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

“The fact that no one understands you…Doesn’t make you an artist.”

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.

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.

mateo_sancarlos > Maybe it'll set a precedent for even more parables or sermons in the future.

You want a sermon? ;)

hmmm.... Isn't this plagiarizm?

Jackson, do you mean my story as being plagiarizm?

hehe very good

The Art Door and Rendervisions Community.
For Artists By Artists

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

NOTE: No trees were killed in the sending of this message, but a large
number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

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". ;)

Yarp - author of P3DO Organizer for Poser

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

reiss,

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!" ;]

"I am a good person now and it feels... well, pretty much the same as I felt before (except that the headaches have gone away now that I'm not wearing control top pantyhose on my head anymore)"

Monkeysmell

"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.

Jackson: Perhaps I am more cynical than most, but I was under the impression that the CL crew working on P5 was largely the same crew that worked on P4, so it didn't surprise me that some of the things that bug me about P4 (some of which I would classify as bugs, some not) reappeared in the first P5 release, whether they reused code or just the coders. I would agree with you as far as stability issues go. Reusing code in itself wouldn't bother me in the slightest...to the extent that it works. I am not (and have not been) sure what you mean about an "outdated" interface; klunky I understand as meaning not easy to work with, and that can be a matter of taste. I also have a hard time reconciling the "pretty blanket" metaphor with the complaints about the interface, unless you're referring to the box art. However, the complaints you mention are only a part of what Jack was driving at, which was a broad critique of CL's business plan. And it is that sort of critique, absent any detailed knowledge of the situation, to which my original post was addressed. In thinking about the recent tumult, it occurred to me that if CL had called ProPack Poser 4.5, they could have decreased the anticipation level for P5 and increased CL's profits. With additional bucks from P4.5, they could have spent more time on P5. I'll bet just about every CL employee has had that thought in the last month or two...but now I'm the one second guessing CL's business strategy. Must be catching;-)

xoconostle, We need all the moderation we can get... given the number of unthinking idiots following marshlights into the swamps or jumping off battlements whenever an irresponsible firebrand craves attention. I especially savor the complaints from people who haven't even seen the program, much less had their hands on it. :shrug one shoulder: Clemens was a story-teller, but he didn't pose as a cynic for cynicism's sake or tell a story to enlarge himself in the eyes of his audience or raise a controversy just to be embroiled in the middle of yet another storm. I used to own 21 of the 25 volumes of the collected Mark Twain, and enjoyed reading most of them. Tales about the human condition, such as he told, require a dry wit and light hand to do well. Fables, parables, and sermons succeed when they are humorous and fail when they are too didactic. Some of us don't like preaching no matter how it's packaged. Carolly

kblade: If they didn't reuse code, then the coders rewrote multiplying magnets, the same lousy memory management, and many other P4 problems. No matter though, it still isn't what was promised. Outdated interface=out of sheer laziness or ineptness, keeping the old P4 interface and not using the Windows api. Yes, I know the bugs are only part of the story, I was just responding to your first response to my response to you :) I don't know how much "inside information" Jack has but his story--to me--appears to mirror what's happened to Poser and CL.

Was P4PP not a separate purchase and gave CL additional cash inflow? Therefore, calling it P4.5 or whatever would not have accomplished much more than what it did.

Jackson: I might prefer that CL used the Windows API, but that was just as true of P4 as it is of P5. And while I would tend to put that more in the "klunky" category, than the "outdated" category (since the Windows API was always there to be used), my understanding is that historically, this has to do with cross-platform issues. Also, your last msg makes my point. You don't know what, if anything Jack knows about the stiuation. I would submit that if Jack had any inside info, he would be sharing it. Jack has been called many things over the years; "shy" is not one of them. Yet he has presented nothing (and, I note, chosen to disappear from this thread). Again, I agree with some of your complaints, and I think reasonable people can differ over some of the others. But Jack taking a cutesy shot at CL's business plan when he doesn't even know what it was or is, strikes me as cheap. His story "looks" true to you; I already posted a very different version that could be true. I try to base my opinions on evidence; others are free not to, and often do. CyberStretch: "Was P4PP not a separate purchase and gave CL additional cash inflow? Therefore, calling it P4.5 or whatever would not have accomplished much more than what it did." No, if CL had marketed it as P4.5, more people would have bought it, as demonstrated in part by the greater sales of P5 in relation to Pro Pack. Marketing something as an optional add-on simply will not generate the volume of sales you would get marketing it as the new base product. Had CL treated ProPack as P4.5, they could have charged everyone more to upgrade to P5, because the P4PP people had to get a deal since they subsidized the development of a number of the new features in P5. Alternatively, CL could have charged more for people who did not buy P4.5 to upgrade to P5 on the ground that you were really buying 2 upgrades. Plus, the expectation level would not have been as high, because everyone wouldn't have waited as long for the new version of Poser. The product cycle would have looked much more like the regular, incremental upgrading that so many other apps (Photoshop, for example) go through. The only reason I even dipped my toe in the pool of second guessing was to point out that one of the implied theses of Jack's parable -- that CL was eager to put out these other products (at the expense of Poser) "just to make more money" -- is readily disprovable. If CL had treated ProPack as P4.5, Jack's whole analogy falls apart, because then the man isn't neglecting the horse.

What I've done is shared a story, nothing more, nothing less. People are able to interpret that story however they see fit. Whether it is about a horse, a car, a coffee maker or Poser. I don't feel the need to have to defend my story, or opinion or provide to anyone my reason or desire for writing said story. My opinions regarding CL and Poser 5 are my own and are not subject for debate and I have the ability to state those opinions, if I so desired too, in whatever form that I felt necessary, as clearly as anyone else is allowed in this thread. In regard to CL... I HIGHLY and SINCERELY doubt that myself, Steve Cooper, Egi-Sys and the entire staff at CL would like to see me post publicly whatever "insider" information that I have. I gave my word to Mr. Cooper that I would not share or disclose any of that information and I sincerely hope that he appreciates the fact that I WILL NOT do so, even despite whatever displeasure I may have. I gave my word and I intend to keep that word. For all you know, my story could hold meaning for any given situation or subject in my own life and my desire to share it in the Poser Forum was because that is where all of my friends hang out. It could've been about my car, my family life, my trouble with rediscovering my Muse, or, yes, it could even about Poser 5. Only I know the true reason behind my writting this story, and I find it very interesting to see how people digest it, debate it and even find parallels to subjects that matter to the reader and not just the writer. You can feel free to debate the nature of my artwork (this story) here, however, any opinion that I might've had regarding the reason for this story is not open for debate and nor is my focus or opinion expressed in this story going to change. Jack

"What I've done is shared a story, nothing more, nothing less. People are able to interpret that story however they see fit. Whether it is about a horse, a car, a coffee maker or Poser." Semi cop out :) Now I agree your opinion is your own to share, but you cannot say that the story itself was not intended as an editorial comment about Poser5... because it clearly was. "art" does not exist in a vacuum, it exists in a context - and the context of posting it here and now when taken witht he context of your other comments makes the story deliberately suitable for a specific parralel to be drawn. So i defend your right to an opinion, but don't pretend any Poser5 editorializing were only int he mind of the reader... because it simply isn't true. You know it, and we know it :)

Legume........... I liked your story much better.

Yeah, I liked Legume's better also... but then again, I usually do. And Jack's response is not a semi-cop-out, it's a total cop-out. And note that Jack now claims to have inside information, but says he promised kupa he wouldn't reveal it... it's a very convenient position. But it is why he's now trying to pretend the story wasn't about CL, because the implication is that the story is based on this information that he is sworn not to reveal. So why write the story and put it in this forum in the first place? There are plenty of other sites that cater to fiction writers. There is even a writer's forum at this site, but Jack chose to put it here. But I thank Jack for his evasive non-defense of his cheap innuendo, for he has revealed it as such more effectively than I could have by myself. Which, incidentally, is why I noted his disappearance in my prior msg...I suspected he would rise to the bait.

Perhaps the reason why I've refrained from responding to this post that I've made is because I choose to believe that the people that read these forums and visit these sites are intelligent enough to make their own decisions or formulate their opinions about things that matter to them. Why waste my time coming into this thread and having a huge debate with you Kbade? What would it solve or for what purpose? Obviously, I've my own opinion and you've got your's. What point would it be for me to sit here and waste my time arguing with you or trying to change your opinion? Other than a waste of time, what would it serve? Unlike you, I'd prefer to credit the individuals who read these threads capable to make their own decision about whatever matters to them and they don't need any poking and proding from me to make those decisions. Nor do they need me to sit there and try to argue my own beliefs or convictions (whatever they may be) with them to try and "convert" them to my way of thinking. I have my opinions, whether you agree with them or not, based on situations that have, do or will affect me, now, in the past or future. The knowledge that I have helps to establish that belief and none of you need me sharing any of that with you, for you to make your own assumptions or opinions. My opinion may be right, or your's may be. Hell, both of our opinions may be right... for ourselves. Why waste my time debating something that I am set on? Why waste your time? Why sit there and try to find ways to try and "provoke" me to explain my beliefs or opinions. I am not out to change anyone's opinion... I am just out to express my opinion and move on. Jack

The only point I have been making throughout this thread is that people are free to have beliefs and convictions and be set on them, but if they want to express them publicly, they can expect to be asked about the basis for them. Many people like to have beliefs, convictions and opinions that have no factual basis, and in such cases, Jack is absolutely right, it is a waste of time to debate them.

Of course, Jack did just say that he was just writing a story, and that it wasn't about Poser, so I guess I'm wondering how convictions and opinons came into it.

That would be "opinions." Sorry I missed that.

Attached Link: interesting reading on the new p5 eula

"No, if CL had marketed it as P4.5, more people would have bought it, as demonstrated in part by the greater sales of P5 in relation to Pro Pack." Incorrect presumption. A .x release is a minor release and not a new product. Since the only value added was a few features needed mostly by Professionals (hence the PRO in Pro Pack), CL could not have gotten away with stating that the Pro Pack was anywhere near a new release nor even applicable for their larger hobbyist user base. Jack has admitted to being one of the beta testers, like many others. To presume he has "inside information" would be a likely case; ignoring the fact that he has a history in the community to base his convictions, opinions, etc, off as well. Just like the presumption that he is bound by the NDA, as the rest of them are, not to disclose certain information would be logical to presume. Most NDAs' "authority" ends when the product has been released. Yet, it would seem CL took extra measures to ensure that "silence is golden" even after release. Perhaps you would like to disclose your involvement and where you get your information from for the public scrutiny of the community? He who is without sin be the first to cast a stone. - Paraphrased from a major religious text.

Jack. If you thought: "I choose to believe that the people that read these forums and visit these sites are intelligent enough to make their own decisions or formulate their opinions about things" Then why post that antagonistically written nightmare you call a "STORY"? And proceed to insult our "intelligence". After all....we're intelligent enough to know when someone is ranting. Even if it's 10 paragraphs long. You just said so yourself. Can't you visit these places without stirring up trouble? This is a software forum. It's not the school playground. ScottA

This is a software forum. It's not the school playground. ROTFLMAO Looks around.. scratches head snicker wanders off to find something that doesn't resemble a school playground. :)

"Then why post that antagonistically written nightmare you call a "STORY"? " Why not? wanders off after Questor

"I am a good person now and it feels... well, pretty much the same as I felt before (except that the headaches have gone away now that I'm not wearing control top pantyhose on my head anymore)"

Monkeysmell

Hehe, bye Questor and Ironbear. See ya later, when you are back. ;)

"Why not?" "This is a software forum. It's not the school playground." I hate to repeat myself. ;-)

This is a software forum. It's not the school playground Erm.... heheh... Naaaahhhhh. wanders off and tries to figure out which turn brought him back here... damn playground, too many corners. smirk

"Incorrect presumption. A .x release is a minor release and not a new product. Since the only value added was a few features needed mostly by Professionals (hence the PRO in Pro Pack), CL could not have gotten away with stating that the Pro Pack was anywhere near a new release nor even applicable for their larger hobbyist user base." First, it you scroll back to post #54, you'll see the little ;-) emoticon at the end of the paragraph, which ought to be a tip-off that I was kidding in that paragraph. That being said, I agree that it's generally true that .x release is a minor release, but if you take a look at reviews for 2 of Adobe's flagships, Photoshop and Premiere, you'll find complaints that PS7 is not really a major release, and raves for the major additions mad in Premiere 6.5. Moreover, the release of P5 demonstrates that CL is trying to position Poser as an app for hobbyist and pro alike. Accordingly, issuing ProPack as P4.5 would have been consistent with that strategy. And if you want to argue that even a minor release would have sold more than a product expressly marketed as unnecessary to most of the customer base (despite the fact that P5 ultimately incorporated may ProPack features), be my guest. "Jack has admitted to being one of the beta testers, like many others. To presume he has "inside information" would be a likely case; ignoring the fact that he has a history in the community to base his convictions, opinions, etc, off as well. Just like the presumption that he is bound by the NDA, as the rest of them are, not to disclose certain information would be logical to presume. Most NDAs' "authority" ends when the product has been released. Yet, it would seem CL took extra measures to ensure that "silence is golden" even after release." If you care to search this very forum, you'll find beta testers stating on the record that they didn't see any of the major problems some users have experienced. And since Jack has been typing out of both sides of his keyboard in this very thread -- it's just a story, no, wait, it's my conviction, no, wait, it's my legal duty -- his claim rings hollow. If Jack has some smoking gun based on inside info, he'll do the community a favor by becoming the named plaintiff in a class action against CL by P5 users, rather than claim to be bound by an NDA, then write "stories" that he apparently believes violate that NDA, which is why he then retreats back to th "only a story" defense. I will certainly agree that Jack has a history in the community, though Jackson certainly didn't want me to discuss it. "Perhaps you would like to disclose your involvement and where you get your information from for the public scrutiny of the community?" Ah, yes, I was waiting for the unsupported attack on my credibility. For the record, I have no connection to CL or any of it's employees, other than as a customer. In fact, my only communication with CL in years was to e-mail them that Airborne failed to deliver my copy of P5 on time. They promptly and more than adequately addressed that complaint, even though Airborne was primarily at fault. That would be the extent of my bias. As for where I get my information, I get it from many sources which are publicly available. In this post, the Photoshop review I believe can be found at zdnet.com, the Premiere review at creativepro.com, and the comments of the beta testers are here at R'osity. Again, one of my major points, should you bother to read my posts, is that people should base their opinions on what they know, and if they want to go public with their opinions, they should expect that people might ask for the basis of those opinions. My posts are not intended to defend CL as much as they are to request that people who want to criticize or attack CL state their reasons. For example, if you go back to read this thread, you will find that Jackson and I have a number of areas of agreement, because Jackson can actually identify the facts that back up his criticisms. If Jack's opinion is based on information gained under an NDA, he probably shouldn't be writing thinly veiled screeds against CL based on that information, should he?

with a full cast of weasels...what can we expect next? the longest thread in poser history? wouldn't THAT be special? cl f'cked up in their strategy. they waited too long, then, promised too much before they could rationally deliver. as for jack's thread...well, hey, now...if any of us poser peons had posted a similar thread, here at our ever-so-caring renderosity....it would have been sent to the o.t. forum before your head could spin around 4 times, exorcist style....why did jack get special treatment...'cause he's from the bad old days. that gets deference. is p5 gonna bring poser into the "serious applications"..."professional applcations"? hell, no. check out some of the "real" modellers on the market.

'cause he's from the bad old days. that gets deference ROTFLMAO I'm sorry Poppi, but I reckon you're wrong there. I know of several people who would be more than joyous to see Jack kidnapped by aliens and removed permanently from the face of the planet. The only deference he gets here and at other sites is that he's not shy of saying "Oi, that's not fair." :) Wow, special deference for Jack at 'rosity. I'll bet the owners are spinning in horror at that one. LOL

Yeah.....stupid moderators........Dog pile on the moderators!!!! Hey over here! This person knows one of the programmers....I'll hold him down...... You Get Him!! Steve Cooper was last reported boarding a plane to Germany with nothing but brief cases for luggage.....Get his flight number so we can nail him at the airport! Crazy pills for everyone. On me! No need for pushing and shoving. Theres Plenty to go around. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

. I'll bet the owners are spinning in horror at that one. LOL ya think??? i'd love a render of that. Crazy pills for everyone. On me! oh, wow...and, free, even...i'll take many, thank you. :*)

e-mail Congress; they're working on it;-)

"And if you want to argue that even a minor release would have sold more than a product expressly marketed as unnecessary to most of the customer base (despite the fact that P5 ultimately incorporated may ProPack features), be my guest." If P4PP was more of an "upgrade" than an add-on, I am sure that it would have been marketed as such. Say anything you wish about CL, but their marketing skills seem to be well above par, regardless of the failures in other areas. P5 does not incorporate the main consideration (and most likely, the biggest push) for purchasing P4PP - import and export, from what I have been reading. Although that is forthcoming, CL did not state that they would not release that as P5PP or offer it as a "patch" to the general populace of P5 users. "Ah, yes, I was waiting for the unsupported attack on my credibility." No attack on your credibility, supported or not. Basically, you are asking Jack to defend himself and the statements, opinions, etc, in his posts. However, I would surmise that neither you nor Jack personally know one another, yet you continually attack his character and motivations. So, is this a case of "pot calling the kettle black"? "Again, one of my major points, should you bother to read my posts, is that people should base their opinions on what they know, and if they want to go public with their opinions, they should expect that people might ask for the basis of those opinions." And get labelled as "unsupported[ly] attack[ing] [someone's] credibility" when you ask them to clarify? To me, it seems your keyboard has two outputs as well. "If Jack's opinion is based on information gained under an NDA, he probably shouldn't be writing thinly veiled screeds against CL based on that information, should he?" That presumes his post was entirely concieved and written based upon what he learned by way of agreeing to the NDA; which his long involvement with Poser and the community would dispute. Also, it depends on the verbiage and intent of the NDA. As a lawyer (or so I gather from your EULA posts), you should know that any agreement has inherent loopholes, which lawyers and certain individuals can use to their advantage until they are patched. If people can circumvent the laws legally, why not a simple NDA; if that is the case at all?

The dino getting confused with all the twisted words and implications? :0)

Hosting Poser scenes in Lightwave etc. is certainly a major feature of ProPack, but whether it is the main feature depends on usage. Animators might view the simultaneous multi-view, motion blur, and character setup features as equally important...and those features are in P5. As to whether CL is good at marketing, I would say they have generally been very good at staying in touch with forums like this one, but in moving to position Poser as equally valuable to pros as hobbyists, they've undertaken a difficult task that is difficult to market. Certainly some of the complaints about P5 (though not all) are from hobbyists who didn't understand that a firefly render was going to take a lot longer than a P4 render and that you can't just leave all of the maps set to their P4 settings and expect a quality result. kupa did a good job of getting everyone hereexcited about all of the new P5 features, but he may not have stressed the learning curve sufficiently, which only added to their current PR problems. You asked: "Perhaps you would like to disclose your involvement and where you get your information from for the public scrutiny of the community?" I apologize if that was not meant as an attack on my credibility. However, my point was that people who want to launch an attack ought to be able to back it up...in what way does my involvement or sources of information matter to that point? It was in the context of that question in my mind that led me, perhaps erroneously, to believe that you were looking for a motive. Jack, on the other hand, neither wants to apologize or even discuss what he has written. As for whether Jack's story is related to information obtained under an NDA, or the scope of said NDA, I must confess that I have no idea; you were the one who brought up the NDA. Jack wrote that "he gave [his] word to Mr. Cooper that I would not share or disclose any of that [insider] information." Regardless of whether he's referring to an NDA signed as a beta tester, the principle is the same: if you promise not to disclose information, should you then write a story, then mention that you have such information in the course of attempting to justify yourself? As for attacking Jack's character and motivations, it might help you to actually read what I have written. In post 29, I specifically state that I never formed an opinion regarding some of the prior controversies with which he is involved, and did not have a probem when he took this site commercial. I did write that I was baffled that he would want to stir the pot after having been more conciliatory recently, but my "involvement in the community" is sufficiently long that I can state without fear of contradiction that there was a ton of flaming and venom when he originally took the helm here all those years ago. I didn't say that he was solely responsible for it, but I think it is beyond dispute that it existed. In post 51 I wrote nothing that could be viewed as attacking Jack's character or motive. To the contrary, I attempted to repeat to Jackson that such was not intended in post 29. Post 54 is much the same, again not criticizing Jack so much as pointing out that he has no facts backing up his veiled critique of CL's business strategy. In post 58, I wrote: "I would submit that if Jack had any inside info, he would be sharing it. Jack has been called many things over the years; "shy" is not one of them. Yet he has presented nothing (and, I note, chosen to disappear from this thread)." Again, my main point. And I think it is beyond dispute that Jack has been called many things over the years, though never by me, I would note. I don't consider not being shy to be an attack; I consider that a compliment. And when I wrote, it was true that Jack had chosen not to contribute to the thread. In post 62 I criticize Jack's response, not Jack. And I think that criticism is entirely valid. He does not want to state the basis for his opinions, or even discuss his opinions. Jack wrote that he wants to express his opinions and move on. However, in those past controversies that I am not supposed to mention, I distinctly recall Jack being willing to respond to attacks that he thought were unfair, so he should not be surprised that I and others have responded as we have. Until Jack started posting these more recent messages, I had thought that perhaps he would respond as he had in the past and we all could have learned something, but no such luck. Rest assured, if Jack comes after CyberStretch, I will respect his wishes and not ask Jack to support whatever mud he wants to sling.

kbade, Just so you do not think I am avoiding the questions, I think this line of discussion is only leading into personal grounds which would be inappropriate. My point is that if you also contribute to the discussion, your involvement lends itself to scrutiny as well. Expecting one thing from one member and not the same from others is hardly equitable; even of the "other" is you (meaning the person making the post). You can only beat a dead horse for so long before there is nothing left to swing at.

You know, KBade made a very good point when he sat there and said: "Jack has been called many things over the years; "shy" is not one of them." KBade is right, I have always taken great measure to inform the Community about things that affect them to the best of my ability, whether Community members agree with what I say or what the companies may think. I used to be very free and honest with the Community about my feelings on issues that I thought were important, despite whatever harm it might cause me. For some reason, I've been very (gun)shy lately and I guess it kinda really hinders my ability to be honest with myself and with the Community. So with that said, I will be preparing a statement in the next couple of days as to my feelings/Experience with CL and Poser 5. I will probably get hammered on for doing so, but I really think it is time someone speaks up without fear of no longer being supported by Curious Labs... and since they hate me now and no longer support me, I guess it is up to me. Be prepared, though, it wont be pretty. Jack

Just make sure it conforms to the TOS, and it should probably be put in the OT forum, since it will be moved there anyway. :0)

It wont be posted here on Renderosity. Since I am not a part of Renderosity outside of just being a member. I will, however, post the relative link to my statement at the various websites so that those interested can partake in it, without it reflecting on Renderosity or any other website that is heavily supportive of or controlled by CL. Jack

"or controlled by CL" Which sites are controlled by CL, Jack? -JH.

Content Paradise would be one. Though it isn't a forum based website or even open yet. So none as of yet, but that could always change, couldn't it Jeff?? Jack

"A politician wants police to ban sweets in the shape of penises from Blackpool's seafront. Councillor Mary Smith says Blackpool should copy Southport and launch a crackdown on obscene confectionery sold in shops. Sweet shop bosses in Southport were furious after police ordered them to remove the rude sweets from public view. The manager of the Southport Rock Shop, who did not wish to be named, told the Blackpool Evening Gazette: "Two male officers came in here and ordered me to take all the rock willies out of the window. "They said the rock boobs could stay because they hadn't received any complaints about them." "I am absolutely fuming. I can't believe, with all the youth crime and shoplifting that goes on here, the police are choosing to spend their time worrying about rock willies." The Evening Gazette says several seafront shops in Blackpool sell the same saucy rock shapes. Councillor Smith is calling for the police to take the same stance as their Southport counterparts. She said: "These items are disgusting and give the town a bad image. Who wants to see this sort of thing when they are walking along the promenade with their children? It's OK for the stag and hen parties but it's putting the families off. "If the police can do this in Southport why can't they do it here? I have already spoken to the chief executive about this. If we have got to get a byelaw to do this then let's get one." If you outlaw candied penises, only outlaws will have candied penises. I have NO idea why I thought that fit here, but with all the dicking around lately in these forums, it seemed singularly appropriate...

"I am a good person now and it feels... well, pretty much the same as I felt before (except that the headaches have gone away now that I'm not wearing control top pantyhose on my head anymore)"

Monkeysmell

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: Just an Interesting Story...