Who knows, perhaps they will turn around and sell it again.  They are still working on Poser 7 Pro Pack, which supposed to come out last fall.  They should take their time though, this way it will be a product that people wil really want and use.

From looking over their press releases, Smith Micro is in "attract venture capital" mode, and is acquiring whatever they can get their hands on in order to jump themselves up on various "fastest growing" lists - at least, that is what they brag about in a great number of their press releases.  IMO buying Poser was simply a numbers decision.  Having been employed by companies bought for that sort of reason I am skeptical of how well it will turn out.  We'll see I suppose.

The jury is still out on Smith Micro, and what they'll do with Poser.

The release of Poser Pro -- and the community fallout afterwards -- will likely tell the story.

Dunno, based on the timing I would think the entire scope of work for Poser Pro was defined before talk of the sale began, probably it was a major haggling point in the sale in the first place.  I wouldn't expect everything to be done the same way once Poser Pro is released, whether that is good or bad - just not the same good or bad.

If Poser is sold again I wonder who would buy it.  Wouldn't it be interesting, for instance, if Daz bought it?

Odds are , Daz would buy it and then bury it deeply, so new users were forced into getting DS, and buying plugins for it. Since they would no longer need to compete with poser, the plugins sales would end, and they'd release a bundle price for about the same price as poser.. but without the features poser has that ds does not.

Competition is a GOOD thing.. look at what daz has done with hexagon.. it's real developement pretty much ended when it left evoia's hands.

Well I don't think so, if DAZ bought it then it would be a win all the way around; they could "give D|S away free" as they do today, and they could also sell Poser at $250 a pop.  Plus they could stop fighting with their counterparts over how to interpret content.

Actually look at what they've done with every program they've bought up.. done a few minor patches, but practically no major foreward developement at all.

And there are two camps.. how to best develop content FOR DS, and how to best develop is FOr poser.. that wouldn't change, but having both major programs own by different players assures us that one or the other will survive.

Hexagon 2 was a remarkable achievement, the the changes and bug fixes by Eovia when they owned it were amazing in a very short period of time. Once daz got it, even major bug fixes like exporting proper point order took almost 2 years to achieve, and that's a HUGE deal breaker for anyone using it.

Daz intended to take over poser's application place, and in 4 years of developement now, still haven't added poser base features like cloth, hair and rigging ability, not to mention even touching close to poser's powerful material room.

I trust SM and poser's legacy developement team FAR more then I trust daz hacking at it for the next few years.

Good points Gareee, though I really can't complain about Hexagon because I payed very little for it and now I'm getting the upgrade for free.  I remember the original Hexagon buyers howling when Daz sold it so cheaply to Platinum Club Members.

I was looking to Quidam to become a more powerful Poser competitor, but since it's so expensive I can't afford to buy it and I'm not sure if it will ever take off.  Plus content for it is through the roof.

Competition is good as long as you can still use your legacy content.  If, for instance, Daz Studio would old use special Daz Studio content exclusively it becomes a much more expensive propostion to replace a content library.

Daz intended to take over poser's application place, and in 4 years of developement now, still haven't added poser base features like cloth, hair and rigging ability, not to mention even touching close to poser's powerful material room. <<<<

4 years development time. The same amount of time it probably took to do Poser 1, and either Poser 2 or 3.  Another 2 years for Poser 4. Another year for Pro Pack. Another 3 years for Poser 5. Another 2 years for Poser 6. And another year on that for Poser 7. So you're probably talking AT LEAST 13 years of ongoing development to get to the Poser 7 that we know today. At least 10 years of development for Poser 5, which added the features that you belittle DS for not having yet.

So you are comparing 4 years of feature development to something more like 10 years of feature development. Is that a fair comparison?

Hexagon 2 was a remarkable achievement, the the changes and bug fixes by Eovia when they owned it were amazing in a very short period of time. Once daz got it, even major bug fixes like exporting proper point order took almost 2 years to achieve, and that's a HUGE deal breaker for anyone using it. <<<<

And you do realize that there was a 4 year lag between Poser 4 and Poser 5 when it changed hands? Yes, Poser Pro Pack was released in between but it was probably already in development under MetaCreations before the changeover.

I'm not taking sides here, just trying to compare apples to apples.

>> Well I don't think so, if DAZ bought it then it would be a win all the way around; they could "give D|S away free" as they do today, and they could also sell Poser at $250 a pop.

But it would also mean continuing double-development on every model mesh they create or buy.

Actually look at what they've done with every program they've bought up.. done a few minor patches, but practically no major foreward developement at all.

Or in the case of Bryce 6.1, made it into a train wreck that inexplicably requires DS to run.

Re: developing double content, imo that's mainly because the two apps are headed by different groups and since they don't implement each other's changes that affect how legacy content loads, you have this compatiblity problem.  If both teams were given a serious mandate to stop fighting each other's goals (e.g. they become the same team, or at least have rigid design goals that require compatibility) then that would stop being a problem - whether it stopped because some differing and conflicting goals are killed (e.g. methods of subdivision, whether Catmull-Clark or Reyes) or just because of enforced cooperation.

we don't have an exact figure on when daz started working on D|S as a poser replacement,
but I daresay it was not long after they split off from zygote.

By the same token, we also don't know how long it took to develop Poser 1, so I also tried to take that into account in my comparison.  That's why I said it might have been the same amount of time to either Poser 2 or 3.

That's a lot of years of development.  But it also puts DAZ Studio on a more even keel when you compare it to the earlier years of Poser's development, rather than comparing it to the features that we now have. Those features didn't happen overnight, is the point I was trying to make.

And I would imagine that there was probably some reverse-engineering at play when the initial betas of DS were built. Just a hunch.

I think Deecey is correct.
I also think that it wouldl take another 5 to 10 years before DAZ|Studio has functionality comparable to Poser.
If that is what DAZ wants to do with D|S. Some of the new functions in the latest version of D|S make me think that DAZ wants to target the 3D game market. Which would be a smart move, the game market is bigger than the movies market (yes, including the Hollywood blockbusters). There's a LOT of money to be made in games!

I wonder what Smith MIcro is going to do with Poser. I expect them to release Poser Pro somewhere in 2008, they will want to get some revenue to set off the cost of purchasing Poser. But after that? Who knows. I wouldn't be surprised if they went after the game market too.
Hey, even Microsoft is doing it. I read their purchase of trueSpace as a step into the game creation market, I expect to see a sort of XNA Game Studio Pro, including a 3D modeler based on TrueSpace, appear pretty soon.

Quote - Actually look at what they've done with every program they've bought up.. done a few minor patches, but practically no major foreward developement at all.

too soon to tell with most of 'em - combing through a codebase and (basically) re-writing it for speed and stability on modern operating systems is a mother, to be kind about it.

Quote - Daz intended to take over poser's application place, and in 4 years of developement now, still haven't added poser base features like cloth, hair and rigging ability, not to mention even touching close to poser's powerful material room.

Probably because they don't have enough programmers, and are still working on what to do with 'em, long-term.

Quote - I trust SM and poser's legacy developement team FAR more then I trust daz hacking at it for the next few years.

Poser's legacy dev team have more interest in Poser's continued survival than SM's management does, when viewed overall. This isn't a knock, but simply the nature of business.

/P

Quote - we don't have an exact figure on when daz started working on D|S as a poser replacement,
but I daresay it was not long after they split off from zygote.

Ain't saying.

Quote - And I would imagine that there was probably some reverse-engineering at play when the initial betas of DS were built. Just a hunch.

Possibly, but I doubt it would've gotten them further than the fora discussions of it did. Qt and 3Delight are off-the-shelf parts, so to speak - both are open-source to boot, so behaviors can be determined fairly quickly for them.

OTOH, there'd be precious little that could be incorporated from D|S into Poser - quite simply, they're just built far too differently.

/P

I think that most of the flagship features people are craving are going to be developed in Carrara rather than Daz Studio.  This last edition of Carrara included dynamic hair and lon-linear animation, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the cloth and Mimic ended up in there too.  So we'll have Daz Studio for free and if you want all the bells and whistles, including modeling and natural environment people will buy Carrara--which I suspect will eventually have better Poser figure controls.  It's clear to me that that's where most of the development is going, as a platform for Poser content.  It already had bones and rigging.

Poser was very simple when it started and was never intended to be a 3D rendering application.  It started on floppy discs, a very simple program for people to use 3D manequins to draw and paint over in Painter.  Then, when people started using it to make artwork they realised that it could be developed into a 3D figure application all by itself, they even developed painting filters for it.  I remember seeing those early poser figures in online galleries, they were crude at best and people were using them to make kind of surrealistic pictures with them--gold and silver characters.  I don't think that Smith Micro will kill the goose that lays the golden egg--let's just hope they steer it in the right direction.

What i am really surprised at is ...why daz did not buy poser since it was on sale?
They have carrara now ti would make perfect sense to me for them to buy poser, that way most of their problems and competition is basically anihilated.

On a side note on the render engine parts of these discussion,and having worked with carrara, i think it has a better and more efficient render engine than poser.

I also like carrara's interface and ease of use , On that app the principles of rooms are also used but i find the rooms usefull for what i want to do....

People do not want Poser to change because they fear a price tag increase. I find it really cheesy to say that. For that reason alone just people want to keep the app cheap, it would never get anymore tools and the point of upgrading would be useless. Poser's price will never come near the price tag of other 3d apps like 3ds max or lightwave, but if people want new tools they will need to fork more dough. If the tools are a real time saver then it is worth the money. I do 50% of my work in photo editing programs ( post rendering) and that bums me out.

I do not want a "make art" button in poser but there a hell lots of features that can be added thru plugins or actual features.

Features i would like to see:

IN-APP graphical editor, to adjust , trim the textures on the go while i am working in poser.

Ability to get rid of some rooms in the interface ( maybe it is already possible) but i do not know.

Ability to use things other than dialers to adjust stuff ( they always have a tendency to be over sensitive) and you have to type in values most of the time.

Gimble locks on joints on the figures so that finally they will bend at an angle than is humanly believable.

The render room of carrara, i love it cause they are tons of settings in it than can produce awesome results. I think they should get rid of firefly altogether.

A library explorer, the current scheme is good but it is a hassle if your assets library become too big.

Search engine in poser to search your assests.

Faster loading time.

Optimized render engine for multiple cpu's

Better animation features.

A puppetry system that allows user to Puppet his or her rig to what he wants the mesh to accomplish.

An actual BVH library for poser figures ..this is a really powerfull tool but nobody is exploting this

More support for import and exports formats.

Batch rendering.

More intuitive magnets systems. i never got around them and they drive me crazy.

A real toon render.

Even more optimized preview window.

...that is it for now....

peace

Quote - What i am really surprised at is ...why daz did not buy poser since it was on sale?

Assuming that's even a possiblity (no idea there, personally) I think it very probable that Smith Micro did not look too hard at the price, they just bought for the sake of growth.

>> why daz did not buy poser since it was on sale?

Probably some ill will left over from the MilFolk/FaceRoom debacle? Just a guess.

*"Ability to get rid of some of the rooms"

*Can be done by editing some of the XML files that come with Poser. Not easy, but it can be done.

*"**Ability to use things other than dialers to adjust stuff..."

Can be done: either by clicking the value and enter the numbers by hand, or by double clicking the value and change the tracking scale, making the dial change at more appropriate increments, or by enabling the direct manipulation tool and using the circular gizmos around the joints.

*"Gimbal locks on joints..."

*Choose Figure -> Use limits.

*"Render room of Carrara"

*Don't have anything to say on that, I don't have Carrara and can't say if it's more capable/user friendly.

*"Library explorer..."

*Agree with you on that part, it should be part of Poser itself. There's a plugin available (free AFAIK) that has an Explorer-like style for the libraries, the ability to group different kind of items together (a figure plus all hair that fits that figure, for example), and lots more. Don't know the name of the library by heart, though.

*"Search engine to find your assets in poser"

*Download my free FindInLibs.py script.

*"Batch rendering"

*Is available from the scripts menu.

See, more than half of your Poser peeves have already been solved, either by the Poser development team itself or by others.

Forgot some:

*"Reduce load/save times"

*Several options there. Use external binary morph targets, use compression, use my RemoveMorphs and SpawnCharacter scripts, all of these will dramatically reduce file size and load/save times.

Preview window is about as optimized as it can get on a decent OpenGL enabled graphics card.

In-app graphics editor is a BAD BAD BAD BAD idea. Link to an external graphics editor, leave the choice to the user!

I think that the preview modes in Poser currently are the best it's ever had, it's the closest to being able to see what an image will look like without actually rendering a scene completely  It is good however, that Poser gives the ScreeD display option for those whose graphic cards aren't up to par.

Maybee some node's previews need some improvement.
Some nodes make the model white which makes very difficult to understand which material is where(?) :unsure:

Quote - > Quote - What i am really surprised at is ...why daz did not buy poser since it was on sale?

Assuming that's even a possiblity (no idea there, personally) I think it very probable that Smith Micro did not look too hard at the price, they just bought for the sake of growth.

...and this little page (for Stuffit Expander) doesn't exactly inspire confidence in what they may end up doing with Poser, either.

Note the no immediate opt-out option on their cute little spam-a-thon "agreement" on the page... you either join their little spam list, or you're stuck without a download. So... where's the "opt-out" page on their website? It took a bit, but it's here (in case you're curious). Funny thing is, I went to unsubscribe, and my addy isn't on the mailing list (yet, I suppose).

So... the delay I suppose is to help you forget you've signed up, until you start getting spammed. Of course, you can email them (cs@smithmicro.com w/ the subject "Please Unsubscribe"), or they provide a physical address (like I'm going to spend $0.49 on an unsubscribe request when I shouldn't have been subscribed in the first place? WTF?)

Anyrate, rant over... I just hope they don't hammer Poser with that (IMHO) spammer's mentality.

/P

What I think is interesting is that if you go to their main site: www.smithmicro.com/ , it's pretty difficult to find anything about Poser.
Even typing Poser into their search engine only gives you the news announcement of their purchase.
How do they expect to sell it if it's so hard to find it?
Their Online Store page doesn't have it: www.smithmicro.com/default.tpl
Nor does the page THAT links to: my.smithmicro.com/win/index.html
shrug

Oh, I found that... it's at graphics.smithmicro.com

Creepy, innit?

/P

Uh oh, I linked to products sold elsewhere. My bad. ;-)

Quote - Oh, I found that... it's at graphics.smithmicro.com

Creepy, innit?

/P

Yeah, I found it too, but only through googling Smith Micro Poser.
Creepy? It's almost like they want to hide Poser from their "real" business.

I always thought that developers of poser just make poser! :rolleyes:
That they never play with it! They are not real poser user (users that render and collect content like maniacs and the only dynamic they want is breast gravity)... They make it and then release it and than "oh let's see what needs correction, what those addicts are yelling about? A beautiful women should look like Judy!!!" :glare:

But from that to hiding it??? Well this should not be good news on what they think about poser...

Even the CP newsletter has lost it's style! I looks more like spam now, flat...

To whom should we yell and complain now please!!! :biggrin:

Moon on a stick!  Moon on a stick!  LOL  I want a moon on a stick, too.  Any moon.

Umm.  I did have something to say.  Think for a moment....

Oh, right.  This talk about Poser being sold makes me wonder: how much does any new owner tend to pay for the program?  Maybe the users could all band together, stop buying new whizwham figures, pool their money instead, and buy Poser.  Then make it open source.  Like they did with Blender.  Then it could become everything for everyone - assuming anyone could manage to re-work the code....

Quote - Creepy, innit?

It's also possible that Smith Micro just hasn't quite gotten around to merging Poser in with their other product lines yet......perhaps it's nothing more sinister than that.

Cage, the fact that they gave away Poser 5 when they were still selling Poser 5 (aka: Poser Artist) was miraculous enough!  I don't think  we'd ever come up with enough cash to buy it ourselves--then again who would further develop it if it were open ended?

Quote - > Quote - Creepy, innit?

It's also possible that Smith Micro just hasn't quite gotten around to merging Poser in with their other product lines yet......perhaps it's nothing more sinister than that.

Not sinister - creepy.

Meanwhile, their customer service wrote back saying my email addy was nowhere to be found. Now, to see if any spam shows up from them.

/P

Quote - Cage, the fact that they gave away Poser 5 when they were still selling Poser 5 (aka: Poser Artist) was miraculous enough!  I don't think  we'd ever come up with enough cash to buy it ourselves--then again who would further develop it if it were open ended?

If it were truly open-source, it'd be worth a shot to port the thing to Linux (and clean a few things up internally). Next up you could build render farm modules from it. Then build a Blender -> Poser bridge, and a Poser->POV-Ray internal bridge (PoseRay does exist, but this would simplify things),  and perhaps a Renderer plug-in system...

Oh, and here's one: How about ripping out the joint controllers (or making them just a module), and putting in a skeletal rig system if you wanted? Do that, and the Blender community would likely get awfully interested....

/P

Quote -
It's also possible that Smith Micro just hasn't quite gotten around to merging Poser in with their other product lines yet......perhaps it's nothing more sinister than that.

I guess we'll see in due time how they handle it, but their graphics.smithmicro.com site is fairly elaborate and even well-designed. Looks to me like they intend on keeping Poser separated from their normal day job.
I mean, why no links to graphics.smithmicro.com on their main site? If I just paid six million bucks for a program I'd want to start selling it immediately.
It just seems a bit strange. Not "creepy", but strange. Are they aware of this enormous cult of followers they bought along with it? You'd think they'd want to demonstrate their pride in having acquired it and splash it up on their front page for all to see.
The cult is a little apprehensive about it, after all, and I'd think if they were aware of that, or were concerned about that,  they'd have the idea to at least make it look like they're not too embarrassed to parade it out in public for all to see.

Well, speculation is getting the better of me. I hope I'm way off target and they give it the attention it's always deserved and turn it into the app it should have become years ago. For all I know their developers could be working extreme overtime turning it into Houdini, Blender and Maya all rolled up into an improved an easy to navigate interface, while cutting render times in half AND not breaking previous version PZ3 files.

Then again, their board could be a collection of sick sob's who have been conspiring for years, even going so far as to  setting up Smith Micro as a front,  just waiting for their opportunity to acquire and subsequently destroy Poser in the most horrific display of intentional ineptitude imaginable. 

Poser must stay accessible to as wide an audience as possible to survive, and that means cheap.  This is why it is so widely used.  Poser, like any 3D app, has many problems.  So does 3ds Max, by the way.  I have found though, that with a little ingenuity and patience, you can get it to do alot of things very well.  Like rigging,  I have found it to be frustrating and hard but eventually I was able to get it to do what I wanted of it. For the price, Poser is a good app.  That's not to say it couln't be better.

cheers,

phantom3D

>> Are they aware of this enormous cult of followers they bought along with it?

It no doubt figured into the sale, because if I were selling something like this, I'd want to demonstrate the huge user base and its various websites around the world.

Everything in life is a tradeoff iof features vs price, and poser is no different. You want advanced features, you need to shell out bucks for a more robust program. Same with paint applications, office applications, or buying a new car.

Quote -
It no doubt figured into the sale, because if I were selling something like this, I'd want to demonstrate the huge user base and its various websites around the world.

This is probably true, that it figured into the price.
Speaking of which, I dunno, but six mil seems a little cheap, if you ask me. Not that I really know one way or the other, but it just "feels" cheap. As I said, I'd have no idea if that is in fact too low a price or not. I'd be curious to know how much EF paid CL, and how much EF asked for initially and if there was any haggling before settling on six mil with SM.

Quote -
Everything in life is a tradeoff iof features vs price, and poser is no different. You want advanced features, you need to shell out bucks for a more robust program. Same with paint applications, office applications, or buying a new car.

I'm glad SM is coming out with a new Pro version, although I'm a bit apprehensive since it's only going to be 400 bucks. Or was that 500?
Either way, it's doesn't inspire much confidence that it's going to really be "pro", with better "pro" features. The exporters, sure, but I really hope that's not the extent of it.
I hope they continue with their regular Poser development and keep the non-pro versions at a similar price to now, but I'd like to see them also develop an "ultimate" version, something with a far better skeleton rigging system than they have now - something similar to LW in terms of ease of use, and with weight maps and so on. Plus, advanced lighting, GI, and all that and...basically bring everything including the material options up to par with the "pro" apps. Oh yeah, and the ability to import subpatched LWO2 objects without "losing" the UV maps would be cool, too. ;-)

Another thing I can think of is, it doesn't seem to make any difference how large or detailed of a bump map one makes, it seems Poser can only render only so much detail. That could definitely stand to be improved.

I don't hate Poser, but it takes just too much work and hacks to get it to do what I want, particularly in the lighting and rigging departments. Some far advanced version with more intuitive tools would definitely be worth it, money-wise and possibly even bring Poser into the mainstream.

In my experience higher price doesn't necessarily equate to higher quality.  Vue 6 Infiinite was the most expensive software I've ever bought, but it is so bug ridden and a memory hot that I can hardly use it on my system, which has good specs for a household computer.  The system requirements have all been met and are far above them, yet the loading of 2 or 3 Poser figures with high res textures is enough to crash the program.  If would seem that if you're not running a 64 bit version of XP with 8 gigabytes of ram, then you are extremely limited as to what you can do with it.  I'm sure people with dedicated workstations in studios can take advantage of all it's benefits and hefty system requirements (it was used to make Pirates of the Carribean 2), but not me.  I don't love it enough to want to spend $2000 or more for a system that can properly handle it.  For those reasons, unless they make a considerable jump in performance on average computer systems, this will probably be the last version of Vue I will ever buy.

Poser was really designed for the hobbiest, if they make it too expensive they will be pricing it out of the market for most people who are using the software now.  As I've said previously in this thread, Poser is extensively used by professionals all the time--there are numerous sightings. Those in doubt should read the Secrets of Poser Experts for plenty of examples.  It is what people make of it, for those with commercial uses in mind it is as worthy a tool as any, it allows people to create graphics for advertising without an excessive budget or time put into it.  It's a great work horse to meet those deadlines on time.  It will never be Maya or Lightwave, so why try to make it that?   The exporters in Pro will allow professionals to get content into more high end applications if they need to, but many professionals haven't seen the need so far.

If you are a modeler or making the next big animate feature film, like The Incredibles--I can understand needing more horse power--but for people like me--working on a small scale it's just fine.  Over pricing the software will destroy the base market that has always been aimed at--that, more than anything else, I feel would jeapordise Poser's future.  Disney or George Lucas would never lower themselves to use anything called Poser no matter how big the price or how advanced the features.

I didn't say anything about making it Maya or LightWave, just creating some "ultra" version for those of us who are interested and can afford it.

That's also why I wrote, " I hope they continue with their regular Poser development and keep the non-pro versions at a similar price to now..." ... for the hobbiests, those who don't need extra features or whatever.

Sure there are pros who use Poser, but that still doesn't make up for the fact it has no volumetric lights, radiosity, or the ability to make soft shadows on a ray traced light. Or the archaic  and clunky design of the setup room. Usable as it is or not, it's a serious nuisance to rig a new object even if you create point and poly groups in a different program.
And many many other things I think would only benefit it. I would pay two grand for a Poser like that.

Hey, maybe I'm the only one, but I'd like to see a Poser that has all the advanced features of other programs. No way would I want it to replace the standard version though. :-)

Vue was really designed for much higher end systems. Fortnately they kept the pricing down so consumers can afford it, even though we are all most likely using underpowered systems for it.

Check the professional graphic forums, and you hardly ever seen anything bad posted about Vue6 I at all.

I'd much rather it can do more with better systems, then was designed to do less for underpowered systems.

Quote - I'd much rather it can do more with better systems, then was designed to do less for underpowered systems.

I feel the same way. Especially now that decently powered systems are quite affordable (that $2000 Tomsde mentions can be cut in half for a Q6600 system with 8 GB of RAM and a decent OpenGL graphics card).

Vue 6 Infinte works very well on my Q6600 system, both under Vista 64 bit and XP 64 bit. Yes, sometimes it crashes, but not as often as 3D Studio Max - which is far, far more expensive.

I'd like to see Poser develop into an app with the higher end consumer PC in mind. Yes, with 64 bit OS, 8 GB of RAM (or more), multicore CPU and a fast OpenGL graphics card. DAZ|Studio, which is still a pure 32 bit app (not even multicore enabled AFAIK) then could become the application of choice for lower end systems.

Poser already has volumetric lighting and fog effects, those 2 things were introduced in version 6 along with IBLs.  Mind you I don't find that those lighting setups are intuitive or easy to use, but they are there. 

If I were going to use volumetric lighting, I find Carrrara's a lot easier to deal with.  I think that Carrarra also does radiosity--I know that Vue does.

I've tried avoiding 64 bit computing because not all my hardware or software is compatible with it.  I think the trade off, being able to use Vue more effectively--is not worth it to me.  This is a case where there are "lesser" grade versions, but they all use system resources the same way--badly.  My main gripe is that they should tell you when you buy the thing that it won't run effectively on systems such as mine.  The new version was touted as being able to optimize Poser figures and textures and use less system resources.  Out and out lies.  In fact many Vue users had down graded back to version 5 because they said they 6 worked even more poorly with their Poser content (even though it was a main selling point that it was supposed to work better).

Carrara uses photon mapping for GI. I.e. Bidirectional Reflectance Distribution Function.
Vue uses global ambience, photon mapping, and 'global' radiosity.
Vue's 'Global' radiosity is really final gathering; I.e. diffuse and specular reflectance.
Radiosity is one directional, and cannot therefore account for 'positional' phenomenon, such as specular reflectance. Vue's 'Global Radiosity' isn't CG radiosity at all, it is much more advanced than that.

There is a lot of confusion about the term 'radiosity'. Radiosity is the first attempt at CG GI (circa 1987, Cornell University). In optics, radiosity is the sum of surface reflection of illumination (reflectivity) and thermal radiance (diffuse inter-reflection, 'color bleed'). 'Global Illumination' became confused with the optical term 'Diffuse Inter-reflection' and 'Radiosity' became confused with 'Global Illumination' in computer graphics terminology.
They are actually three different ideas, that somehow became lumped together as 'GI'. Radiosity is but one form of GI, and diffuse inter-reflection is just one component of light 'bouncing' behavior (the average 'bounce factor' of a 100% lambertian surface). That is (one of) the major flaws of radiosity; the algorithm assumes that all surfaces are purely lambertian; and they are not.

^^ gave me a brain cramp. ouch.

Do I get the impression I'm the only one who would like to see a really advanced version of Poser?

It's not like anyone would have to buy it, although one could make the argument that development costs might spill over into the "standard" version. That would be a valid argument.

I could probably sit here for two hours and type up a list of features I'd like to see, and another hour for improvements to existing features, but most of those would be along the lines of functionality and usability - loads of nitpicky things such as using a keyboard key to select bones up the hierarchy chain in a figure and a setup room that doesn't take 5 minutes just to get the cameras positioned in 4 viewports so you can see what you're doing.
And other things such as, why does it take 10, 20 seconds to snap back to preview after completing a render?
And OpenGL lighting previews that actually give a good representation of what you'll see in a render.
And and actual buillt-in preview render such as modo has would be necessary far as I'm concerned.

Of course, the biggest things I'd want is the ability to get VRAy quality renders out of it and to be able to create and edit a bone hierarchy easily.

And blah blah blah, yada yada yada.
See, the thing about it is, for what it does, i.e., posing figures, it does it great, only limited by how well-designed a skeleton is. And it does it quickly. I've rigged up Poser meshes in Lightwave and even have made some pretty decent improvements over the originals, but when it comes to bending and posing it all around, the response is slow. And my PC is no slouch, either, with 8 gigs of RAM, dual core 3.1 ghz Athlon x64, 640 MB nvidia 8800GTS, blah blah blah.

So the thing is, while it's easier and quicker to use Poser to set up a scene with a rigged figure, once it's time to render that's when I start getting really aggravated. It does nothing as I would expect, from specularity to reflection to shadows and everything in between.
And they know it, too, which is why they're doing this new Poser Pro, for people to export scenes.

I'd just prefer to have the ability to do it all easily and quickly  in one app is all, when it comes to figure manipulation and editing.
Tossing in some 3D realtime painting and sculpting ala modo would be cool too.

The thing is, all these other programs have all these wild, incredible features such as I mentioned, plus other things such as fluid dynamics and so on and so on, but none of them that I've seen have the best of what Poser has. You'd think by now someone would have copied it, but no. But beyond that, they have thousands of things Poser doesn't have, most noticeably, Poser wasn't developed for people to get something done quickly. And intuitively.

Now, I'm not knocking Poser. I've fully accepted and even embraced it finally, "flaws" and limitations and all, but I'd really love to see it develop into something huge, something to give the major apps a run for their money.

Once again, not the Poser as it exists now. I'd like to see SM, or whoever owns it next year, take the core and develop something new out of it, while maintaining the original for whomever wants it.

Well, that's all. Allow me to want an Ultra Poser.  If it doesn't happen, you won't see me bitching and moaning about it, either.
Y'all stop raining on my parade.