This is probably known to many, but I am glad to have official word on Poser5 hardware implementation. This past week I wrote to CuriousLabs asking: 1) WIll Poser 5 have important optimzation for dual processing? 2) WIll Poser 5 utilize additional RAM in a significant way? Response came next day: Hello there, there is no release date for Poser 5 yet, but the underlying features are the same for Poser 4 and 5; They are not multi-threaded. so dual processors will not increase performance; previews are not hardware accelerated, so hi-end video cards are not needed, Poser 4 needs to have a memory updater applied to work with several gigs of memory; Poser 5 will have the updated code to handle gigs of memory. Right now, RAM and processor speed are the biggest performance dependencies. -- Thank you for your interest in our products. Sincerely, Al Willbrand Technical Support Manager Curious Labs Just thought I'd pass that on... ::::: Opera :::::

Thanks for sharing that Opera. I'll bookmark this thread so I'll have it the next time this is brought up. :)

I would like to ebot mark this thread as well and leave this picture of Ace on a swing. Could be the MAC version of P5 is being held back by Steve Jobs and friends and not necessarily by Steve Cooper.

With apparently no attempt by Apple to go beyond the circa 1 GHZ G4 (another MacWorld passed) and no explanation by Jobs as to the shocking neglect of the high end, and the insult of having to re-buy OS X, and with Poser not taking advantage of multi-processing, Mac does not seem to be a good choice for a rig intended primarily for Poser. Not to mention the extra $1200-1500 you have to pay for a Mac on the high end to get the same Poser power. Not to mention all the 3D and Poser stuff that is Win only. Not to mention CuriousLabs now making Mac the follow-along-eventually platform. I have been Mac for 17 years, but am buying Athlon system for Poser. ::::: Opera :::::

NO multi processer Support... OH dear!! wait till people start those collisions and hair calculations. any way its not Steve Job responsibility to make the MAC OS compatible with poser5 but Apple has clearly failed in the hardware arena. thats why when people ask me why i havent bought a new MAC yet i tell them that Apple hasnt built one yet that i can justify. oh well :-)

My website

YouTube Channel

Let's say, tactfully, operaguy, that sounds like an unwise decision -- but your decision to make. Mac systems are really far better for the money than PCs... especially if what you want to do is create rather than fiddle with the system. (By the way, by all accounts faster G4 systems, with much improved memory bandwidth -- the only real technical advantage of current high end PC systems -- will be out before Poser 5 ships even for PCs. And even if Poser doesn't do multiprocessor rendering, you'll still find a second processor doing some work to help you out.) And the way to stop developers like CL from treating the best computing platform as "follow-along-eventually" is for more people to buy based on quality rather than mindlessly following Monopo$$oft. Not the other way around. As we used to say in Chemistry... "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate."

I think I recall the 1Gig G4s being announced a few weeks AFTER the Mac Expo in January when they announced the Flat Screen iMac. A Mac rumour site put that since the current buy back scheme to encourage the migration to OS X will expire in August the new mini towers may be announced after that. Although P5 doesnt need multi-processors it may find double-density RAM usefull (are you listening SJ? Hello!). No, its not MACs responsibility to comply with Poser but we would still like DDRs.

Monopo$$oft?????? (!!!!!!!!!)

Oh and cost? Maybe we should direct Operaguy to this thread.

http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=761119

(Or maybe not)

AMD/Win vs Mac Here are the factors i have run through my mind over and over again. This is a dedicated Poser/3D system. I am casing my lot with Poser in a big way. Yet, even though I go with AMD, I will still have my Mac. In fact, I will do post production on the free and fine iMovie. If I find a place in the 3D world, I will of course move up to the higher level of play, where the graphics pacages cost $2000. Later for that. I've got a friend who is a hacker-type. He will stand by me. We've struck a deal on it, and he has a lot of success stablizing Windows rigs. I am willing to fiddle, some, to get this platform stable. It promises to be quite stable after that. Most Poser pros seem to like Win2000 a lot, and testify to its stability. I'm tired of waiting for the G5 or whatever. When it comes, if it comes, the top end will shoot up to $3900 (with additional RAM) as per usual, and I'm sure it will be magnificent, but for THIS TASK I can get the same power for under $2000 with the top of the line Athlon. I never again want to go hunting for tools, only to see the dreaded "For Windows Only" tag on the thing. They don't even say, "Sorry,...." anymore. I have no grudge against Bill Gates. Nothing personal against Microsoft. It's a valid company. And I admire AMD tremendously. As for my responsibility to force the world to write for the Mac by sticking with it, even if reason tells me it is the wrong decision for me, that is a call for me to self-sabotoge. It is rejected. As for being part of the problem, what credit do you give me for 18 years of pioneering in the Mac world? I purchased a Mac 128K with no HD and an imagewriter for $3200.00 on April 2, 1984. I had to drive 250 miles to get it, you couldn't get 'em in LA that month. I was doing business analysis on my Mac 512 with Multiplan in 1984. I was a major "Helix" pioneer, remember Helix? I have placed many friends into Mac systems. I have caused at least 125 Mac systems to be sold into manufacturing companies in Los Angeles. I was a very ardent evangelist for FoxPro on the Mac, now long abandoned because the Mac community displayed no desire for a serious database management system. I do all my web graphics and html imagemapping on Canvas, once a flagship Mac application, now a Windows program with Mac as a tag-along. Hell, I even use Virtual PC, but even THAT program is now being sold hand-over-fist to the Win world, for Win sysops to run multiple instances of different WinOSs, no Mac involved. Dbutenhof, I will discuss this with civility, with you or any other posters, if you wish, but I believe you already owe me an apology. Here is my current shopping list, a work in progress: 228 ...... AMD Athlon XP 2200+ 1.8GHz Processor 152 ...... Asus A7V333 Athlon MBD (Aud/RAID/Firewire/USB) 597 ...... 1.5 Gb (3 x 512MB) DDR PC2700, 333MHz RAM ($199 ea, Crucial) 128 ...... Antec Plus880 Full-Tower Case ATX, 430W 109 ...... Seagate Barracuda IV 80.0GB Hard Drive ..74 ...... Asus 32x12x40 CD Recorder ..59 ...... Asus 16X DVD/48X CD-ROM Drive ..39 ...... KeyTronic Lifetime Designer 104-key PS2 Keyboard (Black) 178 ...... INTUOS2 4X5 USB TABLET & GRIP PEN & 2D MOUSE 106 ...... Asus V8170DDR GeForce4-MX 64MB AGP w DDR Memory 109 ...... Altec Lansing 621 - 3pc Speakers 150 ...... Microsoft Windows2000 or XP, still deciding TOTAL: $1929.00 Apple equiv: 2320 G4 933 Mhz with 80 Gig ATA Drive ...600 1.5 Gig RAM ...149 Speaker system ...178 Intuos Tablet ......69 Keyboard to replace undesirable Mac default Total: $3316 Differential: $1387 I am attempting to be fair, here, and welcome any comments on how either system is not fairly represented. I am not trying to stack the game for either side. As stated above, I think both platforms have their place. I could not quite get the two systems equally equipt. The Apple system has DVD-write support (superdrive) but everything is in that one drive, not as desireable as having two different CD drives. It also has 256MB more RAM (if the G4 has at least 4 slots for memory), which it will need because Macs don't use RAM and Virtual Memory as well as the Win systems. I think the specs on the Baracuda drive are better than the 80-gig from Apple. At the current state of my knowlege, it looks like the audio support on the Asus motherboard is roughly the equiv of that onboard the Mac. I will look into this more deeply later. Now, this Apple system will NOT render Poser animations as fast as the AMD system, I have been advised by two Poser vets who use both. More opinions on that welcome here...... Perhaps a G5 would catch up. But what will the price of THAT be? And when? When this AMD system has come down another $200? ::::: Opera :::::

Hi, from my understanding Poser 5 for Mac will support multiprocessing since it'll run under OSX. This is a operating system thing. As far as I know all applications that run under OSX use the second processor. Just my two cents. :) If I'm wrong please correct me. If anyone from CL is reading this thread: Could you guys give a statement about this question? While reading the first post from operaguy I think this was a PC related question, so there's quite a big difference between PeeCeeOS like Win2K and MacOSX. Phil

I read that thread just now. The usual OS wars stuff. The lead post does not apply to me. If I were implementing an office system for 40 people, or, or, or, or.... I'm concentrating on what is best for my situation, my budget, my level of hackerness, and my need: get the one best Poser platform at lowest cost. Now if you tell me that the P5 will beat the pants off my proposed AMD system, that it will be really really avail. within a few weeks, that the price is within $800 of the AMD system, and that the "3D tools only for Win" problem has been solved, I am all ears. See, I'm even willing to pay more for a Mac, even now. ::::: Opera :::::

*This is a operating system thing. As far as I know all applications that run under OSX use the second processor.*That is not the case. MacOS X will be able to let any application as a whole run on the second processor, but not to divide its workload on multiple CPUs.Unless an application is explicitly written for using multiple threads it will not notably gain performance from a second CPU. Wether an application is able to use multiple CPUs depends only on the application itself and not the OS. Even with "modern" OSs like XP or OS X, making an application multithreaded is not an easy task.

Poser 4 does not use multiple threads for rendering (that's about the major point for SMP optimizations in a 3D app). I will not comment on Poser 5 as I know you will quote me on that and use everything I say against me. Sorry.

However, a second CPU will help you when running multiple applications as in my experience my system is a lot more responsive with two CPUs when performing CPU heavy tasks like rendering or compiling. If you plan to do some compositing/editing/encoding while rendering or using Poser and one of the plugin-enabled modeling/rendering suites (Lightwave, Cinema etc), a second CPU will give you additional speed.

That said, I am typing this on a dual Celeron 533 which I am mostly happy with.

::::: irony ::::: Being a lifelong Mac person, it did not occur to me that I could render Poser in the background and do other tasks as well. Currently, if rendering, Poser completely takes over my Mac under OS 9. I can't even get to the Finder unless I cancel the render. I wonder what the reality of multitasking will be when Poser5 comes out for MacOS X? Time to think multitasking. Stewer, do you know if Win2000 and XP are equally good at the multitasking issues? Can you comment on life while rendering and doing something else on your dual Celeron system? Can you surf the web? Work in Photoshop? Can you run two instances of Poser? Does doing "other" work while rendering slow down the rendering time? Naturally, this tempts me to go dual Athlon. I have been told that I can get the dual motherboard and work with only one processor for a time, plugging in a second when budget allows me to do it. (that would be pretty drastic, I admit.) I might have to do this with RAM, as well. I am really on a tight budget. I calculate that going dual Athlon would raise the budget by $300 (extra CPU plus more expensive motherboard.) ::::: Opera :::::

I guess now it's time to tell you the downside of multiple CPUs: Some applications or drivers are not prepared for two CPUs. I remember Creative's software for the SBLive! being a prime example of software that crashes on two CPUs. Two CPUs generate twice the heat and require twice the cooling, therefore often creating more noise than a single-CPU system. The cost: AMD and Intel are intentionally removing SMP functionality from their low-price CPUs Duron and Celeron*, making systems with two CPUs very costly. Software that is not multithreaded (which is true for most applications) will be as fast as with one CPU. Two CPUs will not speed up Poser rendering and will not make you able to use more tracks or effects in Logic. My opinion is: Two CPUs are a luxury unless you extensively use applications that take full advantage of them. If not, better invest that $300 in RAM, software or a romantic evening with your loved one. Stefan -- Please note that this is my personal opinion and that is not related my job or my employer's opinion. * The Celerons up to 533 MHz can run in two-CPU systems with special tricks - those were the exception to the rule and have no significance when buying a system today.

Just a thought, if your needs are going to include inputing video via Firewire and outputing as digital video to DVD, ease-of-use and cost might tip you back to a Mac. Every time I have to do video work on a PC, I've gone running back my Mac, and you can't beat iDVD2's price .

Look, why Athlon? what is wrong with pentium 4? They are faster than Athlons I believe, 2200+ is 1.8ghz, P4 goes up to 2.53ghz along with faster rambus. ?? Alex

Attached Link: http://www.apple.com

Hi, I just bought a new PC, P4 2Ghz, Geforce4, 256Mb DDR, 80Gb, 40xCDRW, DVD, firewire, 10/100 LAN, 56k modem, video out, XP+other MS crap. Cost? 1000 Euros (about $1000, 600UK pounds) cheap. The only drawback is I only have two slots free. I bought it for P5, its a tool. But I still lust after a Powerbook. Why? Because they're just so damn sexy. If you want a cool toy, the Mac is it. Always has been. Mac's have always sold on style and ease of use. Because even when they came in beige boxes, they were beautifuly designed, award winning, beige boxes. My new PC by comparison, is a drab metal box. Lately, Apple have been able to boast of toasting a P4, which on certain apps, they do. Simply because the software is written to take advantage of the hardware. Last I hard Photoshop gaussian blur, crunching DivX;-) and mp3's was still faster on a Mac. Which will please content creators, if not the likes of you and me. Apple have never really been able to compete on raw power alone, but they've never really had to. A Mac, like a BMW is an aspirational purchase. If I could only think of one legitimate use for a mac I'd buy one tomorrow, but $3000 is lot to pay for a toy, so at the moment I'm stuck with my laptop, my small metal box, and a bad case of system envy :) later jb

P4's are not not capable of being placed into a dual processor configuration last i heard, so choosing athlon over p4 is already decided for you if you plan to use a dual cpu system, the only other alternative is the xeon, which is a much more expensive configuration. The current p4 northwoods are indeed better than athlons by a good deal, but older p4 processors are easily matched by athlon equivalents, even though the clock speeds dont match up. It is quite true that dual cpu systems will rarely have a very significant effect on the overall speed of an application, but try running both photoshop and 3ds max at once, both smp compatible, with a single processor, and both at once with dual prcessors, and i guarantee you the difference will be as clear as day. As far as the mac guys, i have used a mac extensively in the past, and it is a great system. If you can have both, i highly recommend it. However, in this case, i believe a windows pc is better suited to his task. And i instantly tone out anyone whose only true case for choosing a mac over a pc is that individuals personal bias against "monopo$$oft" ,as those opinions are rarely argumentive or even informed. And both windows 2k and windows xp both run quite stabily on my system, a little fiddling is all that is needed. Which one you choose is often a matter of what other tasks you plan to use the system for, but for pure 3d apps and pure poser, i would recommend 2k over xp. XP is not a bad choice if you plan to do other things with your computer that windows 2k was never really meant to handle. If you do choose xp, make sure to get the pro version and not home. Final 2 cents, you can set cpu priority in the task manager for a dual processor system, and cpu "affinity" as well. If you have 2 processors and are running an application that only takes advantage of one ... tell that application to only use one and tell your other application to use only the second one. You will find that you can render full scenes in poser in the background and still use your computer as if you werent doing anything else on a similar configured one cpu pc.

i forgot to comment on another of operaguys earlier comments, using a single cpu on a dual motherboard is as simple as having a single processor acpi installed on your operating system. whenever you get the second cpu, you can just plug it in, the motherboard will recognize it instantly when you boot up again, and then in windows change your driver to a multiprocessor acpi and windows will begin to use it. Windows XP and Windows 2k use the same kernel when using cpu resources, neither has a performance advantage over the other as far as the processor goes.

AH! That makes sense. I just need a fast single CPU system I fugure the Intel 2.26ghz w/ 533fsb, 850e chipset, 512mb of pc600 rdram should do good for rotating Vina D, and rendering in Poser 5. Current system: XP home, a single PIII 933, intel D815 and 512mb pc133. Too slow for quality rendering in Poser 4 at any higher resolution than 72ppi with anti-aliasing on. And rotating Vina D, it "pops" from frame to frame, too slow. It's also too slow for my heavier Photoshop processing. Thank you very much for the in-depth typing. Any clearifications, please reply. Alex

">Being a lifelong Mac person, it did not occur to me that I could render Poser in the background and do other tasks as well. Currently, if rendering, Poser completely takes over my Mac under OS 9. I can't even get to the Finder unless I cancel the render. I wonder what the reality of multitasking will be when Poser5 comes out for MacOS X?<" Operguy: first i totally agree with your broad view of placing importance on getting your final output/render as fast as possible without the distraction of platform loyalty. secondly Poser5 like any other OSX native application will run its own dynamically assigned protected memory space so indeed you will be able 'jump out" during a render and safely perform other tasks like web surfing and yes even CD burning I routinely render very processor intensive Cloth, water, fur and volumetric smoke simulations in MAXON's Cinema 4DXL 7.3 and simply hide the render in the background and move on to something else. this is NOT possible in OS9 because OS9 is not a modern operating system that can dynamically assiign memory on an as needed basis. therefore OS 9 is not a suitable for real world 3D and film production rendering especially for us who only have One machine and can NOT afford to have it held hostage for 12 hour renders during a busy work day. for that you need OSX win XPro or Win2K pro forget OS9 for serious 3D work!! its a dead OS system with no future.!! good luck :-)

My website

YouTube Channel

Oh man, I am getting very serious and very welcome information from this thread. Thank you all for your clear and careful posts and rifleshot tidbits. Wow. Stewer, downsides of dual noted. And my enthusiasm is not irrational exhuberance, I get it loud and clear that Poser is NOT multi-threaded, but yours (and now others) description of multitasking is very very attractive. Darkphoenix's information on the Task Manager assignment issue seals the deal. Poser may not be multi-threaded for a long time, or ever. I think the "upgrade" to MP rendering of Poser figures is export to Maya/Max/Lightwave, etc. SInce I can't stray from my primary mission, I can not think in terms of "well, go down to a Athlon1700 or 1800 at $100, then you could afford MP." Nope. I want the best render. Will go dual only if I can work the budget up to get dual 2200s. The reason I am going Athlon over Pentium is first price, but also performance. Yes the Northwood Pentiums seem to beat the Aths in quite a few categories in testing. But the top of the line Pent!Vs cost $420-650 and the Ath $288. A little further back from the top, the cost disparity is a little less, but still significant. I am quoting prices from an online component site, UpgradeSource, other sites seem to confirm this price issue. Upgrade has a lot of helpful info, including this page : http://www.upgradesource.com/advice/intelvsamd.html (this is not a plug or affiliate link for me, just a great site) According to an article in XBit, http://www.xbitlabs.com/cpu/northwood-2200/ amazingly, there is evidence that the Athlon might be best on one, specific, targeted task: rendering in 3D. There is no Poser test, but there is a 3ds max render and animation test, nearly the last one all the way at the bottom. The Athlon 2000 beats the 2.2 Ghz Northwood Pentiumns hands down in a render test, and is equal to the Pentium in animation rendering. As for the coolness of Mac? I still have my Mac. It is not a cool Titanium PwerBook, just a 333Mhz G3 box, but I still appreciate the Mac OS. I can use iMovie on it, surf the net, run Canvas, etc. I may not even network the two boxes, since I can transfer files by FTP or on CD. How's this for retro cool: I am a writer. When I am deep in the night and want perfect silence, I go upstairs to a corner of my bedroom. There is a table there on which sits my original Macintosh from 1984. You know, that cute stubby box? No hard drive. No fan. 9" B&W screen. I insert a single-sided, 384K floppy disk. The system (OS 3.4) boots. It takes a while. There is JUST room on the disk for a copy of the original MacWrite and a few small text files. I like the feel of that unique, original keyboard. I write. It works. When I stop typing to think, all is perfectly silent. Cool. ::::: Opera :::::

Wolf makes the point that a Mac running Poser5 in OS X will have the multitasking capabilities. That might be a while in coming. I think Mac/Poser people ought to be upset by the announced "later, sometime" announcement from Curious Labs, but not blame them. They have to change the Mac version of Poser not just into Poser5, but into an OS X version. This is apparently significantly different. When Canvas (Deneba), which has always been Mac-centric, went through its last iteration, they put the Mac version in secondary position. I believe that they did NOTHING on the Mac side until the Windows flavor was set, then ported it back to Mac OS X. The results show. It looks like a Windows application (not counting the OSX look and feel of the shell), not a Mac one. CL is probably in the same boat now. I bet they will not start working on Poser5Mac until the Windows version is frozen. ::::: Opera :::::

Does anyone know if you can run two instances of Poser at the same time under the modern OSs? And if so, is that within the permission of the license? ::::: Opera :::::

operaguy, OT on the above #24 Another good pricing site: http://www.pricewatch.com/ You can get boxed CPUs at Ebay: http://pages.ebay.com/catindex/computers.html?ssPageName=HCP01 A great test site is Tom's hardeware guide: http://www.tomshardeware.com/ thanks for the pointer to that test site. Alex

*Wolf makes the point that a Mac running Poser5 in OS X will have the multitasking capabilities.*You can get something like now by running Poser 4 in the classic environment in OS X. After starting the render job, press command-TAB to switch away from Poser. You can now use native OS X applications while rendering.

stewer, I'm surprised Poser runs in Classic mode. At the Curious Labs webiste, it states that it does not, and they had no plans to make it work. So I stayed running Poser on System 9. There's a nice handfull of other reasons I have not gone to OS X on my Mac, and even this news in your post is not enough to make me do it, since I am realistic about the (non) performance I would get on my little G3 rendering in Poser while I am flipped over to OS X. But thanks for the info, anyway. Hopefully, I won't have to use it! ::::: Opera :::::

I am not sure if pure Poser 4 does run in Classic mode, but Poser 4 ProPack SR3 does on my iBook. It's a little rough at the edges, but it's usable.

I have had no problems with Poser 4 in OS X Classic mode. Can any one tell me who has and what has happened to it.

I believe that OS9 is a fully paid up member of the past and will cease to function and that OS X is the future. I would use it a lot more often if it didnt have the occasional wobbly, eg Typeit4me cancelling shutdown.

operaguy,to the best of my knowledge you can not run 2 instances of poser. It will look for other copies of itself and find one under local host, it then switches tasks to the open version. Additionally, i would get the best processor you can possibly afford for your athlon, and as much ram, and buy the second one as soon as possible. It is better to buy a 2200 and another 2200 later than to get both 1800+ now. Also remember that both processors have to be the same speed and that when you get the second 2200 later it will probably already have dropped in price.

DarkPhoenix, I am following your every word.. I won't fall back to the 1800 level just to get dual. About getting the best possible, AMD seems to be coming up to the mark with a new generation, which will have that 512 thing that the Pentiums use in edging out the Aths in tests. Code name "Barton." But this is not for another 4-8 months, apparently. My philosophy about that next gen is, this 2200 Athlon, and following your advice about RAM, as I keep hearing from many, will get me a first class Poser platform. Now, if and when I continue to follow this 3D path, and integrate digital recording and composing, I will need another machine eventually. In otherwords, I need to prove to myself i can be successful in this field, and this proposed rig will not hinder me in finding out. Then I can talk about "more." My hacker friend confirms your information that both processors have to be the same. I'm quite sure I will be purchasing a dual processing motherboard. If I have to wait to get the second processor, as you pointed out, there is sure to be a price drop by Christmas, escpecially if Barton hits by that time. Thanks again for your several valuable posts. ::::: Opera :::::

Not that I can afford it presently, but there seems to be a ceiling on RAM at 3Gig. it seems these motherboards only have 2-4 slots, and state they support 2-3 Gig of RAM total. It's all based around the 512MB memory modules. Also, I have not seen any 1Gig modules anywhere. There must be either a hardware or systemic limit. ::::: Opera :::::

there is a such thing as 1 gig ram modules, but they are extremely expensive and you are unlikely to find any ddr modules at all. I dont believe micron (crucial is a subsidary) manufactures it anymore. Might have to try kingston or samsung. They are sold as 16Mx8x4 modules of 512M memory, as opposed to the standard 8Mx16x4.
There are also motherboards with 4 gig supported memory, but ddr usually peaks at 3, and to be honest you'll probably only ever need 2 unless you are running a server for a renderfarm or something of that nature. The memory system is often determined by the chipset the manufacturer is using, I believe that the 760MPX, currently the best supported athlon mp chipset, does indeed have a 4 gig addressing system, any other chipset using the amd 762 northbridge should support 4 gig.
If your looking, the msi kd7 is pretty popular, though it has fewer pci slots than most, and 2 of those are 64 bit pci slots. The kd7 64 bit slots will support 32 bit pci cards though. It also uses the pc2700 memory slots. The asus a7m266d is also popular, but seems to be quite buggy to me. it does support 4 gig of memory also though.

Attached Link: http://www.pricewatch.com/

http://www.tomshardware.com/

You don't use a cuisineart to mow the lawn and vice versa. I've been considering a linux or PC to use as a modeling box for awhile. They're tools, not your kids. This silly argument has been going on for nearly twenty years.

It really bothers me that they are still dodging the issue of how much RAM we will need to run poser 5. RAM is getting cheaper, but it is still not cheap! I just got a new 1.7 gHz machine so I should be OK on processor speed, but 'only' have half a gig of RAM.

Poser 4 works just fine in Classic (although the UI is a bit "dirty"). Because of the bugs in the way Poser interacts with QuickTime, I've found it more productive working in Classic than in regular OS 9. This is because when Poser crashes it only brings down Classic -- not the OS. In fact I frequently start up two copies when working on long animations. Just make a second copy of the executable. Since Poser4 is a Classic app, it doesn't multitask well when rendering, however. When not rendering, it works just fine. If you keep both executables in the same directory, they will step on each other unless you lock all the files in the Runtime folder. If anyone is interested, I can post a quick shell script that will do this. Otherwise, just copy the whole Poser directory if you can spare the disk space. I've written many multi-threaded applications: it's a lot easier than you think. Saying that threading an app is too hard is just a cop-out. I've found that once you grok the way threading works, you never want to go back to state-machine programming. WinXP, etc. are not SMP. They still run in master/slave configuration and you don't get the smooth performance that you would with an SMP operating system like OS X. Because of the way Mach shields the applications from dual CPU issues, you don't have the stability problems on OS X like you do in Windows.

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: Multi-Processing, RAM usage in Poser5