1. they dunno what they're talking about / but they'll learn as soon as the right guy spiffs two words of wisdom down the ear canal

Posted at 5:33PM on Jun 6th 2007 by starcomber Vig

2. they do work, just not supported

Posted at 5:34PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Mathieu Basiat

3. The Intel GMA950 also is on many newer Windows laptops, but it is also a shared-memory video processor. Shared-memory video is notorious for not being the greatest at advanced graphics like the newer nVidia or ATI boards that have dedicated video memory.

The other issue with Mac (I have one, BTW) is that there' no processor-specific coding; everything is coded under Core Video with either Quartz or Quartz Extreme.

Posted at 5:59PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Triste Bertrand

4. I thought macs... 'just worked'? :)

Posted at 5:55PM on Jun 6th 2007 by rroo

5. These graphics chipsets have never at anytime been supported. Lindens use macbook pros which use ATI graphics cards not intels. Yes they are hard to support, and would be completely not worth their time

Posted at 6:36PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Kerian Bunin

6. You know, this brings up another issue. I don't think SecondLife is Universal either. Meaning, it is compiled to run on Macs with the old PPC chipset instead of the current day Macs with Intel chipset (Core Duo). The reason I think this is that LL mentions nothing about Intel Macs in their system specs... and... when I boot over into Windows XP on my MacBook Pro, it runs incredibly smoother and faster than when I run it on the same MacBook Pro in OS X. Does LL even know about Intel Macs?? Do they really live in a cave like on that photo they slap up during down-time?

Posted at 6:48PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Stephen

7. Okay, nevermind, it IS Universal. Still, anyone else tried running it in OS X and then Windows XP on the same machine and notice a big difference?

Posted at 6:51PM on Jun 6th 2007 by S. Snow

8. Danielle's been hit with a double-whammy in that regard...she has an HP notebook with an Intel graphics chipset ("not supported") and Windows Vista (ALSO "not supported"). Both of these are likely to be a real problem for LL, as they're becoming increasingly common.

Posted at 6:55PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Erbo Evans

9. Can anybody say up or down if the SL client can run on a Mac with Intel integrated video?

I'm looking to get a combination file server and media station (along with running a few other daemons/services). Mainly a small box to hook up to external hard drives and a big screen TV. A Mac Mini with OS X Tiger or Leopard and 2GB RAM I think would be perfect for this, except that I would occasionally want to throw up SL on that big screen.

Posted at 7:18PM on Jun 6th 2007 by rhhayden

10. I can say for sure that Second Life works on Macs with the Intel integrated graphics - like the Mac Mini. I've done it myself, and my cube neighbor does it all the time. It's not exceptionally fast or smooth, but it does run, with no problems.

Posted at 8:06PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Josh Bancroft

11. I run SL on my laptop and have the intel chipset and i have to say with every new version it gets worse and worse. 1.14 was the best version for me worked perfect and never crashed but oh well LL will keep making it more and more advanced until the only ones who can run SL will be LL themselves

Posted at 9:17PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Dale DeWitt

12. So are the programmers supposed to jump through hoops to support any video configuration that comes out? You should be getting equipment that's compatible with SL. They shouldn't have to bend over to be compatible with your machines with inferior parts. (Intel video? Shared memory? Puhleeze. Get a machine meant for graphics, and quit complaining that your inferior hardware doesn't work as well as everyone elses)

Posted at 9:16PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Kahni Poitier

13. Actually... what could happen, if Intel is paying attention, is that it adds the appropriate support and gets some props for helping maintain the client.

I can't believe LL would say that they don't plan to support the chipset... but then, LL says a lot of things which I wouldn't have believed, so...

Posted at 9:42PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Nobody Fugazi

14. @ Kahni: Problem with that is that the Intel integrated video chips are becoming a large part of the PC and Apple markets, which LL is cutting itself out of.

Posted at 10:49PM on Jun 6th 2007 by rhhayden

15. "Problem with that is that the Intel integrated video chips are becoming a large part of the PC and Apple markets,"

Yes. It's a problem, because they suck.

Posted at 12:54AM on Jun 7th 2007 by Kahni Poitier

16. You buy garbage hardware, you get what you get.

Expect it.

Posted at 1:01AM on Jun 7th 2007 by Kahni Poitier

17. If you can afford a Mac, you can afford to build a PC that will run SL to your heart's content.

Posted at 1:08AM on Jun 7th 2007 by Harold

18. What I mean is, you can't have it all. I've been a Mac user for well over 10 years, and sooner or later I had to cave in and build a PC to run things like Second Life and Half Life and stuff. I still prefer my Macs for many things, but a $300 home-built PC will do wonders.

Personally, I'd rather Linden continued on their current path, focusing on the PC side of things running as smoothly as possible, rather than trying to satisfy the few of us on Macs. Second Life is great, but still has alot of kinks to be worked out, IMHO, and I'd rather those were worked out first rather than trying to satisfy every platform available.

Posted at 1:13AM on Jun 7th 2007 by Harold J. Johnson

19. The Intel chipset was made for desktop applications, not 3d gaming. SL shouldn't be re-rewritten to support Intel, Intel should emulate the other widely used protocols better. You don't have 3d rigs, you have desktop rigs that can kind of play 3d stuff.

Again, if you buy cheap hardware, you get what you get.

Posted at 1:16AM on Jun 7th 2007 by Kahni Poitier

20. I have a Vista machine with Intel 82945G Express Chipset. SL works with the latest Intel graphics media accelerator driver which now supports OpenGL 1.4, and so it should.

After all, isn't OpenGL meant to be a hardware-independent, operating system independent, vendor neutral graphics API specification?

Posted at 6:57AM on Jun 7th 2007 by Eric T