Dark_Raven - "What I meant was people that program in C++ dont use the ++ part of C++ meaning basicly they are still programming in C and the reason why is once you start to use the ++ part of C++ you run the risk of slowing down your programs speed"

We have radically different industry experiences you and I :) I have found that every non trivial project makes fairly heavy use of the object features of C++. There are dramatic gains to be had from a good OOP architecture .. and there are no random slowdowns to consider, C++ can be a very deterministic language speed wise.

kuroyume0161 - "Conversely, one would hope that CL has alot of assembly language in their code for speed. Although highly optimized C (good algorithms, hand optimization, and possibly compiler optimizations (not recommended)) can be nearly as fast, it will never be as fast as well-written assembly code, bless the little programmers who can master coding in it."

This was true for a while, a fairly long time ago IMHO:)

Modern processor systems use complex pipelines and the optimizations for them are extremely complex. It is a rare thing these days for any code to be run as it was written... the processor re-orders instructions, profiles that code and speculatively runs future code for branch prediction. This will only get worse as hyperthreading becomes more common.

While it is theoretically possible for a human to make the appropriate optimizations in ASM for short (very short) loops - overall the compiler will do a much better job of it than humans will ... and it will do that job best when given the additional information provided by higher level language syntaxes.

(unknown author) "They could really improve things performance-wise by implementing OpenGL Hardware-based Rendering. We could get a few frames per second instead of a frame every few minutes. Their Tech Support has indicated to me that they will consider it."

Actually, the render times for full frames would be completely unaffected.

who3d - "If a hardware failure alone (death of a hard drive - or maybe even re-partitioning??) can/could prevent me from running a legal copy in the future, and be forced to try and find and use this crack, then I'm not a happy bunny on that aspect."

I do understand the concern. I guess for me, by the time any of that happens there will be something else available to me and Poser5 will have redeemed it's price for my uses.

Jackson - Soulhunter, I agree with 3 of your 4 points. Where do you get your information for the 2nd bullet? I highly doubt its accuracy.

I got it from the various forums for Poser I frequent and from discussions with others I work with on 3D and animation projects as well as discussions with some of those who beta tested Poser5. It is a personal opinion arrived at from anecdotal evidence... just like he opinion that Poser is unstable in the majority.

Jackson - "The small improvements that were made (i.e. the Library system) could have and should have been made available to P4 users years ago. But instead CL kept it from us so it would be another incentive to buy Poser 5."

I doubt it - I think once CL decided to work on a new version a lot of these things were added to the feature list in planning... as part of a new release. I doubt they existed in stand alone form.