to put it to use. Shame.

Incidentally, did anyone figure out how to get it working with Facebook accounts instead of Google accounts?

Re:An opinionated an biased review (0, Redundant)

joc1985 (1297589) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136571)

All I am saying is that a Mouse Only approach is stupid.

Re:An opinionated an biased review (1)

adisakp (705706) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136907)

On a side note I was VERY disappointed when I found several Sex oriented rooms.

This guy needs to watch "Avenue Q".... sing it with me...

The internet is for pRoN....

Had to say it... (5, Funny)

pete_norm (150498) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135249)

Somehow all the rooms are crowded and porn has made its way in there already"

What more could you ask for???

Re:Had to say it... (3, Funny)

AkaKaryuu (1062882) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136709)

Let's be honest... Google has been the starting point of porn searches for years now. They are just now presenting it to their users in a 3d environment! Technological advancement at it's finest!

"Porn has made its way in there already" (4, Insightful)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135259)

You write that as if it's a bad thing.

Re:"Porn has made its way in there already" (1)

Hannes2000 (1113397) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135505)

Since the review is slashdotted already, many here among us seem not to think so...

Re:"Porn has made its way in there already" (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135659)

You write that as if it's a bad thing.

Did you read the header of his blog? "Technology meets Theology -- The Random thoughts of a Christian IT Professional."

Re:"Porn has made its way in there already" (1)

edmicman (830206) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136333)

Why does Christianity and porn have to be mutually exclusive?

Re:"Porn has made its way in there already" (2, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136511)

I'm not sure whether there's a clear reason (it wouldn't surprise me if someone could come up with an argument). However, I think it's fair to assume that if someone would define himself as "a Christian IT Professional" enough to have it as the heading of his blog, then that guy would probably not be openly enthusiastic about porn.

Re:"Porn has made its way in there already" (2, Insightful)

joc1985 (1297589) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136949)

Porn is a form of adultery. TADA!

Porn? (2, Funny)

neoform (551705) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135265)

I'm just waiting for the blackjack and hookers.

In fact, FORGET the blackjack! (nt) (1)

mujadaddy (1238164) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135381)

That is all. Lol "Google Sadville"

Legitimate Question: (1)

teknopurge (199509) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135277)

Has google jumped-the-shark with their recent products?(things always in beta, no adult supervision claims, etc.)

Re:Legitimate Question: (5, Funny)

Yaksha42 (856623) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136085)

I believe we're using the term "nuked the fridge" now.

Re:Legitimate Question: (1)

TypoNAM (695420) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136301)

I loved that Indiana Jones scene. ;)

Bad copy? (2, Funny)

Hatta (162192) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135289)

Does that imply that a copy of Second Life could somehow be good?

Re:Bad copy? (4, Interesting)

Ron_Fitzgerald (1101005) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135633)

Direct hit to the nail head. I was truly let down with Second Life. I will even go back here and there to see if things changed but they never do.

Last time I ventured into second life I searched for 'Beach' and was treated to a picture of a girl fingering herself.

I had hopes for Second Life for businesses that I work with to have open house and virtual tours for lodging. I would not think about suggesting it anymore.

Re:Bad copy? (4, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135651)

Does that imply that a copy of Second Life could somehow be good?

It could be a good thing if it was an antimatter copy of Second Life, which was then brought into contact with the original Second Life.

Re:Bad copy? (0, Offtopic)

DFENS619 (1008187) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135895)

It could be a good thing if it was an antimatter copy of Second Life, which was then brought into contact with the original Second Life.

please mod parent funny :)

Re:Bad copy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135947)

Third Life?

Re:Bad copy? (5, Funny)

moosesocks (264553) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136245)

"Second Life is not a game," Dwight replied authoritatively. "It is a multi-user virtual environment. It doesn't have points or scores; it doesn't have winners or losers."

"Oh, it has losers."

I tried it yesterday. (5, Interesting)

Paranatural (661514) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135291)

It was slow. It was clunky. The interface was pretty disappointing. Hell, even the 'Avatar choosing' part was badly done. I couldn't tell if I was supposed to be designing my own somewhere or just 'using someone elses'. It seems to be a half-baked beta indeed.

Pervasively perverse proliferation (2, Insightful)

bhamlin (986048) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135325)

porn has made its way in there already

Are you really that surprised?

Re:Pervasively perverse proliferation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135551)

A second second life? Now life comes even more watered down than ever before!

I'd just like to complain that I think people complain too much. If you don't like it, don't use it! Or if its so badly done, go make your own and post a slashdot story about how much better your "thirteenth life" is compared to "second life", "fourth life", "google life", "pen and paper life", and perhaps even "rolling die life". Though nothing beats that feeling of rolling a 20 on a d20 huh guys.. I say guys because the only girls here aren't real girls.

Blog, Submit, Rinse and Repeat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135327)

And why did this get greenlighted? Can I submit "news" linking to my own blog as well?

Re:Blog, Submit, Rinse and Repeat (2, Insightful)

timster (32400) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135425)

At the risk of stating the obvious -- yes. Slashdot editors frequently approve self-posted links and have done so for a long, long time.

Re:Blog, Submit, Rinse and Repeat (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135799)

then he should have prepared himself and take some measure to prevent the slashdot effect!

Re:Blog, Submit, Rinse and Repeat (1)

H+FTW (1264808) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136523)

perhaps its a cunning DDoS attack?... well not that cunning...

Re:Blog, Submit, Rinse and Repeat (1)

joc1985 (1297589) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136611)

Just did that.

GoogWii have your next life? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135385)

Faces are almost identical to Wii, what I am hopping for is a MMO-RPG-FPS with this capability.

LOL DONGS. (2, Funny)

bellers (254327) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135447)

If it's anything like Second Life, that's what you'll be saying a lot of.

Serious accusation (4, Interesting)

Junta (36770) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135497)

It seems to be a bad copy of Second Life.

That's a severe accusation. I tried Second Life. I thought of it as all the design 'quality' and intelligence of myspace, now with 3D goodness...

Re:Serious accusation (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135631)

It seems to be a bad copy of Second Life.

That's a severe accusation. I tried Second Life. I thought of it as all the design 'quality' and intelligence of myspace, now with 3D goodness...

In that case, maybe a bad copy is better! ;)

Porn vs theology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135517)

"Technology meets Theology â" The Random thoughts of a Christian IT Professional."

Come on :-( technology and theology intersects by the empty set.

Re:Porn vs theology (5, Insightful)

darkrowan (976992) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135727)

Exactly.... Christian and Unbiased can't really be said in the same sentence and with a straight face.

Re:Porn vs theology (5, Insightful)

H+FTW (1264808) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136577)

I'm pretty sure slashdoter and unbiased can't be said in the same sentence with a stright face either. In fact you have to work pretty hard to find anyone who is unbiased.

....apart from me I'm very un biased....

Re:Porn vs theology (0)

joc1985 (1297589) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136715)

Unbiased == Not an employee or payed reviewer of Google or any other company. Just your average joe's opinion with experience in the IT field. TADA!

Re:Porn vs theology (1)

PortHaven (242123) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136925)

Human & Unbiased can not be said in the same sentence with a straight face without the word "not" preceding the unbiased.

Definitely a beta (4, Informative)

Dmala (752610) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135601)

Actually, calling it a beta is being generous. There are a lot of interface quirks and bugs to work out, and the content (as far as avatars, furniture, clothes, etc.) definitely feels more like a sample of what will be available. Once they open it up to user created content, I imagine there will be no shortage of "stuff". FWIW, I didn't really have the connection problems the reviewer had. The whole thing thing gets a little laggy in a crowded room, especially if the room is full of junk, but I didn't have any problems getting in.

As far as the sex themed rooms, they seemed pretty tame to me, at least for now. (Uh, not that I checked them out or anything.) You're limited to streaming videos from YouTube, so you can't show anything that wouldn't pass muster there. You can also display static images in a "picture frame", but the frames seems to be pretty broken at the moment. They seem to only display a small portion of the image, regardless of the resolution. So, at least for the moment, it's pretty much impossible to display anything pornographic. I imagine once they open it up to user created content, though, it will become yet another haven for furries.

Platform Support (4, Informative)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135627)

I looked at this the other day and it seemed to claim to be a "Windows only" service. My Windows system was busy at the time, so I didn't investigate further and it was unclear if they planned on supporting other platforms in future. That's a non-starter in my book.

hrm (1)

rootphreak (1320921) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135681)

As of right now the page is covered with parser errors in the right of the page, when it's not giving you the good ol' error 500. Google cache is a no-go so if someone has a copy that would be great.

All I can tell as of now is that he is a Christian IT guy, which means that sex is a nono to him. Personally I'm not surprised with the amount of sex in Second Life; the last time I checked, humans were the ones playing that game. Sex on Google Lively should be no surprise.

Re:hrm (1)

joc1985 (1297589) | more than 6 years ago | (#24137023)

This was fixed.

oh noes! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135697)

"Technology meets Theology â" The Random thoughts of a Christian IT Professional."

Looks like Jeebus couldn't save his webserver from spewing 500s once it got /.ed.

NORMAL people... (1)

Tikkun (992269) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135755)

...would never use the Internet for pron.

Objective != Subjective (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24135809)

Objective: Free of personal bias and opinion, as in an objective evaluation.

Your website is broken (in several browsers), so all I can do is go on the comment responses...

You seem to be making values judgments on the fact that there is porn in the new game. You are comparing it to your subjective opinion of Second Life.

Watch from minute 3 on, he says it best. [escapistmagazine.com]

Newbie here, help! (2, Insightful)

InvisblePinkUnicorn (1126837) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135811)

Hello, I'm new to this ./ website. Can you please tell me know to moderate the summary (-1, binspam)?

TIA!

Re:Newbie here, help! (2, Funny)

hansraj (458504) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136141)

Can you please tell me know to moderate the summary (-1, binspam)?

Yes.

Not too bad (1)

Pedrito (94783) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135833)

Actually, I played with Lively a bit yesterday and I have to say, for a beta, I'm quite impressed. The poster seems to be ignoring the fact that this is a beta.

I found it FAR more user-friendly than 2nd life. The tools for building things up aren't bad. Again, it's still in beta, but it all looks very promising. Is it better than second life? I doubt it, but it's also in BETA!

I do have some issues with it. Camera doesn't seem to follow the avatar. Can't get a view from the avatar's perspective ("Avatar's View" is a view from above and behind the avatar). The camera doesn't do a very good job of following the avatar. As far as I can tell, there's no way to connect rooms together, which is something I'd like to see.

Overall, for a beta product, I'm quite impressed and look forward to seeing it when it's released.

Re:Not too bad (1)

rho (6063) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136155)

The poster seems to be ignoring the fact that this is a beta.

I'm about ready for Google to go gold with something. This perma-beta crap is for the fail.

Re:Not too bad (1)

Pedrito (94783) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136393)

I'm about ready for Google to go gold with something. This perma-beta crap is for the fail.

Which Google apps are you talking about? Obviously not GMail, Toolbar, Desktop, Talk, Reader, Picasa, or Sketchup. Maybe it's just that Google doesn't make things gold until they're ready...

Re:Not too bad (1)

joc1985 (1297589) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136669)

Every Google product out there is BETA

Re:Not too bad (2, Funny)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136205)

Everything at Google is Beta. They're like a bad project manager. They can start things. They can even make them pretty good, but they'll never actually finish anything. :)

    I can't comment much on the game. I primarily use Linux machines, so I'll have to plug in a Windows machine, and see if it turns on, before I can play.

Re:Not too bad (1)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136677)

The problem is that there is so much stuff in perpetual beta. "Beta" is the new V1.0.

Too many people think that "Beta" means it is ready for general use and just needs feature enhancement.

directx was a mistake (1)

spottedkangaroo (451692) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135875)

I didn't really even try it out. Why on earth would they choose DirectX over SDL (or VRML or something) if they planned to release this for more than the one crappy platform that supports DirectX (by design).

From google, I was really expecting an open product or protocol. If it's just another closed directx app I'll just go play guild wars or something.

Re:directx was a mistake (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136345)

Google version of open protocols is usually regarding formats or messaging, not so much on native desktop client application. Think in google talk, the native client from google is for windows, but based all in open specifications to enable developers to do their own implementations. Anyway, maybe it still didnt reach yet the "open" stage in the life cycle of that product, as is in early beta.

Re:directx was a mistake (1)

darkrowan (976992) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136401)

I'm going out on a limb here: I've looked at the system reqs [lively.com] but I'm still not seeing DX as a requirement. You're the third person I've seen say something like this (one was a claim that it was IE only) and I'd honestly like to see the money go into the mouth on this one.

For a 20% product, it's interesting; but... (3, Interesting)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 6 years ago | (#24135981)

it's not interesting enough in itself for me to want to spend time playing with it.

Looking at it in terms of a "20%" product that one of their engineers whipped out on their 'spare' time, it's fairly cool. I don't think they really expected the level of interest that would be shown though, or they would have held it back a bit longer for some more polish.

It has been in testing before this current release. I can't remember which, but it was released to a university a year prior for their student community to play with.

In a year, when it's been hammered on a bit more and Google either rolls it into a full fledged product or cuts it loose, I'll start paying more attention.

Re:For a 20% product, it's interesting; but... (1)

WebmasterNeal (1163683) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136877)

Somehow I have the feeling that this wasn't developed by their people but that they bought out some other company that was creating this. I could be wrong but just my opinion.

Without RTFA... (2, Insightful)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136139)

Anybody else feel that Google is biting off more than they can chew?

I mean, smart people work there to be sure, they have a neat work environment and they excel at search. But everything else they do, and there might be a few exceptions here and there, doesn't hit the mark as far as being "top tier" like their search is. Gmail is probably their best product, albeit free but subsidized by advertising, and then Picasa and Google Analytics. Otherwise a lot of things are very 'meh'... their online office suite, Picasa Web, etc...

Dunno, I think they need to reorganize themselves a bit before they spiral out of control with 'extra' projects, that they lose control of the one thing they are best at -- search.

Re:Without RTFA... (1)

vimm (1300813) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136501)

Dunno, I think they need to reorganize themselves a bit before they spiral out of control with 'extra' projects, that they lose control of the one thing they are best at--search

Wrong. Let me guess, you think that they also dont have a mature enough corporate culture to develop enterprise software?

The 20% deal they have with their employees is awesome. They may not always be dynamite, but they always stir things up. Good or bad, they get a large amount of feedback and new ideas every time they pull as stunt like this, and that's gotta be invaluable to the company - and (probably) really fun for the girl behind GooSIMS.

So, what's wrong with that? (0, Redundant)

Innova (1669) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136175)

"...porn has made its way in there already"

You say that as if it is a bad thing.

If CmdrTaco tried it for a couple hours... (1)

molotovjester (1273662) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136201)

...then I am impressed. I couldn't stand it for more than half an hour.

I tried it out last night and I was thoroughly underwhelmed. I couldn't get the rooms to avoid exception errors for more than 5-10 minutes at a time.

At one point, I had cascading exception errors and had 66 processes not responding in a matter of seconds (up from my normal 31ish).

Not only that, but I expected, AT MINIMUM, an avatar in an environment that was as easy to use as WoW with no clipping of outer bounds.

The one concept that I did love though, is that I can take my avatar and engage him in an environment with any theme from knights and dragons to beaches to the future.

This is a concept that is poorly implemented, years behind its time for the social networking aspect, and a bit ahead of its time in an mmo aspect.

From the "who cares?" department (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136329)

So its a new Web 2.0-esque masturbation party where people can chat with avatars, instead of on AIM or god forbid, calling them on the phone. Its overcrowded, underpowered, full of spam, and doesn't offer anything compelling. Do we pimp everything Google does? Does the term "Google fanboy" suddenly have meaning?

Well, that lets me out! (1)

mmell (832646) | more than 6 years ago | (#24136343)

Lively is a Google Labs project, which means that we're still testing it and seeking feedback. We hope to support other platforms in the future, but for now you'll need a Windows system to access Lively.

Too costly.

bad... porn? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136367)

I don't think I've ever seen those two words in the same sentence before.

What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136405)

I gotta take a shit. I wonder if Lively has toilets available for public use. Hell, even if it doesn't, I'll just crap on the floor just like this review.

Lively is for Porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24136681)

Why you think the second-life clone was born?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>