"Second, Studio has been long on unkept promises, and that suggests a poor grasp of the scope of the task (a charitable interpretation). That poor grasp does not inspire confidence in the result, assuming we ever see one." mickmca: I can understand your definition and your view regarding foolish/dishonest people and unkept promises/delayed releases, etc - however, you do realize don't you that by what you say you condemn pretty much all the major players in the computer industry. Apple has a long history of failing to meet release dates and also a long history of orphaning their old products shortly after bringing out something new. Microsoft has been late on every release date all the way back to the release of DOS and when they do release a product it is at best in a beta stage [they don't call it that but if you look at the level and types of bugs that their products have when first released and the average number of up-grades and patches they have to add - it shows that the products ARE beta test quality when released] Linux producers likewise have long been big on promises and slow on delivery. What does this have to do with DAZ? Different sorts of product and all ... yes, but the standards for judging a company is not limited to the type of product they produce. I'm not saying it impresses me when a company fails to deliver on time on their promises, but it has become the standard of the whole computer industry so it doesn't surprize me. These days people blindly accept things as if it is to be expected with computers - things that didn't used to be acceptable at all and things that anyone with a long enough background in computers knows are simply bad programing standards. So, if you are going to take a negative stand on DAZ for the reasons you give, I hope you are doing the same for Microsoft, Apple, the various producers of Linux, etc. Now if you do judge all of those the same as you judge DAZ - then ok, judging DAZ is fair enough, but if you don't take the same stand with the major companies in the computer industry then I think you are being unfair. Not that I'm saying you don't have the right to take whatever stand you wish, but if the standard is not applied universally it does rather lack fairness. I wish that software developers all the way from the people who write small apps up to those who do OSes and the people who write major apps like D|S, Poser, etc, would manage to put produces out when they say they will and that the products would be fully tested and fixed as needed so that there were no bugs [or at least only rare cases] and the software didn't crash [I started in computers in 1972 working on mainframes and back then the idea of a piece of software which was not in alpha or beta test stages EVER crashing was almost unthinkable but these days it doesn't even raise an eyebrow] however, wish though I might, it isn't the way of the industry. Not the OS developers and not the apps producers - DAZ is hardly unusual in that way at all. They have LOTS of company.