seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (06/04/91)
Although this has to do with an E-Mail reply from William Coldwell of Cryo Software, I felt that those keeping up with this thread would also benefit from reading my responses, so that there are no misunderstandings (hopefully). >His direction did not lead me to believe that he was leaving the Amiga >realm of software. He talked about professional software, period. You know, there is a ton of it outside the Amiga realm... >[me talking about cost of packaging and feeding developers deleted] >Not sure what Ken's been working on lately. Last I heard was that he was >doing some CDTV stuff. As for slinging mud, come on... I'm talking about >not being able to get a product a dealer because of direct sales only, and >he can justify that and still stay in business. That's some pretty >extensive mud. My point is, you, as an Amiga developer, shouldn't comment on another developer's business practices period. Good or bad. They're none of your concern. You're perfectly capable of buying the software as an individual. And if you don't buy software that you haven't seen in action, then that's fine. But leave it at that. >Heh, now who's slingin'? ;-) All of these issues and more have been >addressed. The point is that you WERE able to use it to find out if it >met your needs, either by buying it, seeing it at a dealer, or by pirating >it (generic statement here). When I said "crap" I wasn't refering to 3DPro, just making a point that packaging in no way reflects the quality of a product. If you took it this way, then I'm sorry. Look at ADPro. The packaging is simple, but boy, is the software ever top-notch! Others could learn from ASDG, Inc. I realize that 3DPro has undergone many changes since the version I used (almost a year ago). I would love to have a few of the options that are in 3DPro's current incantation (distributed processing). But my initial impressions are still pretty strong, especially with regards to the interface. Also, so long as my gripes are even somewhat justified, since I'm not a developer I should be able to post'em. >Take an hour? Come on...on an accelerated Amiga? Image filtering is _NOT_ >antialiasing, and is SUPPOSED to make your image more blured. As for >1Kx1K, what other device besides slides can you SHOW this on? If this is >really an issue, you're gonna need a hell of a lot of memory to do it, but >it's something that we COULD have added in. We do versions specifically >for people who need those resonable things quickly. But this isn't the >nature of this message. Yes sir, on an A3000-25/40. An hour or more in some instances. And with that version the output was like rendering HAM in VideoScape 3D, but with textures. The manual clearly states that image filtering isn't antialiasing, but it was the only thing that came close. If it wasn't applied, the image suffered from massive ammounts of "jaggies." Exactly. My partner has a 2Kx2K FIVE MEGABYTE image sitting on his drive right now that was generated in Imagine. You need a hell of alot of memory to run 3DPro (or any other render for that matter) in the first place, so what's the deal? You "COULD" have added it in...but you DIDN'T. You didn't even give those of us who have more than the bare-bones requirements to run the package the OPTION to generate higher resolution images. Right there in the title of your program is "Professional." Give us credit for being professionals and don't limit us by what you think we need. (just like Mac users don't need multitasking...and all most business people need is an XT class machine to get their work done. Gimme a break. You ask them, and they'll tell you different.) The nature of the message is that developers who have a less than perfect package of their own have no business getting down on other developers. >Hopefully, your view will change when you see what we have in 3DPro2, IF >it matches your needs. Maybe it will. Except for purchasing a copy of Imagine so that I don't have to go all the way out to Ingleside to use my partner's, I'm not going to be purchasing any more 3D software for a while. >Some aren't. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. If they have >questions, they can always call us direct. PP&S will even send them a >package to learn it, they can play the videotape right at the store. You'll give dealers the benefit of the doubt, but not "professional" users who see 1Kx1K image rendering as way too low (I know, I'm twisting your words, but I'm trying to make a point.) I'm sure you're proud of your product, and I'm sure you have lots of devoted users. But I still don't think that ANY developer should make ANY remarks, good or bad, about a competeing product or publisher. > William J. Coldwell PLink: CRYO I'm a 3-DPro, wouldn't you BTW> Good luck on the radiosity project. Maybe you will start a new trend in Amiga 3D software... I'm surprised none of the other publishers have jumped on the networking bandwagon yet. /\ 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
billc@cryo.rain.com (William J. Coldwell) (06/05/91)
In article <1991Jun4.055604.103@crash.cts.com> seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) writes: >Although this has to do with an E-Mail reply from William Coldwell of Cryo >Software, I felt that those keeping up with this thread would also benefit >from reading my responses, so that there are no misunderstandings >(hopefully). I really hate a$$holes who post e-mail without the permission of the author. I'm gonna sick Robert Barton on you... Why bother answering you in E-Mail to save bandwidth? My apologies to those (including me) who have grown tired of this subject... >>His direction did not lead me to believe that he was leaving the Amiga >>realm of software. > >He talked about professional software, period. You know, there is a ton >of it outside the Amiga realm... Yes, I know there is a ton of it. >>[me talking about cost of packaging and feeding developers deleted] > >>Not sure what Ken's been working on lately. Last I heard was that he was >>doing some CDTV stuff. As for slinging mud, come on... I'm talking about >>not being able to get a product a dealer because of direct sales only, and >>he can justify that and still stay in business. That's some pretty >>extensive mud. > >My point is, you, as an Amiga developer, shouldn't comment on another >developer's business practices period. Good or bad. They're none of >your concern. You're perfectly capable of buying the software as an >individual. And if you don't buy software that you haven't seen in >action, then that's fine. But leave it at that. Why? I have fingers, I can type... I have questions, I can ask. Whether they are "my concern" or not has very little to do with me being a commercial Amiga developer. Some people seem to believe that being a developer puts one above the other Amiga users - I disagree. As for buying software, (as I have pointed out) I will not buy software that I can't try out at my local dealer. You last sentences are contradictory. [seems that the rest of the message deals with 3DPro. I would normally email it, but it would probably end up on the net anyway...] >>Heh, now who's slingin'? ;-) All of these issues and more have been >>addressed. The point is that you WERE able to use it to find out if it >>met your needs, either by buying it, seeing it at a dealer, or by pirating >>it (generic statement here). > >When I said "crap" I wasn't refering to 3DPro, just making a point that >packaging in no way reflects the quality of a product. If you took it >this way, then I'm sorry. Look at ADPro. The packaging is simple, but >boy, is the software ever top-notch! Others could learn from ASDG, Inc. ADPro packaging SIMPLE? I think not. 4 color seperation of a 24bit image placed onto a slide... this is SIMPLE to you? I have the ADPro sitting right next to my 3DPro box on the top of my hutch... balances things out ;-). >I realize that 3DPro has undergone many changes since the version I used >(almost a year ago). I would love to have a few of the options that are >in 3DPro's current incantation (distributed processing). But my initial >impressions are still pretty strong, especially with regards to the >interface. Yes, 3DPro has changed dramatically. I'll save the net from having to read a commercial from me on the changes ;-). I'll leave it to the advertising in AW. >Also, so long as my gripes are even somewhat justified, since I'm not a >developer I should be able to post'em. HA! Here it is again... just because I'm a developer does not mean that _MY_ gripes are unjustified. I wanna gripe, I post. Gee in this case, it almost sounds that developers should be tied to their machine, gagged, and not allowed to post anything except the expected "buy ProductX" and the usual answers to support questions... I push the button, and one "ZRock WRONG" comes out of the monitor. (For those who don't have the enjoyment of ZRock, just stamp the word "WRONG" on your forehead and walk around for the rest of the day....) >>Take an hour? Come on...on an accelerated Amiga? Image filtering is _NOT_ >>antialiasing, and is SUPPOSED to make your image more blured. As for >>1Kx1K, what other device besides slides can you SHOW this on? If this is >>really an issue, you're gonna need a hell of a lot of memory to do it, but >>it's something that we COULD have added in. We do versions specifically >>for people who need those resonable things quickly. But this isn't the >>nature of this message. > >Yes sir, on an A3000-25/40. An hour or more in some instances. And with >that version the output was like rendering HAM in VideoScape 3D, but with >textures. Algorhythmic textures take time to calculate... use a few and the render time increases greatly. I don't think I understand your last statement... if you render HAM, it looks like HAM? Isn't it supposed to be that way? >The manual clearly states that image filtering isn't antialiasing, but >it was the only thing that came close. If it wasn't applied, the image >suffered from massive ammounts of "jaggies." That has been handled... now there is up to 5x sampling for anti-aliasing, not the rendering twice the size, and then averaging type. >Exactly. My partner has a 2Kx2K FIVE MEGABYTE image sitting on his drive >right now that was generated in Imagine. You need a hell of alot of >memory to run 3DPro (or any other render for that matter) in the first >place, so what's the deal? Memory a while back, was a major commodity (sp?), the idea was to only have in what we could fit on a slightly above average system with overlays. So there was a lot of considerations as to what went in, and what was slated for 2.0, 2.1 and 3.0. Since 2.0 is an all out version, the memory and machine consideration have been moved aside to allow us to add those things that we felt were needed in 1.1, but couldn't. >You "COULD" have added it in...but you DIDN'T. You didn't even give >those of us who have more than the bare-bones requirements to run the >package the OPTION to generate higher resolution images. The "option" was to either get an "in-between" version with the reasonable additions that you needed, or wait for 2.0. Again, having a 2Kx2K is only a use on a slide, where 1Kx1K will do nicely. Granted, changing a bounds check from 1K to 2K is no big deal, but _you_ are the only person that was requesting it. We would have whipped out a version to you, but you never approached us. >Right there in the title of your program is "Professional." Give us >credit for being professionals and don't limit us by what you think we >need. (just like Mac users don't need multitasking...and all most >business people need is an XT class machine to get their work done. >Gimme a break. You ask them, and they'll tell you different.) There had to be limitations set on what we could add. Since there was supposed to be a "3-D Personal" that would have allowed us to go "hog-wild" on the professional version.. It was later decided that a personal version would have been a bad move, so we had to add those limitations. 2.0 will address those limitations and give a more flexible program. Most things now have external ports so that you can write programs that handle those options. >The nature of the message is that developers who have a less than perfect >package of their own have no business getting down on other developers. This package was less than perfect to you, that doesn't mean that everyone else found it that way. Are you saying that only a person with an absolute perfect package (IYHO) has the right to down someone who has a lesser (IYHO) package? IMHO, everyone has a voice... they can use it. I listen to the bitching as well as the compliments equally. I may not bitch and complement equally, but I do _try_ to keep to the original subject as close as I can, and not waste bandwidth. >>Hopefully, your view will change when you see what we have in 3DPro2, IF >>it matches your needs. > >Maybe it will. Except for purchasing a copy of Imagine so that I don't >have to go all the way out to Ingleside to use my partner's, I'm not >going to be purchasing any more 3D software for a while. Great. At least you didn't shelve the Amiga for a Mac or PC to get your "job" done. >>Some aren't. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. If they have >>questions, they can always call us direct. PP&S will even send them a >>package to learn it, they can play the videotape right at the store. > >You'll give dealers the benefit of the doubt, but not "professional" >users who see 1Kx1K image rendering as way too low (I know, I'm twisting >your words, but I'm trying to make a point.) You're actually bashing words on a point that has long been dead... I stated in my EMail that we would have been happy to provide you with a version that didn't have 1K bounds checking. Obviously, you weren't around for the _FREE_ Ray Trace Module update to 3DPro1.1, this allows up to 32Kx32K.... is _that_ big enough? Another problem was that 3DPro allowed you to "view" a 1Kx1K by scrolling on a SuperBitMap... this was a limitation of Agnus, not really of 3DPro's. So, now that the ECS does 32Kx32K, that will most likely be the limit of 3DPro2.0. >I'm sure you're proud of your product, and I'm sure you have lots of >devoted users. But I still don't think that ANY developer should make >ANY remarks, good or bad, about a competeing product or publisher. I may be proud of it, but I never let my pride overlook its weakness or possible additions. That's why we pay attention to to phone calls, and comments on the warranty cards. If fact, the list of 2.0 features were compiled from the top 10 most requested additions/changes... then we added what _we_ wanted in it. As for your last comment: Nike never takes jabs at Reebok, does it? >> William J. Coldwell PLink: CRYO I'm a 3-DPro, wouldn't you >BTW> Good luck on the radiosity project. Maybe you > will start a new trend in Amiga 3D software... > I'm surprised none of the other publishers have > jumped on the networking bandwagon yet. They will... we just have to show them how to do it first ;-) ;-). > RealWorld: Sean Cunningham / \ "Doing our business is what I still think that you should have your skin ripped off and dumped in iodine for posting my EMail. Reconsider doing it again. -- William J. Coldwell Amiga Attitude Adjuster Cryogenic Software 3-D Pro | Anim. Station | CA-650 CD-ROM | CMI PA/MPB | Interact AppleTalk Nexus HD/Aries | CSA 40/4 Magnum | RAMbrandt | Video Blender | DoubleTalk Internet: billc@cryo.rain.com UUCP: tektronix!percy!cryo!billc