re: "bashing". Not at all, that was not my intent. If you go back through the forums, you can see that I was (and continue to be) a VERY srong supporter of CL, especially their "copy protection" scheme. However, for me, the issue is a little different. We use Poser primarily as a means to make moving storyboards for animations that we render in Lightwave and 3DSMax. As of right now, we have Poser 4 fully integrated into our workflow/process. I had hoped to get a sample of P5 to play with to see how it can be used to help with our process. If it is useful, then I can purchase additional seats for my staff. However, it appears that there are some significant issues (as I expected there to be) with the v1.0 release. So for me, it is looking less likely that I will need P5 any time soon, or at least until some of these issues are fixed. Added on top of that the charging now, don't receive shipment for an indetermined number of days, and for me, the need for P5 has significantly deminished (I don't think that is spelled correctly). By all means, I encourage more people to buy P5, as it appears (at east feature-wise) to be a solid upgrade to P4 (plus all of you can act as beta testers for the rest of us, heh). At this point, it looks like I will most likely be catching up on the v1.1 or v1.2 releases. - Ray

Well, I placed my order yesterday morning. I expect more than an email confirm of the order. I expect that I would have an update if they have no intention of shipping it any time this week. If I do not hear from them by end of day Wednesday with confirmation of shipping, I will be canceling my order. I just do not do business that way. They can expect payment immediately, which is their "right", although not generally acceptable mail order practice, but I have my right to reject payment for non-service. - Ray

And the Curious Labs site is down again....

So how late can we order today and still get it shipped today?

Good, well-written FAQ. I think it addresses most issues here, except for "what happens if CL goes under"? Of course it does not address the "why have it anyways, it does no good". As it is, it is a done deal more or less at this point. I am sure CL will be flexible if reality proves to be more complicated. Looking forward to next week (assuming the rumors of shipping tomorrow are true)... - Ray

Thanks, Duddly, I already have that one. It is a pretty good (and very usable) model, but... (acting childish) it is not a real Jeep. We are anal retentative buggers. :) - Ray

Oh yeah, Duddley, if you are so inclided, a Jeep Wranlger would be awesome, and that one could even have morphs for teh XJ, YJ, and TJ models (all are slight variations in external appearance, mostly slope of the windshield, front grill/lights. The interiors, though, have a lot more variation. - Ray

#34, I understand your concern, but it is not warranted. As #35 said, there is a "fair use" to using vehicle images. This was presented back in my business school days. That is why you can have an ad that includes a vehicle - such as for fast food, etc. There is a "fair use" to the image, as long as you do not do something that seriously harms the copyright's public image(such as a picture of the car running over babies). Many video games go out of their way to license vehicles strictly for the purpose of being able to give their players the supposed thrill of driving said vehicle. Plus if they are going to explicitly advertise they are using the vehicle, then they are making money off of the vehicle specifically, as opposed to something that is peripheral. Then Detroit (and Japan, Germany...) may get upset. - Ray

Carolly, Good response, at least better than what I was going to put up here. I was about to write a very combative response to the first message, but thought twice. I am annoyed how people in this group assume that they have to have everything answered immediately, and if not, they get defensive and start posting speculation, rumor, and veiled insults. CL took a long holiday. They probably got back today to the firestorms in the newsgroups that I am sure Starlet and Anthony noted to the powers-that-be. I am sure they are working behind the scnenes to decide how to address the issues, if at all. As with everything, CL has been a very active member of this community and have been active participants to open dialogues of all sorts. To jump on the cases without giving them time to actually consider the concerns is sad. - Ray (not hiding behind usernames)

But this does absolutely NOTHING about warezing, which is the problem. Warez groups concentrate their hacks on the specific code/executable, etc that is protected. Hacking through a program is very simple. I will use the following simple series to explain: 1. Program load 2. Call program security subprogram 3. If good code - THEN continue install ELSE stop install The warez monkey's just edit the program load to point to the part AFTER the IF THEN, else, and just do the THEN. THe challenge part is never executed. In your example, all it takes is one person to validly unpack the software, and then the warez monkeys just repackage it and distribute, with the hacked EXE. THe copy protection is bypassed. End of story. The only type of copy protection that will ever work is something that is hardware and software related, where the hardware part actaully contains part of teh code that must be used, and can only reference it when called, and even this can be compromised by copying memory buffers, etc. Some company now is touting CDROMs that contain a smart chip built into the CD disc, that must be read to run the software. A good idea, but one that can be bypassed by my example above. All you can do is try to minimize the pirating by the vast majority, and suck up the losses of the pirating/warez minority. - Ray

Just to back Anthony up (although he may not like the storm that this brings): My God, all this complaining over something that is a MINOR inconvenience on a very few occassions. This issue will only impact you when you first install the software and (maybe) if you make enough changes to your system and/or reinstall the software, or if you reinstalll your entire system. Otherwise it is a ONE TIME THING. The only valid complaint is "what if CL goes under", which of course something will have to be done. People, get used to it. All software companies will be following the lead set by Microsoft. For those of us with legitimate copies of XP, we already have to deal with "checking in with Microsoft" and this is after making only a few changes to our systems (both hardware and software changes). Other companies are taking the lead from Microsoft and doing the same thing. You may try to "vote with your dollar" and not support the software, but eventually you will have to use something that uses this or a similar method since the pace of software development marches on. Face it, with the tougher economic times right now, and the hysteria with which content companies are complaining to Congress (in the US) about lost revenues to piracy, this is not going away. If it is not this method, it will be another. Companies will continue to try all sorts of schemes to protect their content from piracy. Of course it will always be a losing cause, but they have to do something. Also, CL's EULA is very similar to that of almost every other software package out there. As Anthony posted, check copies of your own. They are not asking for anything too unreasonable, and they are being generous in allowing us multiple installs (although single use at a time) of the application). And, no, I am not a CL employee. I am a realist. - Ray

Responding to #23, if that is what you must do, then so be it. It all comes down to economics - of Money, time, whatever. CL is trying to find a way to protect its economic investment in the development of its products. It is obtrusive, yes. It is annoying yes. It penalizes the honest user, yes. BUT - it also thwarts the average "hacker/thief" - the regular person who would copy the software and pirate it. Yes, I know there will be cracks and patches for it available almost as soon as the program is released, and most of the hardcope warez-monkeys will have a copy immediately. That happens to all software regardless of value. But this will deter the average person who is not hooked up to all of the warez groups, etc. You are free to vote with your wallet, just as CL is free to put software protection in. That is a personal choice. In my mind, that can be limiting, as you may miss out on some great features at a great price. In this I am also referring to other apps, such as WinXP. With WinXP, Microsoft actually got many things right - including fantastic memory management. It is your loss. I understand your frustration, but I find the sulking attitude humorous (again, my opinion). This is just a hobby. Regarding the "cydoor". I guess most of you have not dealt with the "big boys" in the 3d world. Things like C-Dilla, hardware dongles, etc. Makes CL look like a cakewalk. - Ray

Well, the point is mute. CL is using the tool. It is a done deal at this time. Just remember guys, when you buy software, YOU DO NOT OWN THE PROGRAM. You are buying a LICENSE TO USE THE SOFTWARE. That is why these companies can place limitations on the ability to resell the software. It is a fact of the business. Yes, there will be cracks out there that can be used to bypass the scheme. Yes, they are illegal, at least in the US. However, if it makes you feel better, download a crack, save it to disk, and keep it as a last case. I do not want to debate the ethicality (is that a word?) of this, but it is most likely your only recourse in the "what if" category. Oh yeah, regarding the person above who thought that when a company goes under that the copyright is no longer valid... That is completely and utterly wrong. If a company goes bankrupt, odds are good that one of the creditors will obtain ownership of the copyright, and can do with it as they want. If the company just goes out of business, teh copyright will most likely fall into the hands of the majority partner, owner, etc. who can do with it as they want. The copyright is still valid and enforceable. - Ray

Increased memory bandwidth ALWAYS helps out, especially when moving large memory items around - such as high quality textures, etc. There would be noticable increases in speed for certain usages, but the actual rendering would not show a noticeable increase in rendering time. Getting the information to the CPU for processing, YES, the speed will be noticable, but the ACTAUL RENDERING will not be increased. - Ray

Just FYI, all carriers (Airborne, UPS, FedEX, USPS) will leave a package at your door if you leave them a handwritten message. That is if you are willing to leave your package outside until you get home. Here (Austin, TX) that is not a problem as we have relatively low crime, and I live in a nice neighborhood. Not a concern for me.