Quote - > Quote - I've been in that particular biz for far too long, and I very much know better. ;)

I've been in that busines since 1978, so you don't need to educate me.

Like I said - read any EULA on any piece of software and prove me wrong, even those reaching back to the earliest days of consumer computing if you like. The evidence alone is overwhelmingly in my favor.

 

Quote - > Quote - Quick - define "not looking rubbish". Bad lighting can make a perfect mesh look like crap. Bad camera angles can destroy a certain facial expression.  Fact is, you cannot place an objective definition on compatibility beyond loading and being free from obvious defects (reversed normal, misaligned texture, etc).

I expect a limited form of quality where a render looks acceptable - this is nothing more than checking for reversed normals and misaligned textures. Acceptable means remotely looking like the promos

So, now you just have to define "acceptable", or "remotely". 

Know that I hadn't even touched on differences caused by render settings, plugins/scripts, or many, many other individual factors. 

Quote - > Quote - Funny thing is, I'm willing to wager that there are still examples today, and at all sites - just have to dig deep enough to find them. 

I am not interested in your personal feuds.

It wasn't a personal feud. Nice try, though.

 

Quote - DAZ's quality for Poser content is getting lower which is not the case on the other sites

Now all you have to do is have some evidence to back up your assertion. Do you have any?