Face the reality. For a program to put a single pixel on the screen, the call will have to go through at least five layers of code, each coded by a different person. There is something like 30 miliion lines of code in XP, not including drivers and applications. It would be naive to think that much code could be made without some errors or that every contingency could be tested. The advantage compared to the DOS days is that the programmer does not have to care about what graphics card (or other hardware) is used. If there is a bug in the drivers for the graphics card, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to fix it, not the application programmer. In DOS, you had to know exactly how to control the card/printer/whatever, in effect you had to more or less make your own driver. There is a huge difference between having to provide support for hardware variations and just identifying bugs in existing drivers. Sorry Ian, but your comparison is just plain stupid. /Troberg

If you are building a new computer, make it a dual processor and all the multitasking problems will vanish. I watch (divx) movies while rendering and burning a CD at the same time, no problems. /Troberg

Do as I do: If you are considering buying software, let the magic of the internet provide for you, try it out and if it is good, buy it, otherwise uninstall. Yeah, I know you are not supposed to do this, but I don't want to spend my money on crap. Besides, can someone look me in the eye and say that it is bad for the industry if people spent their money on good products instead of crappy products? /Troberg

While all good images, the card set has very little feeling of being a set. The images are very different, different color scales, different layout, different scope, different motives. I realize it is a bit late to whine about this, but if a new contest is started, I think these things should be considered. Each suite should be given a theme and a color scale, and each value (Is that the correct word? English is not my primary language.) should have a theme, so that each card should be of the basic theme of the suite, but with the twist from the value. Some guidelines concerning content, perspective and so on would also help to enhance the feel that it is ONE deck of cards, not a mix from 52 different decks. It would be more difficult for the participants, but I'm sure we like a good challenge. /Troberg

I run a dual monitor setup (a 21 and a 19) with two >>> seperate cards and have no weirdness problems. >> >>Well, it insists on putting windows in the center, >> right in the crack between screen 2 & 3... > >That's characteristic of cards that have connectors for >two monitors off the same card. Using two different cards >eliminates that problem, though it does produce some >funnies with the cursor jumping over to the second screen >after you lift your finger from the mouse button after >selecting something. No, not really. I actually have three different cards, and the screens it puts the window on is not on the same card. >>But mainly (OK, I admit this is more a lack of features >>than wierdness) it will not allow me to move stuff >around. >>Some things are permanently docked to window edges. I'd >>like to have one full screen for the scene, one for >button >panels and other controls. > >That's the way I run it. I expand the Poser main panel so >it sprawls over both screens. Then I move all the controls >over to the second screen and expand the scene window to >1024x768, all alone on the big monitor with just room at >the edges for The indespensable figure and figure-part >display at the bottom left and the animation slider at the >bottom. Still, you cant move the animation panel and the object library (or whatever it is called) panel. Also, it would have been nice if the different views were different windows, not splitscreens of the same window (allowing me to have one camera screen, one side screen, one top screen et cetera). /Troberg

Sorry about my crappy English, of course I meant "there ARE medications"... /Troberg

I run a dual monitor setup (a 21 and a 19) with two seperate cards and have no weirdness problems. Well, it insists on putting windows in the center, right in the crack between screen 2 & 3... But mainly (OK, I admit this is more a lack of features than wierdness) it will not allow me to move stuff around. Some things are permanently docked to window edges. I'd like to have one full screen for the scene, one for button panels and other controls. /Troberg

There is a book from Microsoft that the people at CL should read, it is called "The windows interface guidlines, a guide to designing software". As someone said, if it runs on windows, it should behave and look like a windows program. I don't care about if it runs on other platforms, it should look like a windows prog on windows. On other platforms it should look and behave like progs on that platform. I have choosen to run windows, and I want programs to respect that. If I wanted to have a mac, there is medications I would have used to get rid of those urges. /troberg

I agree. The "creative" user interface really sucks. Right now it has parts windows, parts mac and parts that are just wierd. There is a reason most windows programs look and work similar. CL would also save a lot of programming work by following standards and not having to program everything from scratch. If you think it sucks on low resolution, try it on multimonitor. I run four monitors at 1600x1200, and if I allow it to span more than one monitor, it becomes wierd. /troberg

"if you really want MP sujpport and hardware accleration you are betteroff saving for a real 3D application that imports poser files like cinema 4DXl or vue or lightwave." But I prefer the simplicity of Poser. It does what I need, no fluffy dice I don't need. If they'd made a good, windows standard user interface instead of this messed up strangeness that is part windows, part mac and mainly just strange, they'd saved enough development time to do SMP support and a radiosity renderer (which would be great to remove the plastic look). CL should look at how the user interface works in Visual Studio .Net, especially the properties list which could replace all the dials, color selectors, texture selector and so on. They could also learn how a button should look: nice, square and single color background. I don't have this problem, but I have friends with bad eyesight, and to them the user interface is almost unusable. I don't know why they would use a graphic app, but still... Oh, while I'm whining: Poser really handles multimonitor badly (but not as bad as Bryce...). Especially among people who work with graphics, this should be a common configuration. /Troberg

I agree, SMP is the way to go if you want more speed. I don't know if me and my friends are representative of the average user, but 80% of our computers are at least dual processor, some are quads. All of us have home networks, some only two computers, some (like me) 15-20 machines. In our case, SMP support and support for distributed network rendering would make things a lot faster. As long as you don't spread each frame between threads/machines, it should not require that much rewrite. Just give each render thread/machine a frame to work on. /troberg

It is mostly a matter of how much time you have. It should run on lower specs (at least as far as clock frequency goes), just slower. A slow machine should not be the source of a blue dump. /troberg

Soulhunter, you are reading extremes into what I am saying that are not there. Try to read it again without trying to make the worst out of it. I will not continue this discussion, it has already strayed to far off topic and into rant land. /Troberg

Actually, in legal terms it is not stealing, but that's a detail. You are missing my point. My point is that there are some very bright shades of grey here. My point is also that to a certain extent, companies bring piracy on themselves. What I'm trying to say is that if I were not going to buy a prog anyway, it is a victimless crime, one that perhaps even benefits the company. I'm not arguing right or wrong, just trying to see both sides. /Troberg

I agree that piracy is not necessarily a lost sale. For instance, I would not feel guilt for using a copy of (for example) lightwave, since I's probable only play with it for a while a couple of times each year, and there is no way I's be preparared to pay their high price for that. On the other hand, if I find that I like it and were to start using it professionally, of course I'd buy it. I think that piracy is divided something like 1/3 free PR, 1/3 people who would never buy it anyway and 1/3 pure loss. The best thing to change this is to provide value to the customers, in the form of a good product, good documentation and good support. /Troberg