Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!ucsd!nosc!crash!pnet01!pro-party.cts.com!seanc
From: seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.graphics
Subject: Thoughtful remarks (was: Wayne's World)
Message-ID: <1991Jun4.055604.103@crash.cts.com>
Date: 4 Jun 91 05:56:04 GMT
Sender: root@crash.cts.com
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Lines: 108

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