So is all the comments about a version 6 of Poser real? Since they seem to not have got versions 4 or 5 working properly yet, should they even be thinking about it? Until the current versions are working properly, I cant see myself spending anymore on Poser. What are peoples thoughts on this, some of you obvously have it working well enough for yourselves, but I still see many complaints.

Clearly their policy is not to fix Poser 4 anymore (shame). What CL has said in the past is that the policy in Poser 5 was just to add lots of new functionality rather than try to address basic issues of usability, which will be the focus of Poser 6. To my mind this is exactly the wrong way round, but there you are.

Photoshop, Windows, 3DSMax, MacOS, Paint Shop Pro, Nero, Bryce 3 and 4 and 5 -- this list goes on and on and on. In fact, it's more likely to be easier to list the programs not on this list than the ones on it. What about all of them? All of them currently have bugs the makers are aware of and haven't "fixed" yet. The boards for them are just as vociferous, just as demanding, just as whiny. (And while ya'll take umbrage at that, note please that I've whined right along with ya) Phantast is right -- it should be the other way around. But software in general doesn't work that way -- never has, and it's unlikely to anytime within our lifetimes. Me, I'll settle for a point light.

I'll see your point light and raise you a GI ability, with network rendering to offset the incredible hit on rendering time that would create.

Damn, I hate to say this, but it makes sense. What's going to sell on the box? "Now with dynamic cloth!" or "Now with save dialogs that don't go insane!" In all fairness, I didn't pay upgrade price for the library system. I paid it for shader materials and dynamic cloth.

Nonetheless, software developers should do both. Add new features and fix past bugs that aren't practical to patch. The thing is with some bugs is that you might be able to let them slip one release, but only one. Some of these that have been around since version 3, and were left in 4, and left in Pro Pack, and left in 5... Well, it starts to tweak people's switch, ya know.

Point lights and some form of real-time preview for transparency (doesn't have to be perfect, something like what DAZ Studio has would be fine) are major "you want me to upgrade?" points. I'd also like area lights. And some bugs ironed out.

I don't see how you can have a new version release without new features. I have to think they mean MAJOR features like the cloth room, not minor ones like new light types, better preview, and other things that could just as easily be called improvements.

F..k the dynamic cloth! I want 'trackingScale' to work for all channels, I want Poser to update the actor number (:#) in the ERC slaving code when a new character is added, and I want all those other script parsing problems fixed.

I want menus that cascade instead of scroll, I want the default save name for the graphic to be the same as the pz3, and I want each open/save box to remember which folder it opened last, I want to be able to move the camera without having to reselect the actor I am working on.

In short I want them to fix Poser so it handles the scripting better, and improve the interface and "try to address basic issues of usability" as Phantast said.

And if they could make it so that I could inject a new channel, and let me put the diffrent library file types in the same folder, that would be worth a thousand dynamic cloths, face rooms, and collision detections. I would probably rush out and buy it, but I am not going to pay for more bells and whistles!

" I want to be able to move the camera without having to reselect the actor I am working on." Ditto and add lights. Ideally, using the track-ball thingies to change or adjust the cameras and lights should be "momentary-action", with the selection returning to the real object as soon as you let go of the mouse in the track-ball area. If you go so far as to pick a camera or light by name from one of the selection menus, that should count as a real (non-momentary) selection, and you should have to manually re-select other actors from there. (Merely adjusting a camera already works like this... SOMETIMES! But all actions in the trackballs should work this way for consistency.)

Good point:

Quote - I want each open/save box to remember which folder it opened last

Other thoughts: Should they have their own forums links directly to off-site forums (such as this)? How many seats worth of Poser 5 did they sell? (that makes a big difference in what kind of expense and coding time the program justifies). Wonder which questions are the most common? How about improving the bundle of "stuff" that comes with Poser. I mean, the behemoth from sixus1.com ought to be there, I'm hoping Judy, et al. in P6 are as good as lo-res vickie and mike (which are free), etc. If I'm making sense.

"Photoshop, Windows, 3DSMax, MacOS, Paint Shop Pro, Nero, Bryce 3 and 4 and 5 -- this list goes on and on ... What about all of them? All of them currently have bugs the makers are aware of and haven't "fixed" yet. The boards for them are just as vociferous, just as demanding, just as whiny." I have to disagree. I've used Photoshop since version 3, Windows since 3.1, Max 4 and Bryce 4. I've never experienced serious problems with these programs that I've experienced with Poser. Yes, they may have "bugs" but none as severe as Poser's. Plus, I've been to many Photoshop and other programs' forums and never seen complaints to the extent I've seen them here for Poser. And the fact that Poser's bugs (known by CL as "issues") have been with it from version 4 through ProPack and even got worse in version 5 is proof the developer just doesn't care about its customers. It's great to add features but fix the obvious problems first! But CL has already said they're going to address the proplems with 5 in version 6. In other words, they ain't gonna fix 5, let alone 4. I'm with you mouser. Unless they offer a HEAVY discount to Poser 5 customers, I won't be buying 6 either.

First, as anyone who's followed the Poser Forum for a while knows, I was, uh, VERY dissappointed with P5. Not so much for what I got, but for the way CL has handled the whole P5 episode. I think P5 was a great step forward. I also think we who bought it early were badly cheated, and that CL owes us compensation. They intentionally released a product before they believed it was ready for release, and advertised features they knew were not working. That's called fraud. If CL ever did anything like that again, I'll be calling lawyers and government agencies. That said, CL has since changed hands after their parent company went bankrupt (wonder why?). I'll give the new parent company a chance. Maybe they'll do it better. I will not buy early though. I want some other poor sucker to use the thing for a month or two before I'll put any money into it. And, if there's anything that they say will be released later, I won't buy until it's all released. I also won't buy unless they fix a rather long list of problems still there in P5. I'll also wait until CL doesn't have problems with leading Poser content providers. No more Daz vs. CL crap. And if they include a built-in bowser in the program, they'd better be able to TURN IT OFF. Anyone tried to use Content Paradise lately? Right now it's down. Fool me once..

"I've never experienced serious problems with these programs that I've experienced with Poser. Yes, they may have "bugs" but none as severe as Poser's." Now Jackson -- lol, when have we agreed often? lol None as severe as Poser? Photoshop took four versions to get the handling of gif format corectly, and three to handle png, and still doesn't handle wpg particularly well. The original plug-ins architecture for it caused it to crash unexpectedly. not gonna go into windows. That one should be pretty simple. However, they work. Not for everyone perfectly, and not all the time. But I haven't had anyof the issues that are commonly heard with P5. I have no issues with workflow (my workflow would actually be destroyed by some of the suggestions I've read for "fixing" that, and I'm pretty quick when coin is on the table), and I've used P5 for some time. And only the very lucky or the fool would say the intial release was good. It took until sr2 for it to be usable with any reliability. It's that -- as LD pointed out -- that rankles people. It wsn't just bad. It was very bad. The stink over licensing and the DAZ issues (played out publically, no less) -- sheesh. That was just plain ugly and left a lot of bad feelings in a place where people wear their hearts on their sigs. also, ERC is a hack. It's a hack dependent in part on cross talk. Cross talk was a bug. It was fixed in P5. Sorta kills that hope. While we'll likely not know how many seats were sold, I'm willing to bet it's in the multiples of thousands. WHich is important to note: The vocal minority involved in these discussions do not always reflect the broader range of experiece with the program.

"The vocal minority involved in these discussions do not always reflect the broader range of experiece with the program. I agree with that 100 percent :) About Photoshop though: I said, "...none as severe as Poser's." Not handling gifs or pngs isn't quite as severe as crashing your computer and forcing a reboot. And I can't recall any plugin doing that to Photoshop either. About Windows, I can't recall being forced to reboot by simply using it as it's supposed to be used. Come to think of it--aside from some games--I can't think of ANY program that locked up my computer simply by using it. Except for Poser, that is. Of course, the extremely bad memory handling is just one of Poser's many serious "issues." But we've been all over that before, no need to go into it again.

Which looks better on the box? "Now with Dynamic Cloth" or "Now fixed: the bug that causes Poser to do weird things when it can't find a texture and gets lost looking through your multi-gig hard drive trying to find the missing texture." There's only so much space on the box. :) Poser 5 has been built on Poser 4 which was built on Poser 3, which was based on code from Poser 1. So, needless to say, there are a lot of issues left over. As sad as it is to say, though, there comes a point where someone has to say that it's time to start from scratch. Yes, it may cost more development time, but in the long run, it would be much better than trying to tack extra features onto the existing P4/ P3/ P1 code base. --John

One of my peeves is how steve cooper flat out lied and said that Poser 5 was a "complete rewrite." Remember that? Three years in tehmaking, and then we saw a Poser with the exact same interface, some 3rd part add-in hacked on to it. and (The only thing that was needed was to see the same box with "4" crossed off and "5" written in magic marker.) Miraculosly this "rewrite" had the exact same bugs. So when faced with the question "Was it hard duplicating the bugs for the new version?" they admitted that the "core application" was not changed. Oh, gee, thanks for telling us that after the fact. Sounds like Poser 6 is going to be bug fix. Thats a pet peeve of mine. In reality it should be called v5.5. Poser 6.0 should be a total rewrite. I know. It aint gong top happen. Legacy code is far cheaper. And who cares if the users think its unusable what do they know. They buy it because its in a nice shiny new box.

I've already made my feelings clear. Poser6 will be Poser5 with 80% of the bugs intact, a larger and more obnoxious library, a cludged-in GI that will work very slowly and not very well -- and they will sell umpteen copies to every newbie artist who won't believe that "latest" doesn't always mean "greatest." And forums like this, which are largely responsible for distributing information and decent models and hacks to make the software run properly (in short, all the stuff the developers of the software should have done), will be innundated by a new crop of screaming users looking for help. There is very little incentive to fix bugs. Given the choice between selling an upgrade to an experienced user, or fobbing of ten copies of a bug-ridden piece of junk through Barnes&Noble to new users, which way do you think they will go? And ain't no way in heck the base code will be substantially revised.

Some questions: It's that -- as LD pointed out -- that rankles people. It wsn't just bad. It was very bad. The stink over licensing and the DAZ issues (played out publically, no less) -- sheesh. That was just plain ugly and left a lot of bad feelings in a place where people wear their hearts on their sigs.

Where can I read about that?

Also, is there a good alternative program? When I look at the problems people have with Daz|Studio -- a program basically designed, it appears, to encourage people to sepnd their money on Vick & Mike rather than CL -- it becomes obvious that the problems CL had/has aren't as easy to fix as it may appear.

Anyway, I'm still learning. Guess I'll eventually have the same problems as everyone else once I get good enough to encounter them. Right now my problems are more on the line of "darn, I need an undo, darn cat jumped on the keyboard right before I saved" or "man, I'm glad I organize things, this software loses them immediately" sorts of problems.

Though I am curious about the history.

Thanks!

I don't care what CL promises or what it claims - I will NOT be buying another product from them again. Ever. As far as I'm concerned, ProPack was the last usable product they put out. I'm not installing P5 on the new computer.

I want area cameras I can parent to props and figures or animate like in truespace thAt can also track the anmation and keep in framed. I want animation textures, To be able to assign a movie file, or Windows avi as an animated texture to a prop or figure within an animation set. I want an easy to use animation controls and animation timeing setup that can be easy to understand instead of looking at a bunch of squares...that im not sure what to do with.....

I want poser to be fast without all that Content Paradise crap built into it.

"I want animation textures, To be able to assign a movie file, or Windows avi as an animated texture to a prop or figure within an animation set." DM -- this feature is present in P5. And it's pretty unlimited -- lights, background, and any surface you can assign a texture to you can assign a movie file to as that texture. Shift to the spline editor in poser -- it came with P4, and is a lot more powerful than those boxes -- and easier to use, as well. Damn, Kate! And here I thought ya were gonna stay hidden. Very glad to see you post. I agree about content paradise -- it was a good idea horribly executed. Bury it appropriately.

Ethesis, The bits and pieces of that debacle were spread out among here, Poser Pros, and a couple other places in several threads. Some were deleted, a few locked, and the rest buried in the halls of the strange "archive". There are several alternatives: Truespace, Carrara, Lightwave, 3DSMax, Maya, and several more. Most cost considerably more than Poser does, are much, much harder to learn, and pretty much include modelling as well -- that's the primary focus of them, too. And Jackson -- Dang! This is starting to be a trend! Now, I'm sorta in the position of "defending" CL here, but I sorta should point out I'm not, ultimately. A lot of people who loved Poser 4 simply refuse to upgrade. The same holds true of old Mac users and those people who still swear up, down, left, and right that Windows 98 is better than Windows XP. With only a couple exceptions, Curious Labs (a company whose size is smaller than pretty much any major content provider) is NOT the same company it was when P5 was released. Aside from the "ownership" of the company changing, many of the people and the faces behind it have as well -- and, having talked with some of these people, I am convinced it's for the better overall. The current crop of folks involved have inherited all the P5 debacle. Which, now, isn't even close to as bad as it was when P4 came out (except now there are a LOT more folks invovled). Given my experiences over the last year, I'm going to be rather pointed and say that I'll take CL over other companies in this community pretty much any day of the week. And that has nothing to do with the softwre, but everything to do with the people themselves. As this thread yet again shows, the issues that people typically have with P5 pretty much fall into the categories of: 1 - They didn't change the interface/workflow. 2 - They didn't write all new code. 3 - They didn't add "x" feature that I wanted. 4 - It doesn't work with my computer. The above things are not bugs. Bugs are universal across the specific spectrum of applicable elements. In the case of number 4, it needs to be specifically reproducible on a system matching the specifics. 8 times out of 10, this will be due to some hardware issue, and that will commonly involve some of the newest graphics cards. Cards which don't always get along well with other applications in the first place. Now, part of the reason poser is so successful is the interface. You don't have to like it, but that's part of it's appeal. It is old, and it is clumsy. But, well, it works. If ya don't believe me, check out this place called renderosity and all the picutres it has made using it. That's an awful lot of times for it to work. For my part, if they change the interface as some folks have suggested they do, it would screw up my workflow. Now, I am crazy, but I'll bet that there are at least ten different general workflow systems in use among the users of poser. Some of these workflows were developed in other programs -- and are habits. And we all hate it when our routines are broken. Just as I would hate it if mine were broken by a new interface. (hey, can we go to an interface like wings now that I've spent two months figuring it out? That would help. I like that. Mostly because It's been a god awful pain in the ass to learn). The point here is that it's mostly a lot of experienced users who have used other programs and liked the way things worked there better who want changes to the interface. This would not lead to quicker use by new folks -- most of the tutorials presently extant show the old one, and changes would mean a lot of new tutorials. As for writing new code, I'm not against this. Not even in the slightest bit. I am against changes to the actual core files' format (pz2, cr2, etc.). I believe, at this point, that that's a bad idea. I have since the original discussions about P5 when ProPack came out. Writing new code to match the existing format (which is text based) might not be hard, either -- and, if that's the case, then I am for it. Otherwise, though, this is CL, which does not have a large budget and a gazillion programmers and like as not would simply say "ok, you want all new code, here ya go" and then we'd have to deal with how it doesn't work with existing (and non-hacked) products. If they did do a really massive rewrite, though, I'd hope that they would take some of the hacks that the community has developed and incorporate them into the program. ERC is one of the coolest things. But it's a total hack -- and if they go with a new boning system, oh, crap -- out the window it goes. Even DAZ (which has a programmer staff larger than CL as a company from what I've heard) hasn't managed to get that one working right. Well, except for their in house stuff. The lack of special features like "openGL" and "GI lighting" and "point lights" and all that fancy rigamarole. Well, personally, I don't want GI. If they add it, great. I've got IBL capability now, and I've takent he time to learn how to use it, and I'd like them to expose more of that function of the rendering agent to the program (and python) LONG before they add GI. My least favorite of the suggstions, though, is OpenGL. This may be because of lack of knowledge on my part: I simply don't understand what the benefit to me, as a user, is going to be from having OpenGL added. I just don't. I can see a lot of drawbacks, but I haven't seen anyone explain why it's such a good idea. I mean, we're talking about the real time display here, not the rendering engine (and OpenGL is a lousy engine), and I have yet to see open GL mimic the capabilites of Poser's current display. It might -- I don't know. But until someone does show me, I won't support this call. There are other complaints, as well -- and all of them are pretty much the same thing as my whine about point lights. Give me point lighting and I'll be able to duplicate GI in about 6 lights instead of the 9 it takes me now. With a quicker rendering time. But they are still "whines" based on nebulous "they said..." when no one ever actually said it -- it sort of built up as an expectation in the community that never happened. (and people around these parts HATE not having their expectations met.) Now, there are other complaints, too -- there was, once, by folks who are not with CL any longer, mention that all the critters would be remade. We didn't get them as part of the package. But they are coming out. Someday. And probably not from CL. That's the way it goes. A lot of folks bitch about the lack of convertors. And to that one: CL, even under the old folks, NEVER promised that They would make those convertors. They ALWAYS stated they would be from some one else. Go yell at the someone else. There are some valid concerns out there -- I'm not dissing them, nor am I saying that CL is a bunch of angels (though I am saying they are slightly more angelic than some), nor am I saying that P5 is perfect. I'm saying that a lot of these complaints are giving the wrong impression and are based on erroneous information or, worse, based on a desire of an advanced user who has completely different needs from a new user. CL does understand that last bit. And it would be nice if they moved forward with their current product lines (not unlike the flagship product of their new owners, I'll note winkingly) and had a beginner, advanced, and professional version of Poser. (gee, ya don't suppose a survey about just that sorta thing was done recently? Nah. Must just be my years writing them telling me that...) that's my quarter, said before and said again and now I'll save this long ole post so I can post it 'cause some site's software times out anytime you type a reply over 30 words (wink, wink, nudge nudge)...

My only complaints with p5 are the backface issue (yeah, you can use the alternate diffuse materials, but it isn't the same....that is a hack!) Memory consumption for renders is significantly greater than p4, which I suspect to be poor memory manangement, not just the cost of the better renderer The weird geometry problems seen on some items that looked fine in p4. This, to me, is absolutely unreasonable. If it rendered fine in p4, then there is no reason for the problem to show up in p5. Otherwise, I love p5. I use vue, so if the geometry crap shows up, I'll generally use vue for rendering (unless it's clothing, in which case, I'm assuming the p4 renderer will work as well as real PP). Would I buy p6, not sure. If they never attempt to address some of the clear bugs in p5 (like the backface thing, or the ugly geometry), probably not. I waited months before upgrading, and only did so after everyone stopped complaining. Frankly, if they had done a little better with the core renderer, I would have been perfectly happy to pay what I did for the precedural materials and improved library system (though, I always believed that should have been fixed in 4:). And, I would have payed 50 more bucks for a cloth room plugin (that has been really the best part of the whole buy). The face room....huge waste of CL resources....at least for me. eric

Just to answer to ynsaen - By necessity, a lot of people's work routines have developed in response to the flakey way Poser operates. Sure, if the operation of the prog were made more logical or efficient, you would have to change, and at first you might not like not having to do it other than the way you were used to, but I think you would quickly see the new way is better. You might have a working practice built up around the fact that when you try to import a pz3 file, the import dialog box prompts you randomly for a pp1 or pz2 file (how likely is you would want one of those??), but ultimately it would be more effective if it either defaulted to pz3 (most common) or better, remembered your last choice. And you may be used to selecting an item in the Poser window by waving the mouse round for a few minutes until eventually the right body part has the red outline (when the cursor is actually an inch to the left of it), but if you had a chnace to use a sensible selection system, you would soon be glad of the change.

Like the character list and body part list for the active character at the bottom of the main scene window? Those are just standard Windows pop-up style menu's, gray color and all. I quit the hunt-a-part in the main window awhile ago. And I side with ynsaen in regards to OpenGL. The =only= thing it would do is provide real time rendering of light sources and transparencies in the workspace window...and possibly screen refresh acceleration on the actual interface. While it would be nice, the hard truth is that OpenGL is in a constant state of flux, what with the addition of all the nifty new shader effects for games (and most of the people here use gaming cards, not pro level boards). Driver roulette is not fun (I point to Vue 4 and Nvidia drivers. VuePro works much nicer, but then it also has a totally different OpenGL implementation than Vue basic; and once you commit to a specific version of GL you are stuck with it, just like Direct X). Ethesis; That's one of the major points that always grind my particular gears; how 'easy' it is to fix all this. It isn't. As I've pointed out in the past, the P5 executable is 10.8 megabytes in size. That is 11,075,584 individual bytes of =compiled= code (compared to the E-book 'Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix', which tips up at a grand 675k; and that is simple text with a touch of formatting. Stack 22 of the newest Potter books one on the other, and you have a rough idea of the size of the Poser executable if you printed it out. And that is in compiled form only....). God and CL only knows just how large the actual source files are, what -can not- be touched due to Poser's cross platorm nature, and what they may be contractually prohibited from changing (most of the required code changes to 'fix' some pet peeves would probably trash most or all of the hacks that have been taken to heart in Poserdom. ERC is a hack, f'r instance). Poser does need work; so does every other program out there. Computing these days is a matter of compromise, due to the intrusive nature of OS's in general. In days of old, when DOS was bold, a program could be designed to access the metal directly, and ignore most of the OS. Then you were only dealing with the hardware, and if you had hardware that met specs, no problemo. Not today. And not for any platform. I might trade the GI in for an expansion of the library system, that allowed me to create new categories to shove things like REMs and INJs into their own little corner. Better memory management would be nice...and using that to add a couple more levels of undo. Curious Labs has a mostly new team, now, and an owner who has an established record for writing graphics apps. I'm willing to judge the product to be, not prejudge it against the past since those conditions have changed rather radically.

Having just gotten into that dynamic cloth stuff... gimme. It's great. (in reply to the F*** dynamic cloth above lol) Yeah, P5 was buggy and horrible and whatnot before SR3. SR3 fixed a lot of "issues" (not enough) and made P5 usable. SR4 fixed a few more (and broke others) and made it even more usable. I really don't have a gripe more than I have a wishlist. Spot renders (ala bryce) would be fantastic to preview parts of a render before committing to the full thing. (You know, render the foot, check if it's on the ground etc, adjust, render the foot... rinse repeat.) Being able to tell where in heck the shadows really are would be nice too. Better lights would be great. HDRI would be wonderful. Having a semi transparant or a colored transparent mesh so it's easier to pose onto something to work out if it's intersecting etc would be great. Having the tools on floating palettes instead of embedded on the workspace would be nice. (i.e. parameter dials. Do it for all the tools like this) Yes I know P5 still has issues, but it's not as bad as all that. (At least here it isn't) I'd like it to dump unused textures from memory when they are not assigned to a figure. Really it's niggly things with me. Probably "bugs" but some I can live with. (Tho not happy with it and would like to see it fixed, but I can live with it as it is.) I don't like D|S. I don't like the interface at all. I'm too used to P5 now. I'm not a lightwave user, I won't BE a lightwave user because I can't afford it. I use poser. I'm used to that. D|S is too disjointed (It was when I last opened it and I'm not using it anymore, so it may well have improved. Not that I care. I'm not going to bother with it.) Anyway... I prefer P5 over P4/PP. I've long since scrapped P4 in favor of P5. Silke

Thanks for the feedback and the history. Makes sense with what I've seen. BTW, what is ERC? Thanks.

Here's a suggestion for P6 that no one has mentioned: When (accidentally) applying a pose to a conformed clothing object, pose the conformed-to figure, not the clothing. For example, you add a shirt to Mike, then conform it, then adjust it. You forgot to switch to Mike and apply a pose... only to have the shirt come off Mike and bunch up. Yes, you can re-conform it to Mike, but you've lost any changes (such as the 4 or 5 OpenShirt morphs you've adjusted). And you didn't want to pose the shirt in the first place, but you forgot which figure was selected.

Ynsaen -

Ya know, I wasn't going to get into this thread until I saw your comparison of Poser's bugs with those other programs. That irks me no end because it isn't fair to those companies and it isn't really true. Comparing Poser's major flaws with other companies' minor glitches is like comparing a broken neck with a splinter. Hey, they're both bodily injuries, right?

And you said:

"*As this thread yet again shows, the issues that people typically have with P5 pretty much fall into the categories of:

1 - They didn't change the interface/workflow.
2 - They didn't write all new code.
3 - They didn't add "x" feature that I wanted.
4 - It doesn't work with my computer.*"

Hmmm, I don't think so. Although numbers 2 and 4 are very valid complaints, there are many other issues people have with Poser 5's release. As for number 2, we were led to believe P5 was going to be a re-write. It wasn't and people felt deceived. People don't like being conned out of their money. And as for number 4, er, doesn't that make sense? If you buy software for your computer and your computer meets the specs, you expect it to work on your computer don't you? People should complain when it doesn't work.

Here are some of my complaints you can add to your list: Long before P5 was even officially announced, I (and others) were asking for certain bugs in P4/PP be fixed. We were told they couldn't work on those any longer because they were busy with P5. We were led to believe the problems would be fixed then. Here is a list of problems that still haven't been fixed even after SR4.1 (how many SR's is that now?):

1. Memory leak (got worse in P5)
2. STILL freezes when it can't find a file
3. Multiplying magnets
4. Erratic behavior in heavily populated scenes (got MUCH worse in P5)
5. Dialog boxes go crazy when trying to scroll

There are probably more but these are just off the top of my head. I won't list the new bugs introduced in P5 that still haven't been fixed.

I know CL has a new staff and I don't blame the P5 mess on them. I was one of the ones who lauded the personnel change when it took place. And, as I've posted in many earlier threads, I still hold out hope for them. They've admitted they're not going to fix the problems in P5 and they'll be addressed in 6 (gee, where have we heard that before?) But I hope these guys are telling the truth and they actually DO what they say they're going to do.

Message edited on: 06/14/2004 09:52

Hmm, appreciate the added knowledge, I've learned a lot I didn't know before, but I started with P5, SR4. Obviously I have a long way to go, and there is a lot I don't know -- heck, I just did my first renders with two or more characters in them recently. Is the memory leakage as bad under WinXP as it was under Win95/98? I had problems with memory leakage in WordPerfect, AOL, Word, etc. under Win95. Where I used to work we solved the memory leak problems by twice a day reboots. Under WinXP Pro it is down to once a day at work (every morning when you log on) and at home I don't reboot XP pro more than once a week or so. The freeze while looking for file stuff is a bit annoying, but teaches me to be careful with the stuff I use. I think if I paid $600 for it I'd be upset, but the current $150 or so price at Amazon.com or half.com isn't so bad.

Jackson -- huggs, hon. I know this might sound trite, but,w ell, I like it when ya hop in. Even if i get all red in the face. lol You are right -- it is somewhat unfair of me to compare the efforts of a tiny company staffed by a hundredth the size of the people and with a budget one thousandth the size of those I mentioned. Terribly wrong of me. Perhaps I should have compared it to Renderosity... "1) Memory leak (got worse in P5) 2) STILL freezes when it can't find a file 3) Multiplying magnets 4) Erratic behavior in heavily populated scenes (got MUCH worse in P5) 5) Dialog boxes go crazy when trying to scroll" These all fall under 4. I've never had a memory leak under p5 -- and I monitor it pretty damn tight. I've not had it freeze when looking for anything since sr4 -- with the sole exception of INJ/REM stuff, which is a hack, and which I had placed in the worng place (silly me). It is not an unreasonable expectation that it should work with your system -- provided your system is a common, everyday one. Now, define common and everyday.... ya got me with 3. I haven't had it happen with magnets I've inserted, but I have with magnets from others. And it tends to be with magnets form a couple related sources that tend to do the same thing. Leads me to believe a hack is in use, but I haven't examined it close enough. But I am still inclined to think it's a bug about saved magnets. Erratic behavior is pretty broad, hon -- I haven't had much there. Even in major scenes. But I'll give ya that one, too. I don't think this was anticipated in the orginal code (much of what we do is far and away beyond what Poser was initially designed for). And Damn it, you are right -- what the hell is up with that? Drives me nuts, lol I mean, that's a stadard windows call (library object)-- it should work without problem -- unless it was tweaked or added poorly. That's one you got in spades. I wasn't saying that hit didn't have bugs. Nor did I say that ALL the comments fell into those four categories -- and, in fact, stated specifically that some did not, and were valid. I like to see valid issues brought out. I do not like to see valid issues brought out and buried in a morass of incompletely thought out ideas, invlaid issues based on on ancient and best left dead grievances or the community rumor mill's insistence on what was supposed to be. JohnRender -- I like your suggestion -- but not as the default -- there are times when posing the clothing is actually important (MAT poses, for example). Phantast -- all of the above I agree with. Those would full under the heading of good changes. It's the more elaborate schemes that seek to change the "look" of that poser interface into something more akin to Photoshop or any other "run of the mill, easy to bury all the commands in flyouts and drop downs and hidden gotta use the freakin keyboard shortcuts when all ya wanna do is click" programs out there. My absolute least favorite of them was one to make Poser use a lightwave interface. That would kill growth among new users pretty damned quick. Dale B -- thanks :) Ethesis -- it's always sorta cool to know this stuff -- you've already got a heck of a good grasp on that. Don't forget to lurk around the Poser technical and Poser Python threads, too -- you can learn more there in a week about Poser than you ever dreamed of knowing....

Ynsaen, ya know I love ya, but I can't let you get away with this one: "You are right -- it is somewhat unfair of me to compare the efforts of a tiny company staffed by a hundredth the size of the people and with a budget one thousandth the size of those I mentioned. Terribly wrong of me. Perhaps I should have compared it to Renderosity..." This is another trick you guys use a lot. You love comparing Poser's bugs with Photoshop, Windows, etc., but when you're called on it, you say it's "unfair" to compare poor little CL with those huge companies like Adobe, Microsoft, etc. If it's so unfair, why do people keep doing it? Anyway, so let's compare small companies. I have several packages from tiny companies (arcsoft, veritas, etc.) and even shareware and freeware that work flawlessly. I know your answer to that one: these packages aren't as complicated as Poser. There's always an answer. "It is not an unreasonable expectation that it should work with your system -- provided your system is a common, everyday one. Now, define common and everyday.... It doesn't necessarily have to be "common and everday." It should simply have to meet the program's specs, just like I said earlier. You must have missed that ;) As for magnets, all you gotta do is save a figure with a magnet attached. When you re-load the figure, you'll have two magnets. Save it again, you'll have four. You're right--erratic behavior is broad. I didn't want to list all individual "quirks" that begin once Poser starts bogging down. I just wanted to illustrate that P5 starts to "bog down" much sooner than P4. You're also correct about my list falling under P4. That was my point: they should have been fixed in 5 but weren't. You don't experience memory problems with 5? It doesn't freeze when it can't find a texture? Either you're very lucky or I'm very unlucky. Or maybe you don't use Poser to the extent I do and you just don't notice these problems. In any event, I'm happy it works for you.

yay! I thought it was buried too deep, lol "This is another trick you guys use a lot. You love comparing Poser's bugs with Photoshop, Windows, etc., but when you're called on it, you say it's "unfair" to compare poor little CL with those huge companies like Adobe, Microsoft, etc. If it's so unfair, why do people keep doing it?" Lack of effective reference points? Ignorance? Readiness of use? I think simply because they are the most common reference points for most people. "I know your answer to that one: these packages aren't as complicated as Poser. There's always an answer." True -- but validity of the answer is what's applicable. IT's a valid response to your comparatives. Dissect it and disprove it otherwise. Then I've got some for those (and ya know if I don't, I'll concede the point :)) "It doesn't necessarily have to be "common and everday." It should simply have to meet the program's specs, just like I said earlier. You must have missed that ;)" Apologies -- I did miss that. I also oversimplified, and that was an error. The point is conceded as I've lost the train of thought. The items didn't fall under P4, they fell under Item four in my list... And then I'm lucky in the same way the larger majority of folks are. Running under XP, using the method I described in my 5 Things posts, I have never had a crash (since SR2.1), do not have memory leaks (granted, my definition is pretty specific), and since sr4 it hasn't locked up once looking for a texture. I'm currently in a position where Poser is in use about 60% of my day on two systems (I use poser to make a living, since it's my primary animation tool for the training CD's I create), running simultaneously with Powerpoint, Photoshop 6, and Vegas Video (and sometimes Acid, as well).

What I've been known to bitch about is the user interface. Two big things: 1: Colour choices and font sizes seem poor for making the display readable, and there doesn't seem to be any was of adjusting them. 2: Some elements are Standard Windows. Some are CL-style. And some CL-style material could be Standard Windows. I'm not going to claim the Windows UI is perfect, but Microsoft did a lot of work on how it works, and how people use it. Apple have done the same for theirs. For the standard jobs, it makes sense to use standard OS methods. For other stuff (look at how the lights can be moved), there isn't a Windows standard. I wonder if some of the bugs come from people trying to do ordinary stuff in a new way, and making their job more complicated than it needs to be.

you know, since I was born half blind and I'm only getting older (bifocals already, and lord knows what in the future), I'll go with that, AntoniaTiger. Being able to adjust them outside of hand editing an XML file would be a pretty spiffy feature. I think you've inspired my next question regarding Poser. :) Thank you!