There once was a man who owned a horse. He loved this horse and found a stable that would house this horse and help him take care of it. And although this horse wasnt a Thoroughbred, in many ways this horse was unique and one of a kind. Everyone liked this horse and when they came to this particular stable they would want to pet and ride it. Even the adults would gather around it with childlike wonder and pay allot of attention to it. Unfortunately, one chilly night before Christmas, a fire broke out in the stables and, sadly, the stables was no longer able to keep their many horses and needed to find new homes for them. The man didnt know what to do, he couldnt stand the thought of his prized horse getting sent to the glue factory or put out to the pasture like some of the other horses. Fortunately, there were so many admirers of this horse and people from all around the world gathered together and offered to help this man and his horse, they said they would pay admission to ride the horse. One particular admirer, Mr. Ripple, who had also worked at the stables, that had burned down, offered to help the man and his horse. Together, he and the man, worked hard and found some people who helped them to build their own stable for this special horse. Everyone was so happy to hear that the man and his horse would be taken care of and that they would get to see, pet and ride the horse again. In fact, while Mr. Ripple and the man worked to get the horse and new stable ready for the anxious public, some of the more serious fans of the horse began to work hard to continue or create new interest in this special horse. They sold photographs and stuffed animals of the horse, wheat and barley, straw and hay that other fans, new and old, would be able to enjoy while they waited to see the horse again. Seeing how everyone loved this special horse, Mr. Ripple and the man had an idea. If they could get other horses and expand the stables, they might be able to get more money. He and the owner of the horse worked hard together and began to expand their stables and get more horses. Both were really happy and had big dreams for their stables. Little by little the one stall stable became two, then three. But what Mr. Ripple and the man didnt realize that while they focused all of their attention on the stables and other horses, they were no longer paying the attention that they shouldve been paying to the horse. And the very special and friendly horse began to suffer from the lack of attention that it was used to getting. It lost allot of weight and its ribs started to show and got very sick. Oh how time flies when one stays busy and before you know it, it was becoming time for Mr. Ripple and the man to open the stables up to the public. Out of time and realizing their error in focusing their attention on the other stables and horse, they came up with an idea. They threw a very pretty blanket on everyones favorite horse, put a very shiny bridle and pretty bows on it and hurried the inspectors around the stable... and then, finally, opened up to the public. People paid their admission, rushed in and crowded over to see the friendly horse and its new stable. People struggled and strained to see the horse and stable. But soon, too the horror of Mr. Ripple and the man, people began to grumble and a mummer ran through the crowd. When people got to the stable they found that bad wood was used, it wasnt even painted very well and would crash down at the slightest of breeze. Allot of them were mad at Mr. Ripple and the man, because even worse the horse was sick and could likely die. The crowd were surprised to find out there were a bunch of signs around saying things like: "Please excuse our mess" and "under construction". On top of all of that, there were new rules regarding the horse, constricting the fans ability to share their love for this special and unique horse. You see, the moral to this story is this... The crowd, the fans of this very special and wonderful horse, had been waiting all of this time to come and see the horse and its stable. They never cared about any other horse or stable. Sure, they did want to see Mr. Ripple and the man succeed and make money, but not at the expense of the horse. Their love was only for the horse. They worked hard to continue to create interest and love for that horse. They wanted to see that horse taken care of and make sure they could continue to enjoy the ability to share that love with others. The sad part to this story is that the horse has gotten sick and might die. No amount of pretty bows, fancy covers and shiny bridles is going to change the fact that the horse wasnt well cared for. The structure to protect that horse is unstable and even though there may be builders out there working on ways to keep it from collapsing, it doesnt change the fact that Mr. Ripple and the man obviously neglected that horse. They lost focus on the reason that the community of people who loved that horse were together. Allot of those people worked hard themselves to insure that that horse would be well cared for and that interest in it would still be there, sure they mightve made money because of that love, but regardless of that fact, that interest and love was real and even as they struggled in that love, they never lost the focus of that love. Its really a shame that Mr. Ripple and the man seemed too and too bad for the horse, huh? Isnt it a good thing that this is ONLY A STORY? Jack

I've saved this story to my hard drive Jack, and will read it to my children regularly. LOL Seriously though, nicely written, the parallels are interesting. :)

Bookmarked Well written Jack. Tom

What's this? Jack writting parables now? Good one Jack.

A tale worthy of Aesop, Perrault (i.e. Mother Goose,) or the Grimm Brothers.

I have a feeling it's some kind of parable you wanted to relate to Poser, otherwise you wouldn't have posted it here. Maybe it'll set a precedent for even more parables or sermons in the future.

nice one, jack! :)

Where am I?

Bookmark. One of the best lately, Jack.

Moral: If you want to ride, ride the Pink Pony. Seriously though, good analogy. Let's hope it hits home.

You want a sermon? ;)

hmmm.... Isn't this plagiarizm?

Jackson, do you mean my story as being plagiarizm?

hehe very good

Ok... sp clearly this is a Poser analogy, and I suppose the concept here is what... that Poser5 is P4 with a "pretty blanket" on it? I don't agree :) * Dyanmic hair * Dynamic cloth * Morph putty * A full on ray tracing renderer * Drastically better asset management At least four dramatically new capabilities and an entire rendering techniology. That's a heck of a blanket.

Testify, Brother Yuri!

It'd only be a heck of a blanket if it worked correctly ;)

I'm still waiting for the collection plate to come around Yuri. ;-)

Nicely written, worthy of the likes of Mark Twain. Perhaps the classiest "complaint" about the old gray mare in the pretty new blanket yet.

** Dynamic hair Implemented in a in inefficient, geometry only, and therefore limited way, also incompatible with most other apps. ** Dynamic cloth As with the shader trees, a third party technology, which unless cash-strapped CL found the initial finance to buy up front, rather than paying a fee per unit shipped, will be another up-front cost in any further releases. That is, unless it becomes prohibitivly expensive or un-licenceable, hence requiring a full rewrite with a loss of backwards compatibility. ** A full on ray tracing renderer That must be an Easter Egg. ;-) I've been limited to Firefly which was an attempt to implement a fast scan-line rendering technology with limited hybrid raytracing. Bill

"As with the shader trees, a third party technology, which unless cash-strapped CL found the initial finance to buy up front, rather than paying a fee per unit shipped" every cloth engine is licensed. Maya's is licensed from the original researchers andy witkin, and david baraff. likewise with other cloth that has popped up (with the exception of a few that are sold as external plug-ins). this is just like the other technology roalties that are paid to various researchers (like the z-buffer which was created by Ed Catmull). I know there's been an effort to portray p5 as a "frankenstein" program, but if that's true then it's true of most other apps in the industry. You like Rhino? the nurbs libraries are licensed from the same company that Alias licenses them from (they might even be licensed from Alias). Maya licenses it's tech from various other research companies as well. In addition, in programs like Rhino, and Maya, the actual engine's are just a small part of the program, and don't even deal with the most basic building blocks like data structures, etc.

You like Rhino? the nurbs libraries are licensed from the same company that Alias licenses them from (they might even be licensed from Alias). Maya licenses it's tech from various other research companies as well. In addition, in programs like Rhino, and Maya, the actual engine's are just a small part of the program, and don't even deal with the most basic building blocks like data structures, etc. i love rhino. and, one difference between it and p5...it works...each and every time. even my old version 1.0 works each and every time. and, mcneel also does autocad...which also has a habit of working CORRECTLY, yup...everytime. i was seriously gonna buy p5. then, came the "eula" controversy. the eula is simply words. it, as yet, has not been reworked even one little bit. in a thread on another site, kupa said it would be looked over, yet again, and reworded...of course, he also said that they had gotten new lawyers. that was at least a month ago. and, folks ARE having big troubles with p5. rhino can run on an athlon, intel...what have ya with no troubles...how dare you compare the 2 programs? rhino, and mcneel is a small company, beta tests its stuff thoroughly....free beta testers...not the first few hundred who purchase the program. cl has violated their "warrantee of merchantibility"...i.e. failing to produce a product that does what it is supposed to do. i would most certainly....had i bought it....been demanding a refund. they breached their contract. surely, you are aware of that. jack...cool story. but, it made me very sad. and, i was thinking of pets, not poser.

Not classy enough nor deep enough for Mark Twain. It will do for a comic book where you only have to hold their attention for a page at a time and the emotional sweep is more important than the actual event. Carolly

"how dare you compare the 2 programs?" people are making statements that CL did something wrong by licensing techology from another company, and because of that for some reason it's not valid that it's a significant new feature for Poser so I was making an analogy to all the other 3D apps that do the same thing, licensing technology, and having them as significant features in their programs. I was not commenting on the beta practices of either program, just the fact of licensed technology in the industry

Jack, I was being facetious.

reiss....but, the fact remains: maya and rhino may have licensed technology. however, they both work. licensing is a whole different issue from properly intergrating it to work within a program. if they crash the user's system, or do not perform as they are supposed to, my thoughts are that the company...in this case cl...did not test them properly. or, they released them before they were properly integrated into the program. cl had years to work on p5. but, small company in a "specialty market"...dealing with a cottage industry...after all who were gonna buy propack had bought it...and, the small sales of avatar labs...they ran out of money...plain and simple. so to stay afloat, they "licensed" certain options....did a month of promos...and with a wing and a prayer, gave p5 to the public. i have a business. if i had been in cl's shoes...i would have filed a chapter 13 which would have allowed me to finish, and make workable my product. it would have bought the time necessary for proper beta testing, and, bug fixings before the release of p5. seems as if they have only dug their hole deeper.

This is at the core of what's been eaten away at me lately. Good story Jack.

Great story Jack, I'm just sorry some people can't see . skee

It is a story, but just a story. Many people have stories. Two people named Willow and Grey have a story; Jack knows who they are. A company called EdgeNet probably also has a story. Are their stories only stories? I don't know, and would never claim to know, because I was not actually involved in the situations that form the basis of their stories. I'm sure Jack has his versions of those stories, and I wouldn't claim to know if they were true either, and for the same reason. I want to make clear that I personally believe that over the years Jack has made very important contributions to the development of the community. For example, I was never one of those who had a visceral hatred of this site going commercial when it did. But I confess that I'm baffled as to why Jack of all people wants to issue this sort of veiled attack on CL, which does not require that he back any of it up with facts, but which does continue the sort of venomous exchange that filled these pages when he was running the place. I remember Jack posting messages in a very conciliatory, unifying sort of tone regarding these past controversies, so I am frankly stunned that he would want to jump into the middle of this one. I would no more offer an opinion on whether CL did the best that it could any more than I would speculate as to why Jack ended up going from EG and R'osity to starting the 3D Commune, to starting R'otica, to starting Animotions. I just don't have the information to render an informed opinion about it... and I would hope that maybe everyone else might recognize the same, or bring forth the evidence to support their opinions.

{people are making statements that CL did something wrong by licensing techology from another company, and because of that for some reason it's not valid that it's a significant new feature for Poser so I was making an analogy to all the other 3D apps that do the same thing, licensing technology, and having them as significant features in their programs.} I don't think anybody thinks it's wrong per se to license technology. There probably wouldn't be anything at all said if these great new features seemed like they were truly integrated into the program and really worked at the level promised. If that was the case, nobody would care.

True story Jack. In french there's a famous story who's moral is about the same I don't know if you know it or name it the same in English: "La poule aux oeufs d'or" (golden eggs hen) and there's even a proverbe (I forgot the english name): "Don't kill the golden eggs hen". ;)

Actually the point I was making was that there are various levels of licensing, and it costs a lot of money, up front, to secure a license that will protect your future development, rather than going the budget route which is to pay a higher amount per-unit shipped. Bill

hmm - a good story ...

What happened in the past with Willow and Grey and others is long past. I believe this story is an excellent metaphor for what we are living through right now. One can only hope that someone buys our horse from those two and nurses it back to health before it dies.

Attached Link: Original Post

Since I was the one who called P5 "Frankenstein's Software", I feel compelled to respond.

I am sure that everyone knows the stroy behind Frankenstein, if not, a brief synopsis:

Dr Frankenstein played god with various pieces of recently dead humans to create another "human" being. In the process, Dr Frankenstein, while using the correct anatomical components, built a monster hell-bent on destroying everything/everyone in sight. In the end, it was up to the villagers to gather around and dispose of the monster due to the fact that its creation, beyond being an abomination of nature, was destructive and could have led to the devastation of the community in which it raided.

Now, to place that analogy back into the realm of software:

Yes, many companies do license technologies from many different sources. However, most companies are able to sufficently build a viable, working "human" and not a "monstrosity" hell-bent on destroying everything and everyone else on the systems it is installed upon.

CL, using the same types of licensed technology, built a "monster" that, so far, has to be patched twice in so many months. The problem lies not entirely in the parts, but also the with whole created from those parts.

I find it interesting that you quoted the reference to "Frankenstein", but did not elaborate, as I did, on the meaning of that statement; definitely taking it way out of context in the process:

"What I suspect the real cause of the majority of the issues is stems from the way that all of those 'parts' either have been put together and/or how they interact with one another."

Jack's story is brilliant horse shit :-)

You have to know what you're doing to get a good ride. Sure it's hard to get anything done when the saddle is bumping you in the ass.

-JH.

Carolly, the fact that I praised the writing didn't necessarily mean I agree 100% with the sentiment. I lack insider knowledge of CL, as perhaps Jack does, too. I recently revisited Twain's "A Fable" which is why his style of cynical allegory was on my mind. Jack's fable was a heck of a lot "classier" than, oh, 95% of the inane bitching I've read here since P5 release. I can appreciate a rebuttal, but thought you might appreciate my own elaboration. By the way, I don't think Mr. Clemens would have thought of himself as terribly "classy," even though in retrospect, he was. I know too many VERY computer-literate artists and programmers who are having problems with P5 to fall for the "blame the user" line that the same people keep repeating. The truth about the proggie seems to be somewhere in-between the extremes of blind dismissal of it, and constant dismissal of those having difficulties. I'm not quick to use lowbrow terms like "fanboy" or "apologist," but I admit it's sometimes as tempting to invoke them as it is "whiner" or "complaint addict." Sorry to be the voice of moderation. I know how boring that can be online.

"CL, using the same types of licensed technology, built a "monster" that, so far, has to be patched twice in so many months." M$ released 31 patches for my machine in the past 8 weeks, and it didn't seem to have anything to do with feature integration. but thanks for the explanation! cheers, -J

Some people had a hard time riding the horse out of the stable due to the new owner's lock. You see, even though the owner gave keys to the riders, some keys were bent and some were the wrong size for the opening. And, when some people tried to sit on the horse's new blanket, the horse would fall over. Some people could sit on the blanket fine, but for most people, the horse fell over. When riders complained about the horse falling over, other riders simply said that it was the rider's own fault: they didn't know this "new" horse or they didn't know how to ride it "correctly". Some people tried to push the horse and see how fast he could go. But, it seems the new shoes and sleeker saddle actually slowed down the horse! Only by removing these new options were people able to get the horse back up to its regular speed. And some people tried to look under the new blanket, only to discover the same bumps and sores as before. The loyal fans asked why the new owner didn't give the horse some medicine to fix the sore spots... especially before covering him with a brand-new blanket! Other people wondered why the new owners didn't just put the horse out to stud and build the new stables around the horse's son (same bloodline, same lineage, but younger, newer, better, and without the father's aging problems).

Wow, this is fun! here's another story. An owner was preparing a horse for a race. He took the temperature, checked the hoofs, and did his best to make the horse as prepared as possible. When the horse ran the race, he didn't place first. Later that night the owner found out the horse wasn't feeling well, and started to prepare medicine. The next morning the investors came by and shot the horse. The owner said "why did you do that!? the horse has won prizes for all of us in the past." The investors said, "The horse didn't look well, and we didn't want to wait for the medicine."

and we didn't want to wait for the medicine Or the medecine is too expensive (this is a racehorse right) and too difficult to swallow with no guaranees that the horse will survive or improve anyway.

medicine seems free so far :)

No medecine is free - least of all medecine that further harms the horse. And I was merely answering your analogy, not debating downloads. :)

ah well, hopefully they'll set up a system where any researcher can publically test the next medicine, and tell us all how it works :D har, no offense taken, just having fun with the analogy. cheers! -Josh

Well that would be nice wouldn't it? Instead of mad scientists plugging bloodhounds and beagles with needles and steel skull caps, we could stick the new medecine into someone more deserving and watch to see if they fall over frothing at the mouth. I much prefer that, in fact I can immediately think of a couple people who could do with that. One of them runs my country... It's unfortunate that testing medecine seems to be so lax these days. Stick it into some animal, if the animal doesn't die then it's good. Send out to the public, and when the public start falling over ill then pull it back and complain it was "production process" that altered the medecine to be so unpleasantly effective. Perhaps one day all treatments will be tested thoroughly rather than rushed through for profit, and patients won't have to suffer after effects and allergic reactions to the treatment so they can continue with their lives happily and without trouble. Ah, but such is the wonder of a dream, for it is able to touch on the impossible and the improbable, such as "good" treatment. Meanwhile we still have to be careful of poisoning, death, harmful side effects, allergic reactions and other unpleasantness from the "medecine" that is issued to cure the ills caused by this modern world. Me, I'm glad I'm not a horse, they don't get treated half as nicely as aliens. :)

williamsheil - "Implemented in a in inefficient, geometry only, and therefore limited way, also incompatible with most other apps."

I do not believe the Poser hair IS geometry based, if it was there would be no problem hooking it up to other programs. I am fairly sure it is based on a custom shader concept much like other systems of it's type.

williamsheil  - "That must be an Easter Egg. ;-) I've been limited to Firefly which was an attempt to implement a fast scan-line rendering technology with limited hybrid raytracing."

A scanline/raytrace hybrid is a fine and modern method of handling such things, the fact remains that Poser5 can do optically correct reflections, refractions and shadows. it lacks radiosity and GI, but then again so do many ray tracers.

Poppi - "seems as if they have only dug their hole deeper."

Except by all the information I can see Poser5 is a successful product. While a minority are having problems, many others are using the program and are happy with the features.

CL has a good basis here, and clearly they are stomping issues in a timely manner, this will work out just fine.

skee - "Great story Jack, I'm just sorry some people can't see ."

Maybe instead of thinking those of us who "can't see" blind, you may want to consider it simply isn't true for us :)

DTHUREGRIF - "I don't think anybody thinks it's wrong per se to license technology. There probably wouldn't be anything at all said if these great new features seemed like they were truly integrated into the program and really worked at the level promised. If that was the case, nobody would care."

Ok, I have to know, how much more integrated could the cloth dynamics engine be? I mean, where is the problematic "lack of integration".  Maybe it's because I understand the underlying technology but I cannot for the life of me see a better or more complete way to integrate it.

Feel free to do the same for hair, you or anyone. This is NOT a "do it better" rant, but an honest question - if the cloth room is badly integrated then perhaps you can tell me where the problem is?

Poppi - "seems as if they have only dug their hole deeper." Except by all the information I can see Poser5 is a successful product. While a minority are having problems, many others are using the program and are happy with the features. CL has a good basis here, and clearly they are stomping issues in a timely manner, this will work out just fine. cl has a good following, here...on this site. they had a chance to come out and really SHINE....instead, they rushed production. this is not good business. word of mouth, especially on the internet, counts alot. you've got a business, too, soul...you know that. and, the only reason i can see for them releasing it before the bugs were fixed is .....lack of funds. if the cloth room is badly integrated then perhaps you can tell me where the problem is? i don't have p5. if folks had had a better time of using it, i would have shrugged off my questions about the new eula, and gotten it. i WANTED that face room. by the way, i hear that does not work too well. i did not want the strand based hair. i did not want the "cloth room"....drape is a simple command in my modelling program...if i want to drape vicki...i can drape her, there, and export the whole thing. and, maybe, that is why the cloth room works well....drape is a simple command. the hair looks really ugly, to me. but, halloween is coming and folks could have fun making cousin it look a likes. rendering...i did not really WANT p5 for that...i use bryce, pretty much always. the shape shifter....i did not want that...i have zbrush, and rhino to morph stuff. textures...i have deep paint, and zbrush for that..... but, i wanted that FACE ROOM. and i WANTED to see cool new p5 stuff in the gallery....not happening. i will wait....a few years....and, maybe i will luck out and pick up a copy of p5 at compusa for $89 dollars, like i did with bryce 5. but, this is not good business for cl. folks like me could be sending in our money...as we speak. they got their initial buyers....and those initial buyers had big troubles...so, the rest of us...who would wait a bit before buying are now not buying...even if we WANTED stuff.

Heh heh. Jack, you should have titled the essay "With all this horseshit around, you just knew there had to be a pony someplace!" ;]

"What happened in the past with Willow and Grey and others is long past. I believe this story is an excellent metaphor for what we are living through right now." I know you have had problems with P5 and sympathize. Of course, my point was not to revisit those past controversies, but note that in every one of them, a great many people had a great many opinions about them, almost always on the basis of hearsay. Jack's story is very nice, but if he had the actual facts to back up his underlying theory, he would have written non-fiction. To put it more bluntly, I rhetorically ask someone, anyone, to provide the data showing the percentage of P5 users that have had problems of the magnitude that you have experienced. Complaints in the forum are clearly not a scientific sample; we all know that people are more likely to make an effort to complain (and rightly so, because none of us expects to have the sort of problems you have had). Soulhuntre suggests it's a minority with problems, but I have no way of verifying that either. And to anticipate those who will respond that only CL has that data and the burden should be on them, I say that you would be proving my point. The non-CL members here simply do not have such information, and certainly don't know whether Jack's parable is an accurate metaphor. Want a specific example? In Jack's story: "Mr. Ripple and the man had an idea. If they could get other horses and expand the stables, they might be able to get more money. He and the owner of the horse worked hard together and began to expand their stables and get more horses. Both were really happy and had big dreams for their stables." How about this version instead: "Mr. Ripple liked the horse, but the man told him it wouldn't be in shape for another race for a couple of years. Mr. Ripple told the man he would like to help the man get the horse back on its hooves, but could not pay the man just to care for the horse for two years. So Mr. Ripple told the man he would give the man the money to care for the horse if the man would also raise other horses that could race and make money for them while the horse was being rehabilitated. The man had very mixed feelings about the situation, but Mr. Ripple was the only person interested in saving the horse from death. So he made the deal, and tried his best to raise other profitable horses, even though this dragged out the rehabilitation period for the horse." That's a different story, isn't it? Which one is a more accurate parable? I don't know, you don't know, and the man probably isn't going to incur the wrath of Mr. Ripple if mine is more accurate.

Poppi - " word of mouth, especially on the internet, counts alot. you've got a business, too, soul...you know that. and, the only reason i can see for them releasing it before the bugs were fixed is .....lack of funds."

From what I can see the "word of mouth" about Poser5 is pretty good. Sure some folks don't like it but that is generally the way with new releases. The positive buzz around the patches has done a lot to alleviate the fear that CL will be leaving users out in the lurch. The new features are catching on, the volumetrics stuff is nice and the whole Poser experience is looking bright.

For that matter, I don't see all that many huge bugs in the thing, nor did I see any "show stopper" blue screen level bugs reported during the beta test (yeah, I was part of it), so while Poser was shipped with some known bugs, to imply that it was knowingly shipped with major bugs is simply a falsehood.

 As for the rest of your comments, you are welcome to not LIKE the new features, but if you are going to claim they are "badly integrated" it might help if you had actually even seen them :)

kblade: It's not just big bugs that are the problem with P5. I said in an earlier thread that, even if I didn't have problems, I'd still be pissed. This is because the core P4 program is old and, IMO, unstable...its interface is outdated and klunky...and they didn't even fix the old bugs fer cryin' out loud! They promised us a "brand new program," "built from the ground up." So we waited and waited and waited. "It'll be ready when it's ready," we were told. And I don't remember any big push to get P5 out. Hell, if someone even asked, "Any news on P5?" he got jumped on by members with "be patient!" "Give them time, we don't want another P4 fiasco," "They're doing it right this time," etc. Finally, with much hoop-dee-rah and fanfare, they trotted out the same old beaten down horse with a pretty, new blanket and sadle thrown over it.