First of all, let me thank all you CL flag-wavers for coming on and prooving me right :) And thanks to you who agreed with some or all of my points, I was suprised at that. Now, please let me clear up was has been misunderstood (or missed) from my original post. I never said Poser was a bad program; it's a great program, just clunky, buggy, and old. And I did say that Cooper, et al were very nice people and acknowledged that they come here and post. But that doesn't fix the bugs in Poser, does it? A lot of you liked to compare CL with Microsoft (or "any other software co"). No, Bill Gates doesn't pop in on Access or Windows forums (that I know of). But go to MS's site guess what you'll find tons of? PATCHES and FIXES for their software going back several iterations. You'll find that on "any other software company's" site, too. At least the ones that charge 500+ for their stuff. My Pshop 7 checks the web for updates EVERY TWO WEEKS. (I know what the flag wavers will come back with but it will be invalid, too. There's just no convincing them. And I didn't start the comparison, they did.) Another issue: My main beef isn't with P5. It's with the P4 bugs and the fact CL has left them there for years. So, Carolly, your argument about me being new here doesn't wash. I've been a P4 user at least as long as you. And I know you signed the NDA, I've read that fact about a dozen times. Yes, you know things we don't and Cooper came to your house. That's good. Another issue: Honesty. In a later thread, operaguy posted a msg he'd gotten from a CL employee stating P5 won't have multi-processor support. Brilliant. That probably means no network rendering, either. Oh, but we have strand-based hair!! The employee went on to say that "the underlying features are the same for Poser 4 and 5." Weren't we told Poser 5 was being "completely rewritten from scratch?" Wasn't that one of their excuses for taking so long and not fixing P4? I believe it was. Somebody fibbed. Well, that's not everything, but I'm done for now. Thanks for listening.