How SM can turn Poser's market share around....



  • @eclark1849

    I guess that is where you and I differ. I don't see it as "planned obsolescence." I see it as incorporating new and better features, improving the geometry, improving bending and rigging, keeping up with the latest and with soon to be implemented technologies. Poser figures do the same, by the way. Pauline has more features than Roxie; Roxie has more features than Sydney, and so on. How is that different than the various generations of Genesis figures?

    3D technology doesn't stand still. Go to a show like Siggraph or similar, and developers view the latest and greatest, as well as the "bleeding edge" of where the 3D industry is heading. So eventually those upcoming features will be in demand. That isn't planned obsolescence, that is keeping up with the curve.

    Using your tv analogy, Poser and DAZ Studio still let you use the black and white TV, while also letting you use a 4K ultra high def TV with all the bells and whistles. But to go back and make that black and white TV compatible with 4K ultra high def would not be practical, or probably even possible.



  • @eclark1849 actually, a black and white TV would NOT pick up signals today. TV switched to digital broadcast around 2004, and those signals cannot be read by older TVs.

    Also, it wouldn't display HD content, stereo, or Dolby digital. It certainly wouldn't be a smart TV with built in Netflix.

    You would need to purchase a special adaptor, but even those would be difficult because it wouldn't even have an input. Remember those analog antenna connections? Haven't seen one of those in a while, have you? Even Composite inputs have gone by the wayside.

    So no, a TV from the 60's would not work today.

    If you wan't the latest features, sometimes things get broken. Analog signals didn't have enough bandwidth to support multiple HD streams and a growing number of channels. Digital also has much greater range. Picking up stations 80 miles away with crystal clarity is nothing with digital signal.



  • @v3rlon Actually, you're both right AND wrong. The law only required FULL Power broadcast channels to broadcast digitally, but the technology still works so yeah a standard analog television can still pick up analog signals today from Low Power broadcast stations.



  • @eclark1849 said in How SM can turn Poser's market share around....:

    @v3rlon Actually, you're both right AND wrong. The law only required FULL Power broadcast channels to broadcast digitally, but the technology still works so yeah a standard analog television can still pick up analog signals today from Low Power broadcast stations.

    But that's like saying that you would have to run Poser 4 to use Poser 4 content.

    ;-)



  • @Deecey No, there are full power and low power tv stations in North America. Only the Full power stations were required to broadcast only in Digital. Low power stations and some cable networks still broadcast using standard analog broadcast. You can still use your 1960s tv to receive those stations. As for planned obsolescence, it's not much different than saying Poser 8 can't use Project E or Roxie. But it can still use Sydney or Alyson 1.



  • @eclark1849 said in How SM can turn Poser's market share around....:

    As for planned obsolescence, it's not much different than saying Poser 8 can't use Project E or Roxie. But it can still use Sydney or Alyson 1.

    OK herein lies the difference in how we are viewing things.

    What this sounds like to me is that you are saying "OK. Let's develop Poser 8. But let's deliberately make Poser 8 work so that 9 years from now, when a figure named Project E is released, it won't work in Poser 8. Mwahahahaha"

    The reason that Project E does not work in Poser 8 is NOT because Poser 8 was planned that way. How can software developers predict where technology will be 8 years into the future? It's also not because Project E was planned that way. Plain and simple, Poser 8 does not support weight mapping and a lot of other features that Project E incorporated. As a result, even if Poser 8 COULD load the Project E mesh, there is no way you could expect Project E to work the same in Poser 8 as it does in Poser 10 or 11.

    That is NOT "planned obsolescence." It is feature compatibility. If you want to use the latest and greatest features, get the current figures and software. If you want to use the older figures, you can still (for the most part) use them in the current software.

    THAT is the definition of "backward compatibility." If you can use your old content in the new software, yup, the software is backward compatible. What you appear to want is backward compatible content --- and even then, the point you are trying to make seems moot to me. You can't use Project E in Poser 9 and earlier without losing functionality. You can't use Paul and Pauline in Poser 10 and earlier without losing functionality. No different than one Genesis figure release to another.

    I'm bowing out now.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    Why always make simple things complicated. => This is the simple and true version.

    • New tools drive the sales of new Poser versions. => The newer figures are a by-product to show the new tools.
    • New content drives the DAZ sales, and the app is the by-product.

    The end user that wants newer tools every 2 years buys Poser.
    The end user that wants the latest in content shops at DAZ.

    Simple huh?



  • @Deecey Okay, that is not what I said, and I NEVER said that was the case of Poser. I might have said something about DAZ though, and I'll stick to that.

    definition of
    planned ob·so·les·cence

    /ˌpland ˌäbsəˈlesəns/

    noun

    noun: planned obsolescence

    a policy of producing consumer goods that rapidly become obsolete and so require replacing, achieved by frequent changes in design.



  • @eclark1849

    The earlier Genesis figures do not become obsolete when a new one is released. They still work in the latest version of DAZ Studio. Your point is moot.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @v3rlon said in How SM can turn Poser's market share around....:

    3D has advanced a lot since Poser 1, and computers are more powerful. Do you imagine you could load a modern figure into P1? Of course not. To bring the latest features means that there won’t always be backwards compatibility. I can still load Vikki 1 into the latest DS if I like.

    I still think Dual Quaternions is a step back when it comes to Poser/DS figures. Great for game models, but awful for figures that wear conforming clothes. It brings us back to the terrible times of rigging clothes for Mil3 figures with zillions of pesky JCMs. They fixed that by removing ALL JCMs from Mil4 figures, which was one of the reasons why they became hugely popular.

    Not to mention the low poly, low quality, generic topology in G3 and 8. How is THAT an improvement? Even G2F topology with TriAx rigging is superior to any of that crap they use now. DAZ went back to the ancient times of JCM-gallore Mil3 figures, and nobody cares? And still call this an advancement?? They are sacrificing the DS market for the sake of a gaming industry that couldn't care less about them.

    G3/8 are so bad in topology that they need HD sculpting to look like G2 already did without any of that. How is this better?

    [/rant]



  • This backward compatibility is only an issue because there are previous versions of Poser still in use.
    Over on the dark side, with no upfront cost to upgrade there are very few reasons not to always be on the current version of Studio.



  • @Deecey said in How SM can turn Poser's market share around....:

    @eclark1849

    The earlier Genesis figures do not become obsolete when a new one is released. They still work in the latest version of DAZ Studio. Your point is moot.

    No it isn't, here is the difference.....

    I can retrofit Poser 11 tech into older figures. With DS, one has to purchase everything all over again to get new features. Note how much gen 3/8 content is just a rehash of gen 2 content.

    I can (and have) loaded up a Poser 2 Loz res figure and added subdivision, weight mapping, and control surfaces, making it a modern figure.

    The DS end user can't retrofit new gen3 tech to their favorite gen 1 or gen 2 characters.

    Here's a another one for you - ever try to fit a gen 1 outfit on a gen 3 figure? Good luck with that, because autofit doesn't seem to recognize gen 1 content.



  • I don't understand what backward compatibility means. Does that mean new versions of poser can use old content, or new content can be used in old versions of poser?



  • @prixat said in How SM can turn Poser's market share around....:

    This backward compatibility is only an issue because there are previous versions of Poser still in use.
    Over on the dark side, with no upfront cost to upgrade there are very few reasons not to always be on the current version of Studio.

    The only folks that are using older versions of Poser are vendors. Everybody else has moved one.



  • @redphantom said in How SM can turn Poser's market share around....:

    I don't understand what backward compatibility means. Does that mean new versions of poser can use old content, or new content can be used in old versions of poser?

    Backwards compatibility means that new versions of Poser can use content from older versions. A lot of idjit vendors still have a priority for making content for the mythical Poser 7 and lower "user base", rather than Poser 9 or later (which is where almost all of us are actually at). But that is simply intransigence and stupidity on their part.

    It is a major factor in why I don't buy as much content as I used to - I calculate the amount of time I have to spend to unscrew a product made in 2017 that is made to 2007 standards.

    As a customer, I shouldn't be dealing with material .pz2s in 2018.



  • @Deecey Obsolescence doesn't mean it won't work any more. Posette still works, but she is obsolete technology.



  • @ssgbryan said in How SM can turn Poser's market share around....:

    I can retrofit Poser 11 tech into older figures. With DS, one has to purchase everything all over again to get new features. Note how much gen 3/8 content is just a rehash of gen 2 content.

    I must be missing something.

    You can "retrofit" Poser 11 tech into older figures, using the content dev tools in Poser.
    What prevents you from "retrofitting" current DS tech into older DS figures with the dev tools in the latest version of DS?

    Note I am not a DS user (haven't used it a whole lot since DS3). But I'm really really honestly not understanding the purpose of this whole conversation, because I see no difference.

    DAZ figures have a past development cycle of 2 years, and DS is updated to support the new features.
    Poser and its figures have a typical past development cycle of approx 2 years.

    I really don't see anything different between the two. I'm not trying to argue, I just miss the whole point of the complaint. I am not into software bashing and I will not go there. 8-)



  • @ssgbryan said in How SM can turn Poser's market share around....:

    @redphantom said in How SM can turn Poser's market share around....:

    I don't understand what backward compatibility means. Does that mean new versions of poser can use old content, or new content can be used in old versions of poser?

    Backwards compatibility means that new versions of Poser can use content from older versions. A lot of idjit vendors still have a priority for making content for the mythical Poser 7 and lower "user base", rather than Poser 9 or later (which is where almost all of us are actually at). But that is simply intransigence and stupidity on their part.

    It is a major factor in why I don't buy as much content as I used to - I calculate the amount of time I have to spend to unscrew a product made in 2017 that is made to 2007 standards.

    As a customer, I shouldn't be dealing with material .pz2s in 2018.

    So it's not poser being able to use older content that is the problem, it's people (vendors) refusing to use the new features. So unless Smith Mirco can force all content makers to use only new features, there isn't much they can do.

    Yes, they can have new poser versions to not include old things, but really what is the obsolete features? Textures? We still use firefly. Not everyone has upgraded to P11. Rigging? Maybe, probably the most likely. I guess we don't need old figures, though the variety is nice for those of us that render crowds. But what about rigged props? Rooms, cabinets, and chests have old rigging. They don't need weight mapping. we not only lose all older people but some older props too.



  • @Deecey

    There are no enduser tools to retrofit gen 3 tech into any other figure.

    With the g figures, the enduser gets stuck on an endless upgrade cycle. Poser users don't.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @ssgbryan This is not true. I know from the RDNA times almost all vendors claim that they are sick and tired to create stuff for old Poser versions but also have no desire to make content for two versions.
    So they create stuff which was compatible for Poser 7+ to save time.
    Not the vendors refuse the new Technic, Poser user don't upgrade or stick with old workflow.