Lombardi lays it down: How Croquet is different

Julian Lombardi answers a question that I have been asked a number of times in a very concise and somewhat-easy-for-non-techies-to-digest form.

How is Croquet different from Second Life?

"Croquet makes it possible to develop any number of interlinked metaverses that can be deployed independently of a commercial authority or the constraints imposed by server-imposed resource limitations."

In other words, it's all about freedom.

It's about decentralization vs. centralization. It's about control of information vs. flow of information. It's about DIY (d0-it-yourself) vs. BIFM (build-it-for-me).

Doug Holton responded with this:

[As regards Second Life] They open sourced the client and will be open sourcing the server. They include a programming/scripting interface, that can be extended (once open sourced) to just about any language (if they are still using mono).

What first struck me about this post was the repeated use of the word "they," connoting that someone else is in control. When I speak of Croquet and Croquet development, I speak of "we." A community. In this example, Doug appears to be waiting for someone to grant him rights, to increase his freedom. With Croquet, there is nothing limiting me from doing what I want other than my own abilities and resourcefulness.

I also have the sense that there is a great deal of wishful thinking going on here. I will believe that Linden Labs is open sourcing their server when I have the source downloading to my machine. Further, it remains to be seen just how "open" their notion of open source will be. Take Apple as an example here. Apple used open source components to build their version of Unix--OS X. And they encouraged an open source community to contribute to their Unix derivative. But over time, the process of acquiring, modifying, and compiling code became so restrictive that the community around Darwin nearly died. There is no guarantee that this will not happen with SL server. Yes, I'm skeptical.

But why not the same skepticism over Croquet? Because I'm much more trusting a product released under an open license from the beginning. From the initial pre-release until now with the 1.0 SDK, Croquet has been completely developed in the open--and not always to the benefit of the project (recall that it's not an app).

(I understand that Linden Labs is working hard at "getting"--or perhaps more apt "groking"--open source. But they are struggling. And mistakes have been made. And they cannot seem to get away from the notion of a central authority. But that's not what this blog is about.)

In the end, I understand why people have the need to compare Croquet and SL. They share significant surface similarities. But when you look at the vision for the two products, it appears to be an apples-and-oranges type of comparison. Croquet is a framework for deep, meaningful collaboration at a distance. And SL? Well, just look at what the most purchased piece of avatar anatomy is in SL and you may start to get the sense that it is not necessarily a collaboration tool.

Perhaps the question would be more readily answered if one were to ask, "How is Croquet similar to Second Life?"