I was disappointed when i first started using POser 8 on my computer. It was slow and useless. How can i even do anything, how can i work comfortably? I CANT.

My computer fell under the minimum requirements, i mean even better.
the min was G4 mac 700ghz. , and my computer is a G5.

As you may know, I'm returning Poser 8 for a refund. But the question is, why do they even list minimum system requirements ?

 You made the same mistake I made when i first started using both Poser and Bryce3D. The minimum system requirements are just that. It is all that it takes to get your computer to load and run Poser. Problem is, it doesn't run very well.  Your processor speed is too slow and most likely you need to boost your RAM as well. You can never have too much RAM  and at least  try to double your processor speed.

What are the minimum requirements for Poser 8?  I can't seem to find them listed at smithmicro.com.

 You can find more information about Poser 8 at www.contentparadise.com . The Minimum system requirements for Poser 8 for both Mac and Windows are below. Notice next to the procecessor speed and RAM  it lists a higher recommended rating. This is to make the program run smoothly.

System Requirements

Windows

• Windows XP or Vista
• 700 MHz Pentium class or compatible (1 GHz or faster recommended)
• 512 MB system RAM (1 GB or more recommended)
• OpenGL enabled graphics card or chipset recommended (recent NVIDIA GeForce and ATI Radeon preferred)
• 24-bit color display, 1024 x 768 minimum resolution
• 2 GB free hard disk space (4 GB recommended)
• Internet connection for Content Paradise
• Windows® Internet Explorer® 7
• Adobe® Flash® Player 9
• DVD-ROM drive (physical product only)

Macintosh

• Mac OS X 10.4 or 10.5
• 700 MHz G4 processor (Intel Core Duo or 1GHz G4 or faster recommended)
• 512 MB system RAM (1 GB or more recommended)
• OpenGL enabled graphics card or chipset recommended (recent NVIDIA GeForce and ATI Radeon preferred)
• 24-bit color display, 1024 x 768 minimum resolution
• 2 GB free hard disk space (4 GB recommended)
• Internet connection required for Content Paradise
• Adobe® Flash® Player 9
• DVD-ROM drive (physical product only)

Thanks, EClark1894.  I'm having trouble believing that anyone could be running a system with only 512 MB RAM, nowadays.  Will Windows Vista even run on a system with only 512 MB RAM?  Huh.

Good luck running any 3d proggie without 2 gigs of ram and a good chip, duo core preferred.

I can't say anything about the Mac side of things, but IMO, those Windows minimum requirements are way too low. They're almost asking for returns by posting such low specs and calling it "minimum".

Minimum, to the non-tech savvy, would seem to imply that they can use Poser if they meet those requirements. I can't see anyone actually using Poser with those specs though. It might technically open and run, but I think after that you'd probably do better to simply draw your own previews on paper. ;-)

Yeah, that seems kinda irresponsible. I'd at least double those numbers if I were them.

And what is "recent NVIDIA GeForce and ATI Radeon preferred" suppose to mean?
Some people may think "recent" means they have to go out and buy a GTX 260 or something. Of course if they're only on "minimum" specs, hell they might have a regular PCI or even an AGP bus for video.
I can see it now, "But Smith Micro TOLD me to get that video card..."

Not just that, but "recent" in terms of Poser is far different than "recent" in terms of the reality of what Poser can make use of. An 8800 series isn't particularly "recent" anymore, but due to Poser's OpenGL calls, a more "recent" GTX 200 series doesn't perform any better than the "old" 8800 GTS.
Unless they've drastically changed that for Poser 8, but all the accounts so far seem to indicate Poser 8's OpenGL ability is the same as Poser 7 and Poser Pro, or possibly even slower in some cases.

Quote -
Will Windows Vista even run on a system with only 512 MB RAM?  Huh.

Hell no it won't!
Which makes it even worse, as Vista is included in their list of supported operating systems.
I think they just copied and pasted the Poser 3 specs. ;-)

what I have seen so far (OS X) is two guys with G5 and one guy with an intel imac coming forward with probs.  nobody with a G4 or mac pro has mentioned anything yet AFAIK. even if they've got a G5 on which to test SR1 and 2, there are dozens of OS X-related features that they may not be able to duplicate.  but since they sell stuffit, it seems likely that they have a room full of pre-intel machines.

And I have two intel MACs and no performance issues on either. I should try and install it on my daughters iMAC, but I know that is was tested on a lot of those, so I do not think it is the Architecture that is causing the issues for anyone with an iMAC.

Minimum System is just that... Someone running the minimum OS, with the minimum RAM, Video Card, etc.. (Bare Bones so to say) should be able to run the program. They may need to use minimal settings like Bounding Box, etc..., like I had to do on my old system when I first got Poser 5... I was so happy when that machine bit the dust...  The what it needs verses what it needs to perform at its peak has always been like that, but it is like that with all software. Vista does not require a lot of RAM, but runs a heck of a lot better if you have more.

Attached Link: http://www.povray.org/

here's Moray and POVRay.
"requires at least Windows 2000 and a Pentium processor. We recommend 30mb free disk space and at least 128mb of RAM."

slow on the bare minimum but it will run... and you can get some great results..

Quote -
Minimum System is just that... Someone running the minimum OS, with the minimum RAM, Video Card, etc.. (Bare Bones so to say) should be able to run the program.

I personally think there's a big difference between being able to run the program and being able to use the program. Most people  aren't real big on understanding RAM, video, and so on. And if you have one of those "minimum spec" computers and you're thinking about buying Poser 8, you probably aren't real familiar with computer specs, what is needed for what, and all that.

And a n00b who sees Poser and in particular Poser 8, which is what we're talking about after all, will see the GI examples, the figures, the screenshots, the millions of VIATWAS renders. He'll be thinking, "Great! I can run Poser". Because he thinks being able to "run" the program is synonymous with being able to use the program. What's gonna happen when he tries to load a V4 with some ridiculously hi-res transmapped hair? Or how long will that 700 mhz processor take to whip out a GI render that takes a quad core 3 ghz Intel CPU 10 minutes?

Of course there's the operating system thing, which is probably the best reason to change the system requirements above: It says it supports Vista, but Vista itself needs at least 512 MB RAM. That's from Microsoft, and for Home Basic only. Vista Ultimate, Business, and Home Premium all list specs of at least 1 GB RAM.
I want to see someone with Vista Home installed on a system with 512 MB RAM then install and run Poser and do a render like some of the examples the SM page shows of the content. ;-)

Depends on the application, what you want to do and how long you're willing to wait. When my  already outdated Athlon 2400+ died, I had to switch to an ancient, literally out of the trash Duron 1GHz with 768MB and an antique GeForce 2MX/32MB. Vue's interface is molasses slow but renders of single Poser figures with HDR are within my tolerance of no more than 30-45 minutes. When I tried C4D, the interface was smooth though the rendering time was somewhat slower. POVRay interface N/A, slow render. Kekrythea smooth interface mid to slow render unless using MLT which equals infinity. I use Poser 4 to set up scenes to render. I probably wouldn't even waste time trying to install Poser 8 on this setup.

I just play with this stuff for relaxation, which, being utterly talentless at it, is a good thing. You can enjoy 3D without mega-giga hardware,  you may have to have more modest ambitions or more patience - but heck I'm lazy, I haven't gotten around to installing my "modern" GeForce 6200. Spend whatever happiness requires and you can afford.

 Nice render. Two things though. The bather is floating off the floor and there are no puddles of water at her feet.

Ah, puddles! Thanks. The feet I may or may not have caught in another version. Need to move the water closer to the nozzle as well and probably add a drain to my Poser primitive building. 

I'm very disapointed with how slow and "crashy" Poser 8 is. Poser Pro NEVER EVER crashed on me, and it was so much faster than P8...

My problems with Poser 8 that were not a problem in Poser Pro:

1. When I move a material node on the Material room, it just moves so slow. WHY??

2) I play World of Warcraft on this PC and I get 60 FPS everywhere, and I find it amazing that my preview window on Poser 8 gets 0.5 FPS, even if I set it to display only the wireframe.

3) I have a Nvidia GeForce 9800GX2, 1GB of VRAM, 4GB of system RAM, and a Q6600 CPU (quad core). I've updated my video drivers to the latest, and still if I turn on OpenGL preview rendering on my Poser it will crash after a couple minutes of use.

4) Even without OpenGL, if I turn on the highest form of preview rendering (shaded/textured), P8 will crash after a couple of minutes.

5) Even without OpenGL and shared/textured preview rendering, P8 will crash every hour of use in average. Sometimes when canceling a rendering, sometimes when switching objects, sometimes when just skipping frames.

Quote -

1. When I move a material node on the Material room, it just moves so slow. WHY??

From what I've read, they're working on that. Sounds to me like OpenGL hardware acceleration was left out of the material room.

Quote -
2) I play World of Warcraft on this PC and I get 60 FPS everywhere, and I find it amazing that my preview window on Poser 8 gets 0.5 FPS, even if I set it to display only the wireframe.

Becasue Poser's OpenGL calls barely use your video card for moving it all around - cameras, people, whatever. Poser uses your CPU almost entirely for that, and your GPU for VRAM and light, texture, and shader display. Not only that, but Poser uses only one core for display - it is not multi-threaded.
That's not unusual - that's the rule for most 3D apps, and will be until CUDA is more prevalent.
Games, on the other hand, make FAR more use of your GPU and use it in conjunction with your CPU.

Quote -
3) I have a Nvidia GeForce 9800GX2, 1GB of VRAM, 4GB of system RAM, and a Q6600 CPU (quad core). I've updated my video drivers to the latest, and still if I turn on OpenGL preview rendering on my Poser it will crash after a couple minutes of use.

That second GPU doesn't make a world of difference in any windowed app. It's like SLI in one card, and has to be specifically written for. Most modern games are specifically written for SLI and dual GPU video cards, but I can't think of a single 3D program that is.

Having said all that, you should be getting better performance, considering your CPU is a very good one. Why you're not, and why you're crashing is anyone's guess, and you should submit all that information, along with all your system specs, to SM so they can look into it.

My Windows has always been set to disable the 2nd GPU. I play World of Warcraft windowed and that doesn't work well with SLI.

Well I don't know about WoW as I've never played it. You ought to give Crysis Warhead a spin with that card though, if you haven't already. ;-)

It could be the disabled second GPU is causing Poser some confusion. Have you tried enabling it to see what happens? Beats me.

But you're not alone in any event. I've been keeping track of the display-related threads for Poser 8, and there have been quite a few, more than I would have expected at least.

Its just beyond me how they release a new product with so many problems like Poser 8.

You should have been around for the Poser 5 travesty. Makes this look like nothing. ;-)

I just hope they release a Service Pack real soon for Poser 8, and that it solve the problems.

I've read that the SR will probably be out before the end of August. At least I'm pretty sure that's what they're shooting for. I do know they're working on it already.

They did already release a hotfix for it, the day after the release. Do you have that installed?

EDIT-
Hmmm, thinking about it, maybe it's the end of September. I can't remember now.

Quote - Good luck running any 3d proggie without 2 gigs of ram and a good chip, duo core preferred.

ROTFLMAO!

Back in the day, I got Poser 5 running on a laptop that had 384MB of RAM and a Pentium 866MHz chip! (Dell Inspiron 8100). Alternately, my old Mac Cube (pre-upgrade) had a 500MHz G4 and 768
MB of RAM... and it ran faster there than it did on the laptop. :)

Now get offa my lawn! :)

Those requirements haven't changed since Poser 5 or 6. It's complete misinformation and they should really change it. It's enough to start up Poser 8, but how much fun is that? Just starting up P8 and not being able to do anything with it is very dumb, who would want that?

It's about time for these incorrect figures to be corrected.

Quote - ts just beyond me how they release a new product with so many problems like Poser 8.

Firstly, because Smith Micro made some wrong decisions. They decided to implement some of the vital parts of P8 in an external 'language', not adding it to the P8 core code. That's asking for problems..... on top of that they failed to hire a pro for doing this. Secondly, simply because the number of testers are to limited to catch every problem there is with P8. Thirdly they aren't a good reflection of the poser user base. Fourthly because no one gets it right the first time, but with Poser the mess is always greater then with other applications.

Quote - You should have been around for the Poser 5 travesty. Makes this look like nothing. ;-)

True, but compared to going from P4 to P5, this newest version is a minor update. If you put it in perspective, this release is just as bad as all the others. Enough issues to freak one out. Eventually most of them may be solved, but some of them (like the texture loading error) have been there since P7 and no one fixed it yet. They've working on it, as they were in P7, so hopefully they get it fixed this time.

Still, Poser does better then Vue....... they never manage to release a stable version, let a along release an update that fixes things. They fix bugs from the previous version in the next version and then make you pay for it and then give you a good set of new problems.

I ran Poser 5 sp1 on a 450ghz processor with 256 mb of memory on win98, later winme. It ran OK . I was used to Pov-ray taking days to render so an hour for a pic wasnt an issue.    When that machine was replaced I went to my current system of athlon 2400 and 512 mb of memory.

Lightwave runs fine , even rendering , and Vue is OK, though renders take a while, Carrara 5 is good. There are applications that run well on limited systems.

Poser 8 looks like something to avoid till service pack 1 is out. I didnt have problems with Poser 5 but I wasnt there for its release. I loaded Poser 5 and sp1 during the install.

 Poser 5 sucked for me. The slowest most sluggish version ever. So far, P6 has been the best

Quote -
Back in the day, I got Poser 5 running on a laptop that had 384MB of RAM and a Pentium 866MHz chip! (Dell Inspiron 8100). Alternately, my old Mac Cube (pre-upgrade) had a 500MHz G4 and 768
MB of RAM... and it ran faster there than it did on the laptop. :)

Yeah, most of us were running Poser with specs well below that. I was running Poser 4 and Vue 4 on a Compaq with a 500 mhz Athlon and 128 MB of system RAM. With a VooDoo 3 onboard video card too.
Back in 2001, that is.

Quote -
Those requirements haven't changed since Poser 5 or 6. It's complete misinformation and they should really change it. It's enough to start up Poser 8, but how much fun is that? Just starting up P8 and not being able to do anything with it is very dumb, who would want that?

It's about time for these incorrect figures to be corrected.

Yeah, that's what I've been saying.
And as Cage pointed out, the minimum system requirements are barely even in line with the minimum system requirements of Vista, a supported operating system. Aside from Vista Home basic, all the other Vista versions call for at least 1 GB of system RAM.
When I was running Vista Ultimate, it used 1.5 GB just to load itself and the background processes I allowed, such as Adobe Bridge and my Wacom software, Steam, and some other essentials.

Quote - Those requirements haven't changed since Poser 5 or 6. It's complete misinformation and they should really change it. It's enough to start up Poser 8, but how much fun is that? Just starting up P8 and not being able to do anything with it is very dumb, who would want that?

It's about time for these incorrect figures to be corrected.

What would YOU say are the MINIMUM system requirements? 

There's nothing incorrect about them. Poser lists the absolute bare minimum it takes to run Poser. Then it recommends that you have a higher rated system. Like I said, I got sucked in by that as well when I first started using Bryce3D, but that's because I really didn't know as much about my system or computer as I do now.

Don't even bother arguing about the minimum requirements. The damn program don't even run well on machines way way better than the recommended!

Quote -
What would YOU say are the MINIMUM system requirements?

You didn't ask me, but earlier I said if it were up to me I'd at least double everything listed.
Just to cover my ass, that is. They're almost asking for a certain amount of return requests by posting such low specs and calling it minimum.

 Then you'd be lying. the Minimum system requirements, are what it takes to make the program run. Poser also recommends higher requirements.

Unless what you're suggesting is that Poser only print the minimum system they would recommend. Someone will still bitch about that though.

Quote - > Quote - Those requirements haven't changed since Poser 5 or 6. It's complete misinformation and they should really change it. It's enough to start up Poser 8, but how much fun is that? Just starting up P8 and not being able to do anything with it is very dumb, who would want that?

It's about time for these incorrect figures to be corrected.

What would YOU say are the MINIMUM system requirements?

P4/AMD 1.5Ghz with 1GB RAM for XP and 2Gb for Vista. It will not be fast, but it will work. At least you can create scenes in it. With the current minimum you cannot do that. For a bit more comfortable poser enjoyment, I would recommend at least a 2Ghz CPU with 2Gb RAM for XP and 3GB for Vista. Then it will run pretty well, done that for years and still use it as a backup machine, in case my new pc has problems.

Besides that, I really recommend running Poser on XP, not Vista. With XP you will get a lot more out of Poser.

Quote -  Then you'd be lying. the Minimum system requirements, are what it takes to make the program run. Poser also recommends higher requirements.

With all due respect, I would NOT be LYING. If it were "up to me" being the operative words in my statement.
Read up before being a jerk, I clearly said what I feel to be the difference between "running" a program and using a program.
If it were "up to me" I would up the specs to avoid having people crying that they couldn't produce content like the examples show in less than a day or maybe not at all.

A recommendation doesn't mean diddley squat if they place the minimum requirements on the very edge of usability.

Firstly, because Smith Micro made some wrong decisions. They decided to implement some of the vital parts of P8 in an external 'language', not adding it to the P8 core code. That's asking for problems..... on top of that they failed to hire a pro for doing this. Secondly, simply because the number of testers are to limited to catch every problem there is with P8. Thirdly they aren't a good reflection of the poser user base. Fourthly because no one gets it right the first time, but with Poser the mess is always greater then with other applications.

I just have to react on this:

1. Are these just assumptions, or do you have inside information? As far as I know they have a professional team that has been working on this. I'm just glad they have finally decided to change those more vital parts, something E-frontier and Curious Labs should have been done years ago. Everyone was complaning about the render engine, its poor memory management and the library, and SM has to guts to do something about it. And about what language are you talking? I suppose you have some knowledge in programming, but in this "mambo-jambo" is no-one interested.
2. There is no limit on beta-testers to catch every issue, the number of possible situtations is just to big. You would need half the planet to catch everything.
3. I just don't agree, As I said: the render engine and the library were the biggest problems, and they have done something about it.
   4.Agree that you don't get something right in the first time but you disagree with yourself by mentioning Vue.

It's always easy to shoot on a new release or upgrade, because there will be always errors and crashes, there is some rule that you never should buy a new upgrade untill it's stable but people forget that without the first buyers and their feedback to the company who has released it there will never be a stable upgrade.

just my opinion.

Bopper.

Quote -

Yeah, most of us were running Poser with specs well below that. I was running Poser 4 and Vue 4 on a Compaq with a 500 mhz Athlon and 128 MB of system RAM. With a VooDoo 3 onboard video card too.
Back in 2001, that is.

Considering that P4 came out in what, 1997-1998? Not surprised at all. ;)

Well I started using it in 1999. What I meant was I was still using that machine in 2001, and up to when I built my first good PC in 2002.

1) You don't need IE7 to run Poser 8. The library works just as well if you have IE 6 on your system. I hate to think anyone would go through the hassle of an unecessacary upgrade just because they think Poser 8 won't run without it.

2) You need way more than than 2 or even 4 gig of harddrive space because Poser stores a ton of stuff on your main harddrive. If you don't have a lot of space, it will not be stable.

Everyone's experience and opinions will vary - surprise. I've found Vue to be pretty stable, especially on an underpowered system. It's crashed a couple of times but I'm hard pressed to think of many application that hasn't crashed once or twice -OK SQL Server & maybe Solitaire.

Paradoxically, I think that the higher end applications may be better performing at the hardware margins because the are likely to be more efficient in their use of resources (generalization). Poser has long been known/suspected of memory leaks etc. Many of the bugs like the obj export focus bug were carried over to at least 6 (if I recall posts here correctly) and possibly 7 I don't know if it was fixed in 8. Bolting external modules like the face room to that base probably didn't help matters. 

Some applications may be useable even somewhat below the minimums, but I suspect that with Poser the minimum specs are indeed understated. They could clear things up by giving some benchmarks. That would allow people with lower end systems to make an intelligent buying decision rather than end up disappointed.

Note: Daz Studio 3 Minimums: 1.3GHz/1GB OpenGL 1.3+128 MB RAM.

Quote - > Quote -  Then you'd be lying. the Minimum system requirements, are what it takes to make the program run. Poser also recommends higher requirements.

With all due respect, I would NOT be LYING. If it were "up to me" being the operative words in my statement.
Read up before being a jerk, I clearly said what I feel to be the difference between "running" a program and using a program.
If it were "up to me" I would up the specs to avoid having people crying that they couldn't produce content like the examples show in less than a day or maybe not at all.

A recommendation doesn't mean diddley squat if they place the minimum requirements on the very edge of usability.

I'm not being a jerk. You supposed yourself to be answering a question I'd asked of someone else. Well, I didn't ask what you would recommend, I asked what would the minimum system requirements* *be. That, quite simply is what is stated on the box.

I even went so far as to look up the definition of MSR on wikipedia just to make sure I was on the right track.

The 'Minimum system requirements' must be satisfied for the software to be usable at all. Computers with lower specifications than the minimum requirements may sometimes also run the software. It is suggested, however, that the user will not have a representative experience of the software this way. Generally this set is regarded more of a rule than a guideline. A system meeting this requirement will provide basic performance of a software application.

WOW I'm amazed at all these problems. P8 runs absolutely fantastic on my machine and very fast too. had a little glitch with quick time (or whatever the adobe thing was) for the library, got the latest from adobe and that was it. Been super ever since.

Starts up in a flash, loads from the library in seconds instead of minutes. Renders 3 times as fast as p7 even with all the new IL etc. Didn't like the new figures much, but the performance has been a dream come true.

Q6600 quad, 8 gb ram , ATI HD 4870, Win XP pro X64.

You could try giving poser some extra swap room if you have low ram.

Extra swap room = more disk thrashing. Not something you really want.

Also, some bits to keep in mind:

• Windows Vista is pure crap for memory management. Downgrade to XP or bump it to Windows 7 (well, if you can get hold of the Release Candidate or have EA/SA license access, otherwise you get to wait until October 22nd for that option).

* Not all parts behave well together. If your computer is a home-built put together from odd or spare parts, and the RAM, HDD's, etc weren't exactly made to run well on your mobo? Bad Mojo, no matter what the CPU specs are. OEM machines (HP, Dell, etc) aren't much better, since they have a nasty habit of using grey-market parts or "house brand" parts that barely meet their stated specs. It also hurts when OEMs pack crapware onto the box (Even straight-from-HP printer drivers will suck down CPU cycles, just to bug you to buy ink cartridges and such every time you print something).

* Your best bet is to carefully shop for and build a machine with all the parts made for one another. Tom's Hardware, hexus.net, and the like are good places to start for making comparisons and matching specs.

* Go download a copy of CCleaner (it's free) and use the hell out of it. It lets you clear out the startup crap, cleans your registry, and flushes your web caches enough to speed up damned near any web browser.

* Defrag, defrag, defrag, defrag. Don't bother with the built-in tool either - go get JKDefrag (also free) and turn it loose. The first run will take an hour or more (prolly more), but subsequent runs will be fast, and your computer will speed up because of it (disk seek times shrink, etc).

HTH a bit.

Well just installed P8 onto my ancient 6 year old wallmart $300.00 special (emachines). Has a AMD athlon 1.2ghz with 1gig ram running the onbord video card (nvidia something). I mean this was the CHEAPEST they had 6 years ago. Only use it for the internet. Wont run P7 at all.

Had to update the drivers for the video, install the flash player thing, but hey guess what?  P8 runs like a charm no problems at all, Renders with no trouble, and fairly fast considering, even using IL. Seems to me like a big improvement. I suppose I could find a really ancient computer maybe 10 years old or so that could be worse than this one but I'd have to dig in the garbage at goodwill.

Quote -
I'm not being a jerk. You supposed yourself to be answering a question I'd asked of someone else. Well, I didn't ask what you would recommend, I asked what would the minimum system requirements* *be. That, quite simply is what is stated on the box.

I even went so far as to look up the definition of MSR on wikipedia just to make sure I was on the right track.

*The 'Minimum system requirements' must be satisfied for the software to be usable at all. Computers with lower specifications than the minimum requirements may sometimes also run the software. It is suggested, however, that the user will not have a representative experience of the software this way. Generally this set is regarded more of a rule than a guideline. A system meeting this requirement will provide basic performance of a software application.

I know what "minimum system requirements" means, no need for the definition.
is that what we're reduced to, to supply people with things that "might" work, and have some cold, hard, non-personal guideline  backing up our decisions and helping us to squeak our creations onto others in "good" conscience?

Customer:
I only have 512 MB of RAM, a 700 MHz processor, and I'm running Vista. Is that enough to run Poser 8?
Tech Guy:
Why certainly, that's plenty.
Customer:
Poser will open, but I can't do anything with it. I don't understand, I meet the minimum requirements.
Tech Guy: Well all we guarantee is that it will open. Too bad for you, get a better computer.

Not to say SM is like that, and that's just an exaggeration to show my point. It may be technically correct to list specs like that for a software such as Poser 8, but is it morally correct? That, I don't think so.

And speaking again of Vista...
Home Basic and Ultimate, etc, all list a 1 GHz processor as minimum, which is, IMO, another glaring contradiction in the specs. Why have you failed to comment on any of the Vista discrepencies that I've mentioned three times now and Cage pointed out initially? How can they say "Vista" in general is a supported operating system, while Vista itself has specs above what they list? How are they supposed to "run" the software on a computer that's barely managing to run the operating system? Hmmm? I mean, since you're so involved with arguing on their side, you might as well defend them on that point too. You know, for the sake of completeness and all.

As I mentioned earlier, the "recommended" specs doesn't mean a thing. An ignorant computer user will think, "Oh, that's if I want it to scream", and will be under the impression that "minimum" means he can download all those Vickies with their 4K textures and  make a render with the fancy new GI stuff shown on SM's site.

Obviously you don't seem to understand at all the point I've been trying to make, that it's just wrong to tell people they can run the software that really needs far more power if they're going to actually use it. Not legally or technically wrong, just plain.... wrong.

Quote -

• Windows Vista is pure crap for memory management. Downgrade to XP or bump it to Windows 7 (well, if you can get hold of the Release Candidate or have EA/SA license access, otherwise you get to wait until October 22nd for that option).

I was a huge fan of Vista Ultimate x64... until I installed Windows 7 Ultimate x64. For something that's just a Release Candidate and not yet the full deal, it does far far better than Vista in so many ways.
More useful features too, and easier to turn off all the nannyware.

I wanted to mention this earlier, but I forgot about it.
Back in 2000, with the computer I mentioned earlier in this thread, I bought a game. I think it was Soul Reaver 2, Legacy of Kain, but I can't remember for sure now.
The point is, my computer fit within the listed specs. I was pretty green back then in terms of computer knowledge, and I just assumed I'd be able to play it, plus the guy at Comp USA where I bought it told me sure, no problem.

I got home and installed it and it ran absolutely terribly. I lowered all the options to minimum and it still ran terribly. I did a full restore on my comp and reinstalled Windows 98 SE, and reinstalled the game and it still ran terribly.
It was choppy and lagging badly.
I thought maybe it was a problem with the CD, so I returned it and got a replacement. Installed that one and had the same results. I just couldn't play it enjoyably. Yes, it "ran" and yes I could play it - if I wanted to deal with the lag and the choppiness as my comp tried to keep up with it. And it wasn't just a little lag and chop, it was bad.  IMO, that wasn't "playing" the game, although technically I was "running" the game and technically it worked.

If the people who had written up the minimum requirements had had a little more conscience and a little more concern for their customers, I wouldn't have wasted the money or all that time. And I couldn't even return it for a refund, because technically my computer fit the minimum requirements.

Is that what we want from software companies?

Quote -

 And speaking again of Vista...
Home Basic and Ultimate, etc, all list a 1 GHz processor as minimum, which is, IMO, another glaring contradiction in the specs. Why have you failed to comment on any of the Vista discrepencies that I've mentioned three times now and Cage pointed out initially? How can they say "Vista" in general is a supported operating system, while Vista itself has specs above what they list? How are they supposed to "run" the software on a computer that's barely managing to run the operating system? Hmmm? I mean, since you're so involved with arguing on their side, you might as well defend them on that point too. You know, for the sake of completeness and all.

Because I don't know anything about Vista. Let someone who knows that system argue the merits.

Once again, I'm only talking about the minimum system specs required to get Poser to "run". I've been adamant about that point.

Quote -

As I mentioned earlier, the "recommended" specs doesn't mean a thing. An ignorant computer user will think, "Oh, that's if I want it to scream", and will be under the impression that "minimum" means he can download all those Vickies with their 4K textures and  make a render with the fancy new GI stuff shown on SM's site.

Obviously you don't seem to understand at all the point I've been trying to make, that it's just wrong to tell people they can run the software that really needs far more power if they're going to actually use it. Not legally or technically wrong, just plain.... wrong.

You've obviously missed the points in my post where I've said that at one point I was that "ignorant" computer user. At no point did I ever think the minimum specs required were what I needed to make the program "scream".  Okay, so maybe either I wasn't that ignorant, or you're not giving people enough credit. 

Of  course I guess that's why you consider giving out the MSR as somehow being "morally" wrong. I don't.  I guess we just disagree.

Quote -
Of  course I guess that's why you consider giving out the MSR as somehow being "morally" wrong. I don't.  I guess we just disagree.

I have no problem with MSR listings, I just think they should list them as higher in Poser 8's case.

As for your comment, "Because I don't know anything about Vista. Let someone who knows that system argue the merits."

Well, you don't need to know anything about Vista. I've already laid out the facts, several times. Fact is, only one version of Vista has MSRs that are equal to Poser 8, but in terms of RAM only, and require a more powerful processor than the 700 MHz listed by SM. The other Vista versions have MSRs that are equal to Poser 8's recommendations, but exceed the MSR.
So I'm asking, how can they list an operating system as supported when the operating system itself has higher specs than what they call minimum in a PC for Poser?
Not saying they shouldn't list Vista as supported, not at all. Rather, they should up their MSR.

I'm really not understanding why you're giving me a hard time about this. What could it possibly hurt for them to raise their specs? There's already been at least one person who has returned the program because it didn't run well, who had a comp within those specs, but not much beyond. And I wouldn't be surprised if there have been many more.
I already told my game story, so yeah, I feel bad for someone who gets suckered in. At least SM has the decency to accept returns though, that's a plus on their side.
The only negative point I could see in them raising the specs to something more realistic is it might hurt their sales a little and..... hmmm...
...never mind, it's all clear now why it is what it is....

* *Well, you don't need to know anything about Vista. I've already laid out the facts, several times. Fact is, only one version of Vista has MSRs that are equal to Poser 8, but in terms of RAM only, and require a more powerful processor than the 700 MHz listed by SM. The other Vista versions have MSRs that are equal to Poser 8's recommendations, but exceed the MSR.
So I'm asking, how can they list an operating system as supported when the operating system itself has higher specs than what they call minimum in a PC for Poser?
Not saying they shouldn't list Vista as supported, not at all. Rather, they should up their MSR.

Exactly what part of "I don't know anything about Vista" are you having trouble with? I can't answer the question intelligently because I don't know the subject. May I suggest you direct your question to Ratscloset or Steve Cooper from SM?

And I'm not giving you A hard time. Poser currently lists both MSR and recommendations. YOU just don't like the way they do it. I can't help that, and neither can they. Perhaps it's another question you could direct to Mr. Cooper.

Well I was under the impression we were having a discussion here, perhaps even an argument. I suppose that's the best way to end it though, rather than conceding (or continuing), suggest I take it to them instead.
I think I'll use that in the political forum discussions I get into, and all the other software discussions from now on:
Beats me why they gave GM all that money only to have them declare bankruptcy. Why not just ask Obama himself?
I don't like the Mental Ray for Maya Hypershade much either, but you should probably just tell Autodesk and not waste our time with silly discussions.

I'm fully aware I don't like the MSR, but thank you for pointing that out, lest I forget.

By the way, ratscloset was in this thread and hasn't responded to anything since the first page. Either he can't or isn't interested, I guess.

Quote - Well I was under the impression we were having a discussion here, perhaps even an argument. I suppose that's the best way to end it though, rather than conceding (or continuing), suggest I take it to them instead.
I think I'll use that in the political forum discussions I get into, and all the other software discussions from now on:
Beats me why they gave GM all that money only to have them declare bankruptcy. Why not just ask Obama himself?
I don't like the Mental Ray for Maya Hypershade much either, but you should probably just tell Autodesk and not waste our time with silly discussions.

?????????:b_confused: