It seems that the XMPP Chat the Lab has been implementing and testing in ADITI is not providing the improvements hoped for. So, progress on implementing XMPP Chat is stalled. The effort is changing to finding out what is the causing chat problems we have now.
Aaaaaah! – Image by: cocoate.com @ Flickr
According to what the Lindens say in the Beta Server Meeting the new XMPP Chat was no better than the current chat. The decision has been made that the Lab will not be replacing our current chat with a new system that is no better.
The priority for fixing chat remains high. Chat is a major source of many complaints in SL. I have loads of problems with group chat. I see others complaining about it too. So, the failure of XMPP Chat to be a magic bullet is highly disappointing to residents and the Lab’s staff. The Lab is determined to fix chat problems. Fixing chat is a top priority. Everything else is not going to stop, it is just a matter of the chat team, one of several development teams, having a set back.
The next step in fixing chat is a better analysis of complexity of chat as used in SL. XMPP Chat is supposed to be able to carry millions of concurrent users. So, the conspiracy idiots are spinning their theories about this being the newest way to destroy SL. However, in testing in ADITI the XMPP system was not proving to be able to carry the chat load any better than the current system. So, figuring out what is being done in SL or how the Lab is implementing chat that is causing the problems becomes the priority now, in other words a real fix.
I suppose this does NOT necessarily mean the end of XMPP chat, but it may. Whatever the case, SL chat is going to change. Not as soon as I had hoped, but it is going to change.
In other areas this process of research and change is working well. Region crossings are way better, teleports are faster, and inventory is loading much faster. Apparent and actual lost inventory problems are down. If you aren’t seeing these improvements, you may want to switch to a recent SLV 2 viewer or a TPV based on the latest series 2 code.
It may just be people underestimate the complexity of chat in SL and the Lab’s staff assumed there was an easy fix. As the tech’s got into implementing XMPP Chat those complexities jumped into their faces. Whatever the case, this is a disappointment.
If my email server was unable to handle the load I or my company was placing on it, I’d say “Exchange has failed” or “Cyrus has failed” rather than “POP/IMAP?SMTP has failed”.
Is SL’s problem related to XMPP (the protocol) or the implementation of XMPP (the product) they are currently using? I should declare an interest – my company produces an XMPP server, it’s not the one SL are using.
Fair enough.
I know there is a lack of precision in my writing from time to time. Some times from my misunderstanding and some times from my not being familiar with a topic or technical aspect. Some times from an effort to keep it simple for readers. I try to be accurate and avoid too much geeky detail. However, I think most of the residents will get the distinction you make. But, all we really care about is getting group chat to work.
I appreciate comments that make corrections and improve the accuracy. Thanks.