billc@cryo.UUCP (William J. Coldwell) (05/28/91)
In article <1991May24.005621.3479@techbook.com> waynekn@techbook.com (Wayne Knapp) writes: >billc@cryo.UUCP (William J. Coldwell) writes: > >>In article <192b5f2f.ARN0fef@cbmami.UUCP> jason@cbmami.UUCP (Jason Goldberg) writes: >>> >>> Obviously Jman's use of spines makes it a very interesting product >>>to us, but they won't sell it to us! We called up to order two units and >>>we were informed that they will not sell to dealers, they offer better >>>pricing to end users at shows than they offered us. Further they told us >>>that their users were to upscale to purchase from dealers. > >>Generally, this is a good cover for "we can make a better mark up selling >>directly to end users than we can selling to distributors and dealers". >>Remember, I said "generally". Sometimes this method is used when the >>marketroids feel that the product doesn't compete on a 1:? level with >>other new/established products. Sometimes it's used to give the "aura" >>of being more that it is. Sometimes.. ;-) > >That is pure bull. "GENERALLY" for those of you who have their shades on. > Clearly you haven't experience in buying or selling high-end software. Why no Wayne, I wouldn't have ANY experience in that area. (sarcasm alert - run for cover (or at least .advocacy!)) > Many of the best packages available are not sold via dealers. Depends on your dealers and your package. There are some very excellent Amiga packages out there that are handled by educated and experienced dealers. This is also implying that your package is "best". >Besides, going though dealers increases the cost of the product. Hmm. I find it cheaper to go through dealers or (ack!) mail order than to do direct to the source. >The only >reason why we can affort to support a program like Animation:Jounery is that >we have very, very low overhead. This is done by: > > 1. Keeping advertising/promotions to a minimum. None - that's about as minimum as you can get. > 2. Selling directly as possible. You sell _only_ direct. >$500 is very cheap for a program (really a complete set of programs) like >Animation:Jounreyman. It's not what you sell it for, it's what it is worth to the user. >AutoDesk's simalar system sell for $2995. Is that >the kind of pricing you want? Who is selling more? I'll put my money on AutoDesk. Price is not the issue. >Again the beef is not the price, the beef is that Jason is upset because we >sell the program for the same price to everyone. There is nothing to stop >dealers from buying Jouneryman for $500 and selling for whatever price they >can! I recall some "personalized" protection involved here. Besides, it was also the fact that "dealers" were out of the question in general. > What Jason wants is for us to sell him Jouneryman for say $250 and then >he could sell it for say $400. Gee, that sounds so unreasonable? That means that I would probably pay ~$300 for it mail-order. >At that rate, our sales would have to increase by ten times before we would >make any money. Too much of a challenge? ;-) >Why should we give away our modest profit? To sell the 10x more that you need to when you lower the price. >Almost all of our money goes back into the product. Yeh, you probably spend at most $40 on the whole package. The main cost is feeding your developers (and we haven't heard too much from Ken lately - did he die from starvation? ;-)) The whole 3DPro1.0 package cost ~$40, and I can't fathom that your packaging is more extensive. >The only change we have made in pricing is NO DISCOUNTS to dealers. That doesn't sound like a change at all. That was the issue to begin with. >People are >welcome to resale the program, but they are going to lose money if they sell >it less for less than we do. Don't worry, they won't. >The facts are, that direct sells have always accounted for a very large part >of our sales. In fact we seldom made money on software sales to distributors/ >dealers. This is even worse now that so many of the Amiga distributors have >gone belly up! Second it is very hard to get distributors and dealers to >pay. They often delay paying and then later just return "used" software. Hmm. If this were the case, then all of the Amiga developers who went through distributors/direct dealers would be in the same position. This just isn't the case. See above statement about "worth". >I hate to think of how many months by royality checks were extremely hurt by >these returns. Why not find out why they couldn't sell it, instead of returning it? >So we just cut that bad end of the business. Now we sell to everyone for the >same price. You might just be at the wrong "end". >>> It seems to me that Martin is doing a diservice to his product and >>>his end-users (both current and future). Would you rather purchase a $500 >>>package after getting a hands on demo from someone who really knows the >>>products and is farmiliar with its strengths and weaknesess relative to the >>>other products available? > >>Good point. I'll reserve any comments on this subject. ;-) > >We are not doing any diservice to anyone. People who want Jman buy it. We >are not out to rip people off. In fact, it is very hard to buy Jman on >impluse. Most people think about spending $500 if they have to make a phone >call to do it. You are still expecting people to plop down $500 "sight-unseen". Dealers give you that extra sales staff (when they are educated in your product). >(Well maybe we are doing a diservice to dealers, since they >can no longer sell the program to end-users for less than we do. Then again >why should allow dealers to make more money than we do on sales that they are >under-cutting us on?) You seem to be missing the point on how dealers work in this grand scheme of selling products. You would be making the most money since your sales would be direct. Your dealers would make the next largest amount, then your distributors, then mail order houses. It's all based on quanity and quality. >>>Perhaps they don't want their ray-tracing engine >>>compared side-by-side to Imagines... > >>Impulse has been in the ray tracing game longer than Hash, and that makes >>a difference. Martin (IMHO) appears to be heading down the road of "let's >>make the Amiga into some high-end animation workstation". At least the >>features of his program tend to lead me to that conclusion. The only >>problem with this approach is that you tend to leave the mid-level >>renderer/animators out of the picture due to price and machine requirements. > >No. We are doing animation period. There is no high-end animation work- >station kind of thing going on around here. That's too bad, I thought that there was a direction that he was heading. >So many people are hung up on ray-tracing. But the render is only 1/7 of >our Animation:Journeyman. (And it is really improved in the new 1.3 version.) That's also too bad, since the output is everything. I'm not hung up on Ray Tracing, that was last year... I'm hung up on Radiosity and Photo- realism this year, so we'll have a Radiosity renderer available early '92. >There are a lot of things we do that you would spend years trying to do on >a pure ray-tracer package. Your "years" differ from mine ;-). >However, rather than go that direction, let me >say again that we are not a ray-tracing company but instead our focus is >computer animation. Then why was that option put in? Seems that if you didn't want to enter the ray-tracing arena you wouldn't have a ray tracer. That's even what AmigaWorld thought when they put JMan up there with 3DPro, Imagine, and LightWave (which is not an RT - I hate comparing Macs and Oranges). >waynekn@techbook.COM ...!{tektronix!nosun,uunet}techbook!waynekn -- William J. Coldwell PLink: CRYO I'm a 3-DPro, wouldn't you Amiga Attitude Adjuster BIX: wjcoldwell like to be a 3-DPro2 ? Cryogenic Software UUCP:billc@cryo 3-D PROFESSIONAL 2.0 #define STD_DSCLMR "The above opinions are mine. You can't have them."
waynekn@techbook.com (Wayne Knapp) (05/30/91)
billc@cryo.UUCP (William J. Coldwell) writes: >In article <1991May24.005621.3479@techbook.com> waynekn@techbook.com (Wayne Knapp) writes: >>billc@cryo.UUCP (William J. Coldwell) writes: .>>directly to end users than we can selling to distributors and dealers". .>>Remember, I said "generally". Sometimes this method is used when the .>>marketroids feel that the product doesn't compete on a 1:? level with .>>other new/established products. Sometimes it's used to give the "aura" .>>of being more that it is. Sometimes.. ;-) .> .>That is pure bull. >Depends on your dealers and your package. There are some very excellent >Amiga packages out there that are handled by educated and experienced >dealers. This is also implying that your package is "best". While there a lot of software on the Amiga, esp. relating to graphics, there is really very little highend software. Take packages like TIPS, Alias, Wavefront, Pixar Renderman render and you see very few of these in dealers. Even the higher end software the Amiga does have is hard to get through dealers. (examples are Carigali, Animation:Jouneryman, TAD; all three which have been in the Commodore booth at Siggraph before.) >>Besides, going though dealers increases the cost of the product. >Hmm. I find it cheaper to go through dealers or (ack!) mail order than >to do direct to the source. This is because most distributors require a 60% discount off the price that the product is listed to sell for. So most people that go through dealers and distributors set the list price of the product 2.5x greater than the real price. That would mean that Animation:Jouneryman would list for $1250, still cheap for a full package, but alot for an Amiga program. However, we decided to sell direct to customers for the same price as dealers, hence the current price of $500. A dealer always marks up the price of software, how else can he make a living. Most companies don't sell direct, but we do. That is the difference. >>The only >>reason why we can affort to support a program like Animation:Jounery is that >>we have very, very low overhead. This is done by: >> >> 1. Keeping advertising/promotions to a minimum. >None - that's about as minimum as you can get. >> 2. Selling directly as possible. >You sell _only_ direct. >>$500 is very cheap for a program (really a complete set of programs) like >>Animation:Jounreyman. >It's not what you sell it for, it's what it is worth to the user. We do advertise, just not to you. We also do sell through some of our own dealers. We just don't see to dealers at 50 to 60% of our price. Also, Animation:Journeyman is worth $500 to a lot of people, maybe not you, but then you aren't one of our customers. >>AutoDesk's simalar system sell for $2995. Is that >>the kind of pricing you want? >Who is selling more? I'll put my money on AutoDesk. Price is not the >issue. You would lose, but anyway since it clear you don't have either product, why are you talking? Just to make noise? .>Again the beef is not the price, the beef is that Jason is upset because we .>sell the program for the same price to everyone. There is nothing to stop .>dealers from buying Jouneryman for $500 and selling for whatever price they .>can! >I recall some "personalized" protection involved here. Besides, it was also >the fact that "dealers" were out of the question in general. No, it isn't. Just requires an extra step. The product you sell to a dealers uses key disk copy protection, the user then must register to get the personalized copy protected version. >> What Jason wants is for us to sell him Jouneryman for say $250 and then >>he could sell it for say $400. >Gee, that sounds so unreasonable? That means that I would probably pay >~$300 for it mail-order. Yes, it is unreasonable. You see, he wants to be able to sell the product for less than we sell it for. Tough luck, the price of Jman is $500, and it won't go down. In fact if I have my way it will double within a year, or a least a much better version of it will carry a higher price. >>At that rate, our sales would have to increase by ten times before we would >>make any money. >Too much of a challenge? ;-) >>Why should we give away our modest profit? >To sell the 10x more that you need to when you lower the price. >>Almost all of our money goes back into the product. Since, I have access to sales figures, I can tell you that going though dealers would NOT give us then amount of extra sales needed at least at a lower price that would make dealers happy. >Yeh, you probably spend at most $40 on the whole package. The main cost is >feeding your developers (and we haven't heard too much from Ken lately - did >he die from starvation? ;-)) The whole 3DPro1.0 package cost ~$40, and I >can't fathom that your packaging is more extensive. You have no idea of what you are talking about. It is clear you don't know anything about the costs selling or supporting a product. Also it is clear you have no idea of who does what is Hash Enterprises. Just for your interest, the packaging cost is the least of the expenses. Anyway, as for Ken, he just refuses to reply to any more of these articles, because he thinks there are just too many people on this net just flapping their jaws without any brainwork. >>The only change we have made in pricing is NO DISCOUNTS to dealers. >That doesn't sound like a change at all. That was the issue to begin with. SO WHY THE SENSELESS FLAMING FROM YOU? .>People are .>welcome to resale the program, but they are going to lose money if they sell .>it less for less than we do. >Don't worry, they won't. .>The facts are, that direct sells have always accounted for a very large part .>of our sales. In fact we seldom made money on software sales to distributors/ .>gone belly up! Second it is very hard to get distributors and dealers to .>pay. They often delay paying and then later just return "used" software. .Hmm. If this were the case, then all of the Amiga developers who went >through distributors/direct dealers would be in the same position. This >just isn't the case. See above statement about "worth". Many Amiga developers have left the Amiga for the above reasons. The only reason we have survived at all is because we do so much direct business. << lots of senseless junk cut >> >You seem to be missing the point on how dealers work in this grand scheme >of selling products. You would be making the most money since your sales >would be direct. Your dealers would make the next largest amount, then >your distributors, then mail order houses. It's all based on quanity and >quality. Believe me, I know far more about dealers than you realise. First of all most dealers buy from distributors. Second, you have no idea of the kind mark ups involved along the way. Third if the wrold was as you think it is then we would be using dealers. .>>>Perhaps they don't want their ray-tracing engine .>>>compared side-by-side to Imagines... .> .>>Impulse has been in the ray tracing game longer than Hash, and that makes .>>a difference. Martin (IMHO) appears to be heading down the road of "let's .>>make the Amiga into some high-end animation workstation". At least the .>>features of his program tend to lead me to that conclusion. The only .>>problem with this approach is that you tend to leave the mid-level .>>renderer/animators out of the picture due to price and machine requirements. .> .>No. We are doing animation period. There is no high-end animation work- >>station kind of thing going on around here. .That's too bad, I thought that there was a direction that he was heading. .>So many people are hung up on ray-tracing. But the render is only 1/7 of >That's also too bad, since the output is everything. I'm not hung up on >Ray Tracing, that was last year... I'm hung up on Radiosity and Photo- >realism this year, so we'll have a Radiosity renderer available early '92. Output can only be as good as then input. Besides photorealism has very little to do with animation. >>However, rather than go that direction, let me >>say again that we are not a ray-tracing company but instead our focus is >>computer animation. >Then why was that option put in? Seems that if you didn't want to enter >the ray-tracing arena you wouldn't have a ray tracer. That's even what >AmigaWorld thought when they put JMan up there with 3DPro, Imagine, and >LightWave (which is not an RT - I hate comparing Macs and Oranges). Because ray-tracing is sometimes useful for animation. It is a useful tool, but it is a very long shot from being the whole game. Our Siggraph animation "Joyride" has very little ray tracing in it, but it looks great! Besides, who make AmigaWorld God, or who even cares what they think? Wayne Knapp -- waynekn@techbook.COM ...!{tektronix!nosun,uunet}techbook!waynekn Public Access UNIX at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400) Voice: +1 503 646-8257 Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
billc@cryo.UUCP (William J. Coldwell) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May30.070050.652@techbook.com> waynekn@techbook.com (Wayne Knapp) writes: >billc@cryo.UUCP (William J. Coldwell) writes: > >>In article <1991May24.005621.3479@techbook.com> waynekn@techbook.com (Wayne Knapp) writes: >>>billc@cryo.UUCP (William J. Coldwell) writes: [me generalizing direct marketing methods deleted] >.>That is pure bull. [me supporting dealers "selling" products deleted] >While there a lot of software on the Amiga, esp. relating to graphics, there >is really very little highend software. Take packages like TIPS, Alias, >Wavefront, Pixar Renderman render and you see very few of these in dealers. The packages mentioned above require specialized hardware also, A:JM doesn't (other than a 680x0 accelerator). This also implies that your software is on the same level. >Even the higher end software the Amiga does have is hard to get through >dealers. (examples are Carigali, Animation:Jouneryman, TAD; all three >which have been in the Commodore booth at Siggraph before.) Not really, my local dealer has a catalog from a distributor that has both Carigali [sic] (including the "Broadcast" version) and TAD (and ADPRO), but not Animation:Jouneryman [sic]. As for Siggraph, 1) riding along on someone else's ticket is not the same as having your own booth. 2) Ami-Shows or The Hunter Group have this uncanny way of scheduling shows at the same time as Siggraph. >>>Besides, going though dealers increases the cost of the product. >>Hmm. I find it cheaper to go through dealers or (ack!) mail order than >>to do direct to the source. >This is because most distributors require a 60% discount off the price that >the product is listed to sell for. So most people that go through dealers >and distributors set the list price of the product 2.5x greater than the >real price. They don't set the "retail price", you do. I have _never_ seen any dealer selling for OVER the retail price of a product. >That would mean that Animation:Jouneryman would list for $1250, still cheap >for a full package, but alot for an Amiga program. However, we decided to >sell direct to customers for the same price as dealers, hence the current >price of $500. A dealer always marks up the price of software, how else >can he make a living. I thought that the idea was to work with distributors and dealers to get your product out there and not to undercut them. If people want to buy direct from you, then they pay the full price. If they want to buy from their local dealer, then they pay the dealers price (usually less than the retail price). Lastly, they can buy from mail-order houses for usually less than the dealers, but then they have the same "dishing out the $$$ without seeing it" problem. >Most companies don't sell direct, but we do. That is the difference. On the contrary, most companys DO sell direct, they also sell through distributors and direct dealers. [me talking about advertising (not!), direct sales only, and user worth deleted] >We do advertise, just not to you. We also do sell through some of our own >dealers. We just don't see to dealers at 50 to 60% of our price. Also, >Animation:Journeyman is worth $500 to a lot of people, maybe not you, but >then you aren't one of our customers. That's obvious, otherwise you wouldn't still be in business. If I were a perspective buyer of such a system, how would I find out about it? The reviews in magazines are the only thing that I see even mention your product. >>>AutoDesk's simalar system sell for $2995. Is that >>>the kind of pricing you want? >>Who is selling more? I'll put my money on AutoDesk. Price is not the >>issue. >You would lose, but anyway since it clear you don't have either product, >why are you talking? Just to make noise? It takes two to argue. ADA has more of a market share then A:JM will EVER have, out of the shear default of the machine that it is on. There would be little point in me owning AutoDesk Animator since I don't have an AT or 3|486 to run it on. As for owning A:JM, I have yet to see it other than the demo that Ken gave at the Northwest Amiga Group last year. There it was still unfinished and would call that great Beta meditator. My dealer doesn't have/carry it, so I can't weighs it's value now (even if I _wanted_ to buy it). I talk because I can, to those who don't want to listen, it's noise. [me talking about dealers having to deal with "personalized" protection deleted] >No, it isn't. Just requires an extra step. The product you sell to a >dealers uses key disk copy protection, the user then must register to get >the personalized copy protected version. Why protect it? I can't see any reason to protect productivity software. Piracy of your program isn't going to stop if you protect it. This isn't just a beef with your program, but with all productivity programs that have ANY type of protection (especially manual look-up) [leaving the realm of this subject]. >>> What Jason wants is for us to sell him Jouneryman for say $250 and then >>>he could sell it for say $400. >>Gee, that sounds so unreasonable? That means that I would probably pay >>~$300 for it mail-order. >Yes, it is unreasonable. You see, he wants to be able to sell the product >for less than we sell it for. Tough luck, the price of Jman is $500, and it >won't go down. In fact if I have my way it will double within a year, or a >least a much better version of it will carry a higher price. We prefer free updates, or very inexpensive updates (like cost of disks, the manual and shipping). If you feel that you can sell A:JM for $1000 as it currently stands - I'd be impressed, but your newly installed base would pissed that they could have gotten it for 1/2 price. [me saying lowering price selling 10x more through dealers will be the same or better than direct only deleted] >Since, I have access to sales figures, I can tell you that going though >dealers would NOT give us then amount of extra sales needed at least at a >lower price that would make dealers happy. Is this because you feel that a dealer couldn't sell you product? It seems to me that if I can get a dealer to stock 3 of ProductX (sorry Steve T.) then that is 3 more units that I could not have sold direct (as long as they were able to sell it). >>Yeh, you probably spend at most $40 on the whole package. The main cost is >>feeding your developers (and we haven't heard too much from Ken lately - did >>he die from starvation? ;-)) The whole 3DPro1.0 package cost ~$40, and I >>can't fathom that your packaging is more extensive. >You have no idea of what you are talking about. It is clear you don't >know anything about the costs selling or supporting a product. Also it is >clear you have no idea of who does what is Hash Enterprises. Just for your >interest, the packaging cost is the least of the expenses. Gee, since I have no idea of what I'm talking about, I sure do bring up some good points. ;-) [/sarcasm mode on] Why no Wayne, I know nothing about the costs of selling or supporting a product. [/sarcasm mode off (sorta)] As for who does what in Hash, it's not something that I would lose sleep over. Packaging cost is the least of your expenses? Really? I couldn't have possibly said that above, now could I? >Anyway, as for Ken, he just refuses to reply to any more of these articles, >because he thinks there are just too many people on this net just flapping >their jaws without any brainwork. I'll reserve my first comment, but as for Ken, I do miss chatting with him. Ken is a little more objective and doesn't take things as a direct personal attack. >>>The only change we have made in pricing is NO DISCOUNTS to dealers. >>That doesn't sound like a change at all. That was the issue to begin with. >SO WHY THE SENSELESS FLAMING FROM YOU? I wouldn't call it "senseless" or I wouldn't be replying. Truthfully, I'm not really "flaming", just asking valid questions and making comments. >.>People are >.>welcome to resale the program, but they are going to lose money if they sell >.>it less for less than we do. >>Don't worry, they won't. >.>The facts are, that direct sells have always accounted for a very large part >.>of our sales. In fact we seldom made money on software sales to distributors/ >.>gone belly up! Second it is very hard to get distributors and dealers to >.>pay. They often delay paying and then later just return "used" software. >.Hmm. If this were the case, then all of the Amiga developers who went >>through distributors/direct dealers would be in the same position. This >>just isn't the case. See above statement about "worth". >Many Amiga developers have left the Amiga for the above reasons. The only >reason we have survived at all is because we do so much direct business. ><< lots of senseless junk cut >> >>You seem to be missing the point on how dealers work in this grand scheme >>of selling products. You would be making the most money since your sales >>would be direct. Your dealers would make the next largest amount, then >>your distributors, then mail order houses. It's all based on quanity and >>quality. >Believe me, I know far more about dealers than you realise. First of all >most dealers buy from distributors. Second, you have no idea of the kind >mark ups involved along the way. Third if the wrold was as you think it >is then we would be using dealers. I do know the kinds of mark ups along the way. Before 3-D Pro was finished, I've done the dealer thing, including dealing with distributors. So, I have a well rounded approach from the development of products all the way to the distributors, dealers, and finally to the end user - plus support after the sale. As for the world being the way I think that it is, well, there are quite a few 3DPro's (and other products I've worked on) out there. [various ray tracing views deleted] >Output can only be as good as then input. Besides photorealism has very >little to do with animation. Not necessarily, that's what the AW article was trying to prove. Depends on what direction you are headed as to whether PR is for you. _I_ would prefer a photorealistic animation, if I had that option (and depending on the circumstances). [me talking about ray tracing deleted] >Because ray-tracing is sometimes useful for animation. It is a useful tool, >but it is a very long shot from being the whole game. Our Siggraph >animation "Joyride" has very little ray tracing in it, but it looks great! I agree with you on the first two statements, but haven't seen ANYTHING created with A:JM other than 1 clown picture. >Besides, who make AmigaWorld God, or who even cares what they think? How else would I know about your product? There have been many times that I have wondered about the current state of Hash until I see a little blurb somewhere. FYI: 3DPro was originally presented to Martin Hash for marketing. He stated that he didn't have the money to market the product and put us in touch with PP&S - to which we are very grateful. >waynekn@techbook.COM ...!{tektronix!nosun,uunet}techbook!waynekn -- William J. Coldwell PLink: CRYO I'm a 3-DPro, wouldn't you Amiga Attitude Adjuster BIX: wjcoldwell like to be a 3-DPro2 ? Cryogenic Software UUCP:billc@cryo 3-D PROFESSIONAL 2.0 #define STD_DSCLMR "The above opinions are mine. You can't have them."
waynekn@techbook.com (Wayne Knapp) (05/31/91)
Let's keep this from becoming some kind of pissing contest. I was just trying
to present the facts from our side. Some dealers are mad at us, because we
give direct sales the same price as dealers. That is tough. If other
companies don't like it, they can do business the way they like.
Since the people flaming us are:
a. a dealer
b. a guy with a vested interest in Pro 3D
I don't think that is what produces useful insight.
What about me? Well, I don't make anything from the Amiga sales of Jman.
So at least I didn't have a money interest. I was speaking from what I've
learned in my 4 years of working with Martin Hash. I know the sales data,
and why we have decided to do what we are doing.
Hash Enterprises is moving to the point of where 10 artistes with our tools
could produce a 100 minute animation in one year. All that for about $2M,
(not counting flim, rendering, just the animation). That is how we are
making our choices on what we are doing.
I suspect that our goal it a lot different that most companies, hence we
have a different way of doing business.
Anyway, starting with the release of "Joyride" a 150 second animation, we
are going to let our animations sell our tools.
I hope that this clears the air a little. Just keep in mind, we are not
trying to sell cheap animation programs for the Amiga. We are trying to
produce and sell real animation tools, animation services, and programming
services. Also this is a rough business, and we are in it to stay, so that
often means we play by a different set of rules. Getting customers is easy,
keeping them coming back for more is where the proof is. That is where are
real business is.
Thanks for time and letting me blow some steam of at some wild flamers.
Wayne Knapp
--
waynekn@techbook.COM ...!{tektronix!nosun,uunet}techbook!waynekn
Public Access UNIX at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400) Voice: +1 503 646-8257
Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooksseanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (06/01/91)
In-Reply-To: message from billc@cryo.UUCP billc@cryo.UUCP (William J. Coldwell) writes: >> Clearly you haven't experience in buying or selling high-end software. > >Why no Wayne, I wouldn't have ANY experience in that area. (sarcasm alert >- run for cover (or at least .advocacy!)) > >> Many of the best packages available are not sold via dealers. > >Depends on your dealers and your package. There are some very excellent >Amiga packages out there that are handled by educated and experienced >dealers. This is also implying that your package is "best". ...gee, you think maybe he was talking about professional packages OUTSIDE the Amiga market??? Can you walk into a storefront someplace and say, "I'd like a copy of Wavefront Visualizer...and a copy of SGI World, to go."??? I think not... (more gripes deleted) >Yeh, you probably spend at most $40 on the whole package. The main cost is >feeding your developers (and we haven't heard too much from Ken lately - did > >he die from starvation? ;-)) The whole 3DPro1.0 package cost ~$40, and I >can't fathom that your packaging is more extensive. I'm pretty sure Ken's hard at work making JMan even better...not wasting his time slinging mud at a competitor. Packaging? What's the point of having really cool packaging if the product is crap. I used 3DPro1.0 as soon as it came out. Yeah, the packaging was great...hell, it looked like a Mac application. But aside from a fairly nice marble texture, that can't be animated (Jesus!), I had no use for it. I hate interfaces that won't let you turn on interlacing. And for a Phong shader, it sure did act like it was a raytracer. When rendering with JMan and its relatively slow renders, I half understand because it's a raytracer. But having relatively simple scenes take more than an hour with just Phong shading and your fake antialiacing (which just made the image blurry) is out of the question. I also don't like the upper limit of 1024x1024. Some of these issues may have been addressed with later versions. But my first impression keeps me from even considering the package. (more crap deleted) >You are still expecting people to plop down $500 "sight-unseen". Dealers >give you that extra sales staff (when they are educated in your product). You overestimate dealers. Aside from one or two dealerships that I've been to (Amazing in San Antonio), most dealers don't know jack about what they're selling. I used to work at a dealership...and without going into details, let me just say that I still get calls FROM THEM about applications that they're trying to sell, but don't know the first thing about. Most computer retailers are just a rung above used car dealers on the ladder of evolution. (and even more stuff deleted) Let me end this message just by saying I find it distasteful for a developer to criticize his competition's product in a public forum. There is nothing to be gained by spouting your oppinions on Hash's product. Bottom line is, Hash Enterprises decides how they'll sell their product, not Cryogenic Software, who has this decided for them by Progressive Peripherals & Software. Sean /\ RealWorld: Sean Cunningham / \ "Doing our business is what INET: seanc@pro-party.cts.com VISION Amigas are for." Voice: (512) 992-2810 \ / // \/ "Holy #@*!" - any Psygnosis KEEP THE COMPETITION UNDER \X/ GRAPHICS game player
mark@calvin..westford.ccur.com (Mark Thompson) (06/04/91)
waynekn@techbook.com (Wayne Knapp) writes: >Since the people flaming us are: > a. a dealer > b. a guy with a vested interest in Pro 3D >I don't think that is what produces useful insight. Well I am neither and although I could be labelled a LightWave advocate, it is only because no other Amiga program so closely fits my needs. But I have also for some time been plugging JMan (since I saw Ken Baer demo it at Siggraph), so I have no intent of flaming you or Hash Enterprises. I want very much to have the capabilities of animation channels, spine morphing, spline surface patches, etc. However, there are two reasons I have not bought JMan. The first is lack of information. When I spoke to Ken at Siggraph, I asked him to send me any literature describing its capabilities in some detail. He said he gladly would but nothing arrived. I have since called Hash three times requesting literature, all met with equal success (or lack there of). If you do not wish to sell through dealers, that is fine but some method of working with the customer must otherwise exist. The big name workstation animation packages do not sell through dealers but they have sales reps all over to give the needed customer interface. The price is not the concern provided the program can fit my needs. You mentioned to Rich Nollman that Hash would be willing to sell fully refundable copies of JMan for evaluation. This does not nearly meet the interface required by most customers but it would do for me provided I could evaluate it for at least a month before returning it (if I decided not to keep it). The second is rendering capability. Time and time again I have heard people from Hash say things like "pretty pictures are just eye-candy" and "we are an animation company, not a ray-tracer company" or "fancy rendering is the realm of flying logo software". These are very short-sighted statements. All the high end animation packages (like TDI, Wavefront, Alias) have spectacular rendered output and are surely not limited in use to flying logos. My needs (as well as the needs of many others) are for fluid organic animation coupled with a renderer capable a variety natural surfaces and special effects. Also, ray-tracing is not the answer because it simply is not practical for animation of any length. While I have not seen the latest rev of JMan, what I have seen does not meet my rendering needs. If you feel that the renderer has evolved enough to disuade my fears and Hash Enterprises is willing to work out a solution to the information problem (literature and an evaluation) then it is time we talk. If not, I wish your company the best of luck and hope that they consider rethinking their product strategy. %~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~% % ` ' Mark Thompson CONCURRENT COMPUTER % % --==* RADIANT *==-- mark@westford.ccur.com Principal Graphics % % ' Image ` ...!uunet!masscomp!mark Hardware Architect % % Productions (508)392-2480 (603)424-1829 & General Nuisance % % % ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
waynekn@techbook.com (Wayne Knapp) (06/05/91)
mark@calvin..westford.ccur.com (Mark Thompson) writes: >The first is lack of information. When I spoke to Ken at Siggraph, I asked >him to send me any literature describing its capabilities in some detail. Martin, is working on this, I talk to him about it almost everyday. He knows more about the program than anyone else since it is all he works on. However, while working on the code it is easy to push off this kind of item. In my view, not having this kind of material available, is our big misstake. >The second is rendering capability. Time and time again I have heard people >from Hash say things like "pretty pictures are just eye-candy" and "we are an >animation company, not a ray-tracer company" or "fancy rendering is the realm >of flying logo software". These are very short-sighted statements. All the >high end animation packages (like TDI, Wavefront, Alias) have spectacular >rendered output and are surely not limited in use to flying logos. My needs >(as well as the needs of many others) are for fluid organic animation >coupled with a renderer capable a variety natural surfaces and special >effects. Also, ray-tracing is not the answer because it simply is not >practical for animation of any length. While I have not seen the latest >rev of JMan, what I have seen does not meet my rendering needs. We are an animation company, that is the main long term focus. By we are not a ray-tracer company, it means that ray-tracing in not our only product. We do have a good ray-tracer, just don't use it much, since it soooooo slow. As for eye-candy, I don't know who said what you heard, but if I find out, I going to stick a wet dirty sock in his month. Eye-candy is what the game is all about! Flying logos are a little different. Since the roots of Jman are in organic modeling, it really wasn't suitable for flying logos at first. However, I see no road block to it now. The only problem is, that our in-house people are not interested in doing it. However, there is no reason why you can't model it and fly it! >If you feel that the renderer has evolved enough to disuade my fears and >Hash Enterprises is willing to work out a solution to the information >problem (literature and an evaluation) then it is time we talk. If not, >I wish your company the best of luck and hope that they consider rethinking >their product strategy. As we speak a run of Joyride is being single-frame recorded. The sound is done, so I hope that video will be out soon. That is the best ad. That and a feature sheet. Also, I wish Martin would sell the manuals, but I haven't won that battle yet. The render is getting much better, as you will see with our tape. It as lagged the modeling code, since we are rendering surfaces and not just polygons. The rendering code has gone through many, many revisions. Long term, I will look at adding RenderMan support, but I'll booked solid well into the fall, so that won't happen soon. Wayne Knapp -- waynekn@techbook.COM ...!{tektronix!nosun,uunet}techbook!waynekn Public Access UNIX at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400) Voice: +1 503 646-8257 Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
James_Hastings-Trew@tptbbs.UUCP (James Hastings-Trew) (06/07/91)
Can we shit-can this particular discussion now, or should we rename this the Journeyman-bicker session newsgroup? A lot of bandwidth wasted on a product that maybe 4 people who read this have or will buy in the foreseeable future...
robart@agora.rain.com (Robert Barton) (06/08/91)
In article <James_Hastings-Trew.3236@tptbbs.UUCP> James_Hastings-Trew@tptbbs.UUCP (James Hastings-Trew) writes: >Can we shit-can this particular discussion now, or should we rename this the >Journeyman-bicker session newsgroup? A lot of bandwidth wasted on a product >that maybe 4 people who read this have or will buy in the foreseeable >future... Just set the followup line to comp.sys.amiga.advocacy.