With all due respect to PC users, who clearly comprise the majority of Poser users, P7 will be a gift from heaven for Mac users. It is as though P7 is being written mostly to please Intel Mac users, though I'm sure that's not the case. For us, it will be a much bigger improvement than for PC users, though they too should have reason to rejoice. I move my Poser 6 files almost daily back and forth between a Macbook Pro 2.33 Core 2 Duo with 2 gigs of RAM (at my office) and a 2.66 Mac Pro Quad Core with 4 gigs of RAM (at home). Although both run Poser 6 in Rosetta emulation and P6 does not take advantage of either multiple processors or more RAM, the Mac Pro Quad is notably faster and (perhaps owing to its better graphics card) has better previews. Whether that (P6 on an Intel Mac) is faster than a comparable PC, I doubt it. However... Poser 7 will make a HUGE difference -- something like 4 times the speed in routine operation, and 5-8 times faster renders -- on these two machines because it will be native Universal Binary Code, will take advantage of multiple processors and will be able to utilize more available RAM. I also expect it will be able to take advantage of 64-bit processing power of the Mac and its OS. My sense is that if you were ever tempted to convert from PC to Mac for using Poser -- no compelling reason until now -- Poser 7 and the new Intel-based Macs are astounding new reasons for doing so. Plus, you avoid all the inevitable headaches, bugs, viruses, lack of backward compatibility, and ridiculous hardware demands associated with moving to Vista. And you get a superior OS, with the flexibility (on Intel Macs) to boot to Windows or run it simultenously with the Mac OS. Mac Mini's start at $600, so price is no excuse to consider it. Does anyone know more about what e-frontier has in mind for its Mac version or changes that will benefit Mac users? Don't let us down, e-frontier!

yes, stewer knows, but if he tells ya, they'll re-assign him to e-frontier's office in kabul. :lol: don't be so quick to assume P7 will work better on leopard/intel than on vista/intel, as vista was largely based on tiger's predecessors, and both machines are using very similar hardware now. as to mac minis, they really aren't up to the task for any graphics- intensive 3D work IMVHO. at this point, I dunno if all 600,000 known windows viruses will be able to infect vista (I doubt it), but black hats are already targetting exploder 7 big-time.

Fair enough, Miss Nancy, on all points. But what I really meant was not that P7 will work better on Macs versus comparable PCs, but that the margin of improvement will be greater for current Mac users. Still, the net benefit between the PC and Mac might at least be greater operating stability, better file management outside of Poser and easier use of peripheral programs (Quicktime Pro, Final Cut Pro, etc.). Plus its versatility in running both Mac and PC versions of the peripheral programs. And yes, the Mac Mini is underpowered for P7, at least until or unless is has a Duo processor and more RAM capacity. The next step up would be to an iMac, which is still a great value at under $1,000 and up. But nothing will beat a loaded up Mac Pro.

To start, I like Macs - I have a new Intel iMac dual-core (2.16GHz, 2GB, 20" LCD).

But I must protest the 'file management' statement.  I find Finder to be a PITA.  Windows Explorer is better and its default Copy-MERGE behaviour far surpasses MacOS Copy-DeleteEverythingInTheTargetFolder behaviour (which has bitten me in the butt several times - others can chime in here).  I use an Explorer replacement called DirectoryOpus on Windows.  It far, far surpases Explorer - and that makes Finder a useless waste of my abilities to get anything done.  I've continually begged GP Software to port DirectoryOpus to MacOSX!

When Apple can provide a tree view to Finder, multiple views in a Finder window, and let you at least set the copy-paste behaviour, then I might agree with that statement.  The Finder interface is simple, which is good for simple operations.  What about power users who need to do more complex things - I tend to push systems to tears. ;)

Kuroyume, I have the same gripes about the Mac's file management vis-a-vis its use with Poser. It would be much easier to deal with different directories, copying content folders, and loading new content with a Windows-like (or DirectoryOpus-like) system. Something tells me there the answer is either something having to do with Spotlight or a 3rd party utility. I'll bet there is one, but I don't know what it is.

in OS X, I always get a warning about replacing duplicate files, hence I haven't the foggiest where the problem lies. I just assumed it was switchers who had the problem. there is a terminal command (and kaveman's ditto gui) to avoid that, in case the problem pops up.

Yah, it warns you about replacing DUPLICATE files.  But what they don't mention is that it will REPLACE duplicate folders - in full.  Meaning that if you accidentally copy a Runtime folder with one file in it to your Poser folder, it will ask if you want to replace the duplicate file - and then proceed to delete every single file in the Runtime folder otherwise - all 50,000 of them!!! (yes, I've actually done this once - never again).

That is a pathetic approach - Amiga didn't do it.  DOS didn't do it.  Windows doesn't do it.  Unix doesn't do it.  Why will Apple not learn from everyone else, please?  Not just a switcher problem - it is a paradigm problem.  I'm no newbie to computers, so it came as a shock after my couple decades of computer experience to see how MacOS did its thing here.

I know about kaveman's ditto gui.  It is the only way to do it - but it is a workaround, not a solution.  The solution is to stop pretending that this is normal behavior and fix it (listening, Steve?). ;D

That is one thing I like about Windows but I don't want any type of Windows directory AT ALL. I just want to be able to merge stuff but it isn't really a problem for me. It would just be more convenient.