1  |   Order by index

Jan 13, 2003, 6:40pm

Here is more information about there:

http://www.prod.there.com/about_press.html

especially: http://therecorp.there.com/press/jpg/

When I look at those graphics, I start to wonder why here is a
discussion in the newsgroup at all about them <g>.

Moreover, when I read things like (taken from
http://www.azcentral.com/news/reuters/stories/NET-TECH-THERE-DC.shtml):

The company has a two-pronged approach to revenue: an undetermined
monthly membership fee and revenue from the sale of goods and services
within the game, such as Nike shoes and Levi Strauss jeans.

Already, it is recruiting for an ``online sports activity coordinator''
and an ``online fashion activity coordinator,'' people who the company
said must be experienced online users with a knack for making new
members feel welcome.

Players will be able to use virtual funds called ``Therebucks,'' which
they can earn in various ways or purchase directly via credit card, to
buy clothes and other accessories for their avatars.

Among the company's investors are 3DO Co. (Nasdaq:THDO) founder Trip
Hawkins, CNET Networks Inc. (Nasdaq:CNET) co-founders Halsey Minor and
Shelby Bonnie, DoubleClick Inc. (Nasdaq:DCLK) Chief Executive Kevin Ryan
and Wired magazine founder Louis Rosetto.

The company's board of directors includes Levi Strauss & Co. Chief
Executive Phil Marineau and Jim White, general partner of venture
capital firm Sutter Hill Ventures.
<<<

This didn't work in the past, it won't work now, but THERE...

Jan 13, 2003, 6:46pm

.... is is quite hard to take this serious at all
(http://www.ipo.com/venture/press.asp?p=ONI2&prid=2760) when reading
marketing bubbles like ...

"Levi Strauss & Co. has long used the Internet to reach consumers in
innovative and compelling ways. There's immersive communications
environment uniquely brings to life two benefits of the Internet that
consumers value most: communication and community," said Patrice Varni,
Director of Digital Business at Levi Strauss & Co. "When There wanted
its members to be able to wear Levi's jeans, we were excited to
participate. There provides a compelling new way for consumers to
interact with the Levi's brand. We thought it was a great fit for
debuting our new Levi's Type 1(TM) Jeans -- a bold new take on jeans in
a breakthrough online community."


In addition to its relationships with leading consumer product
companies, There, Inc. is announcing a partnership with ATI, Inc., the
leading retail seller of computer graphics cards. ATI will bundle
There with its industry-leading Radeon graphics cards, and will partner
with There, Inc. to upgrade computer labs at schools. "There is bringing
advanced graphics to the mass market, which will introduce consumers to
the power of ATI's innovations in a powerful way," said Dave Orton, CEO
of ATI, Inc. "We're impressed with the visual quality the There team has
achieved on relatively low-end hardware, and look forward to
collaborating on ever more realistic versions of There."
<<<

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2003, 6:49pm

<g>


PS: "There" must be doing something right. It's the number one topic in
the AW news groups. The next year or two will bring some interesting
competition for 3D-VR users.
<<<

http://www.3dvrweb.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=135

Jan 13, 2003, 8:06pm

I was reading through this article and came across the following:

"One of the following video/graphics cards: ATI Radeon (except for VE), ATI
Radeon 7200 or ATI Radeon Mobility 7500 or higher; or an nVIDIA GeForce or
nFORCE graphics card."

Hardly a wide selection of graphics cards. Earlier in the article:

"Unlike high-end PC games, which require cutting-edge PC hardware and
broadband connections, There is accessible to the mass market consumer."

This software requires graphics cards, and an extremely limited selection of
them, so how can it be accessible to the mass market consumer? I agree with
what you said. There and Second Life are (at present) nothing more than a
lot of PR. Until I try out a release version of either, I'm not believing
any of this hype. It reminds me of that Cyboria everyone was boasting about
as the "replacement" of AW :)

-Brant

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2003, 10:02pm

It really said that about mass market consumers? I missed that. I received
this from them when I applied for their (There) beta: "We're sorry, but
according to your survey, your computer does not currently meet our minimum
system requirements." My PC has the following: 1.6 GHz Pentium 4, 512 MB
RAM, nVIDIA TNT2 M64 64 MB video
card, using DirectX 8.1, and cable modem. I have 28 GB free on one of my 2
hard drives alone. I have Windows XP SP1. Not the fastest or newest...but I
would say their is a "mass market" below that yet.
[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2003, 11:08pm

I didn't read most of the other replies but..

Beta minimum requirements are often much higher then they will be intended at public release. I guess it's
easier to test when you don't have to worry about lagging or slowness? You also won't have to worry about the
testers having hardware problems or incompatibilities so they can focus on actual bugs in the software.

--
Zeo
[View Quote]

Jan 14, 2003, 1:58am

I had a lot higher than their minimum system requirements, but I got
rejected because of my NVIDIA Riva TNT2 Pro Card (Which is almost as good as
the GeForce3) and their minimum is NVIDIA GeForce... It's by the same damned
company and I still got rejected... the card is as good as or better than
the minimum of a GeForce card (Any... GeForce1,2,3 or 4...). Looky here:
http://www.creativepro.com/hardware/home/1091.html and here (this one is a
comparison page...): http://www.creativepro.com/company/hardware/3439.html

-Sk8man1 (346035)

[View Quote]

Jan 14, 2003, 11:53am

I tried to sign up also, but it seemed the minimum was 800Mhz ( which it
told me after I had applied). I do not understand why it simply could not
state it somewhere in the beginning so I would not have bothered filling in
the form.

CarolAnn seems to have double the minimum required, so that should be
enough.

Furthemore I think beta testers SHOULD be avarage people with not the
fastest and best computers. Enormous lag and slowness IS a bug in any
programm. A bug that people seem to ignore, assuming everyone has 2,4 GHz.
Any programm should run smoothly on the minimum requirements. Any programm
having 800 Mhz as minimum cannot reach the mass market in many years,
especially if it is slow and buggy upto 1,8Ghz(?) and even support only a
few 3d cards.

It is kind of sad that programm makers makes programs that use more and more
resources, instead of focusing on making the programms good and effective.
In a few years a normal minimum requirement for games will probably be 3Ghz,
so all those who next year spend 3000$/? on a new computer will need a new
one again.

Drac, stuck with my 333Mhz P II, ATI-Antique.

zeo toxion <zeo at activeworlds.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e23630b$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I didn't read most of the other replies but..
>
> Beta minimum requirements are often much higher then they will be intended
at public release. I guess it's
> easier to test when you don't have to worry about lagging or slowness?
You also won't have to worry about the
> testers having hardware problems or incompatibilities so they can focus on
actual bugs in the software.
>
> --
> Zeo
[View Quote]

Jan 14, 2003, 12:25pm

Well, from the pictures you can see that they are using some particle
features in their graphic engine (can be seen eg. at the jetpacks
blast), which will then require a DirectX7 capable graphic card - those
are Geforce 2+ and Radeon 7000+ (for Dx8 it would be GF3+, I think).

In AW, you have as a fallback the software emulation, something they
obviously do not have in There, thus the Dx7 capable cards as a minimum.
However, even the recent onboard chips (which is, btw, the vast majority
of graphic equipment that is sold in the USA) will fulfill Dx7
requirements - how fast it is then, is another question, though...

Whether you have now 800MHz or 733MHz is more or less an academical
question - differences are too small to make a noticeable difference, as
a rule of thumb, a human notices only a double CPU speed as "definitely
faster" (wheras the mainboard settings and drivers alone can make a
bigger difference than CPUs of double/half speed). I'd rather made a
difference in processor architecture, eg. "required Pentium3/500+ /
Celeron xxx+), which would be a more sophisticated and senseful
selection when it comes eg. to SSE/2 processor capabilities or caching
speed and technology.

But anyway - with these requirements, There will neither target the mass
market (which does not have such an equipment) nor the gamers (which
will smile about these requirements and demand a better, actual,
technology), and the number of people in between won't make up the
150,000 customers they need (an amazingly high number, btw, almost
higher than any VR community that has existed yet, but, given the
graphics, it is quite (sub)standard).

The project aims, with no doubt, at ecommerce, and there has not been a
single product yet who even came near a break-even following such an
concept. Potential buyers do not bother to start their computer to go
shopping, neither will they want to pay 10$/month as an entrance fee to
a shop. Funny is their intonation of "women", because they state a well
known fact (for many years, there has been research about it even years
ago already) as a new finding; in ALL interaction-oriented chat worlds,
you will find more women than men, and in ALL competition-oriented
worlds, you will find more men than women - and nevertheless, both types
do not attract the other gender in more than marginal numbers. IMO, a
classic marketing attempt to blow sand into investors eyes.

I had been invited to There many months ago, and the proposal by then
was even more and more open ecommerce oriented; I personally do not like
this (when I want to buy something, I go into a shop, but not into a VR
world where I cannot look close at and touch an article) and so it did
not raise my interest at all. Thinking more about it, there was also a
project of Randy Farmer once which pursued the same goal - I guess some
of those VR projects have started before the ecommerce bubble bursted
and only come now, after years, up with what they were working on. They
will tinker their original ideas to match the current market more, but
basically, these are all still old ideas and won't survive a significant
amount of time in this form.






[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2003, 4:41am

If they really want to aim for the "mass market," I think they should
aim for ease of use (i.e., about the same level as AOL). Most
people are used to e-mail and IM programs and it may be a big step going
to a multi-user 3D environment.

Also, I honestly don't see why they don't just release a version for
consoles. I mean, the Xbox (Live!) already has 150,000 subscribers
(though not all will buy There and use it), an Ethernet port, and a
voice headset. Heck, it is even close to the
recommended system requirements with regards to CPU power and graphics
(it has a GeForce in it).

-Builderz

[View Quote] > But anyway - with these requirements, There will neither target the mass
> market (which does not have such an equipment) nor the gamers (which
> will smile about these requirements and demand a better, actual,
> technology), and the number of people in between won't make up the
> 150,000 customers they need (an amazingly high number, btw, almost
> higher than any VR community that has existed yet, but, given the
> graphics, it is quite (sub)standard).

Jan 15, 2003, 4:49am

Is it possible to "fudge" your specs on the beta application form? ;)
Your system is close or better than the recommended hardware
requirements (except for not having a GeForce). The only way they could
probably tell the difference is if they have something coded into the
program that won't make it run if your system hardware isn't what you
say it is or the software "phones home" to their servers and they can
check your system's specs somehow.

-Builderz

[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2003, 8:18am

[View Quote]
It may be "just as good" but it is an older model, and may not actually
support some of what I would presume to be custom graphics that There
offers - remember, with the introduction of Geforces, the programmers gained
thea bility to actually access the hardware of the video card with specific
coding - this is probably why a TNT card is not suitable for using There
(T&L _+ directX assortments, remember, the TNT was originally designed for
direct X 6&7).

Also, remember everybody, in two years time, when There is actually
*popular* (or gone altogether) those minimum specs will be archaic - it is
the function of all recent games and entertainment software to program for
the highest spec possible, because they know that by release those specs
will already be what most hardware vendors offer as a bare minimum - and in
all honesty, if you dont upgrade your PC at LEAST every two years, then you
should not proclaim to have such heavy graphics uses for your machine,
because anyone who is serious about software and PC's knows that it is
essential to upgrade your entire machine every two years (18 months at the
optimum).

F.

Jan 15, 2003, 9:36pm

[View Quote]
I do not understand this crap... I have a plain 3d accelerated video
card, 1.8 Ghz Pentium 4, 30 Gig HD, 512 MB RAM... and I got accepted? So
what is wrong with all of your specs? Please help me understand that.

x.n.x

Jan 17, 2003, 10:58pm

Software particle systems have been around for years, and quite a few good
ones too. The graphics (wether they were conceptual or screenshots) you
provided a link to certainly don't warrant such advanced graphic cards, a
plain D3D supporting HAL should do fine. There are no indications of
framerates anywhere on those shots either, so this might be running at
0.1fps for all we know, or maybe it was rendered in 3D Studio Max. You
could achieve this (except particle effects and vehicles) in AW, even if it
might be slow on most systems, since AW isn't very well optimised... I sure
hope Shamus and 9 9 9 will work on improving performance after 3.4 is
released, even though I somehow doubt it.

I agree with your views on ecommerce, and the unrealistic businessmodel.
There are no successfull ecommerce ventures that have charged for access,
and I doubt this will catch on either. Just go look at !M at rt or whatever
the world's called, it's completely void of people and nothing's changed
for years. The bundling concept also failed in AW's case, and as you may
know, ended in a lawsuit.

There are some big-shot names on the investor list, some okay-looking
"screenshots", but nothing more. I doubt they'll achieve their 150k paying
user goal unless the earth's population increased dramatically (and
resources, riches, etc increased at the same rate, which is never going to
happen) within the next two years.

It looks like an okay program, and if they beat AW to the bush regarding
vehicles, performance (judging from those sys specs, that doesn't sound all
that likely, though) they might have some AW users "convert".

KAH

1  |   Order by index