CompuServe Messages

— WARNING — Long reply to John re ASDG; rated "R" No, I never let up on ASDG. Why should I? They have the #3 product in a commercial field of three by a huge lag, yet have bamboozled a large part of the marketplace into thinking that same product is #1 with extremely deceptive ads, bogus on-line comparisons, sleazy demos, and worse. Ever see the "morph anim comparison" Perry did "between" Cinemorph and Morph+? You want an example of "interesting" activity, look there. He took an anim done by someone who is *seriously* sight-impaired, represented it as the "best" that Cinemorph could do because "after all it was done by a Nova/GVP beta tester" and then proceeded from there. It was ludicrous EXCEPT that the consumer base tends to take things like that at face value. Cinemorph, in fact, can produce *excellent* morphs, easily as good a quality as Morph+ (or Imagemaster); there are many issues of control that can be brought up, but there is NO penalty in quality for the type of thing that was shown in that "fair comparison", as Perry termed it. What else? Oh, lots. They've tried to hire our programmers (let me tell you THAT got a big laugh around here… you think we ever tried to hire theirs? Not bloodly likely, let me tell you right now. Aside from the ethics, which are questionable, the _products_ show us we don't want to do that. Then, after his (multiple) attempts to hire, he subsequently spread stories that programmers had left us (in fact, at the Pasadena WOA, the fellow who wrote that morphing "thing" in AW came to our booth and told us flat out that we had no programmers left – you can thank Perry directly for that one). Is this ethical? I think not. That same article quoted Perry (unattributed in the article, but admitted by the article's author to me personally when I called him on it), of all people, on Imagemaster's morphing technology. Not us. Interesting? Sure – at the very least. ASDG has advertised Morph+ as the "fastest". They have advertised AdPro as having "thousands" of image processing functions. These things are not only inaccurate, they're *completely* untrue, NEVER were true, and to an aware consumer (very, very rare, unfortunately) they would not hold up in to light of day well at all. AdPro in its current state is no competition for either ImageFX or Imagemaster in about 98% of the areas that all three programs address – now, it certainly has its uses, as I've *always* maintained, and is a very reliable product. That's fine, but you can say that about a lot of things (like AutoPilot, another fine product) which still don't make the transition from useful and reliable to "competetive" with Imagemaster – or ImageFX or that matter. I don't suppose you've ever had the opportunity to see the fax that ASDG sent around to dealers trumpeting Morph+'s "morphing technology" and it's alleged benefits over CineMorph and Imagemaster's methods? Now *there* was a triumph of truth and accuracy. Not. That document was so inaccurate the paper it was printed on should have spontaneously combusted. Perhaps you recall when ImageFX/Cinemorph were released, Perry made himself dear to all by declaring pompously on the nets that GVP/Nova would shortly have to give up the name of one of them (I forget which one… doesn't matter – it's the principal of the thing). At the time, ASDG had no such product with such a name, and the GVP critter was shipping. So what comes up? Lawyers. <disgusted look> Interesting sidenote here; our Windows 3.1 software line was originally titled "Image F/x:", not "WinImages:". When GVP came out (first) with ImageFX, we calmly retrenched and did the right thing – we renamed our unreleased product. No lawyers; no threats; no online static. That kind of thinking appears to be rarer than one would think it should be, at least if "one" is me. Of course I consider lawyers and legal action to be one step above wallowing in raw sewage… so I may be a bit biased on this one <laughing> Most of the time, I address these "Perry" things when they happen as calmly as I can; and if we (I) make original or responding statements of a competitive nature, they are made *honestly*, and if I make a mistake regarding the capabilities of a competitor, I publicly admit it. Nova's been the same way from day one, as far as I can tell. GVP gets a little rough in the print ads, but not so you could really complain – and I don't. In the meantime, ASDG plays "hardball" (well, more like "spitball") on a regular, recurring basis in the marketplace. The above little ditty is but the tip of the iceberg; there's lots – and I mean LOTS – more, we've got a lengthy file detailing this particular saga – we have the VERY distinct feeling it may be of considerable use someday. So I apologize for knocking your sensibilities about with statements that are most definitely not "warm and fuzzy" about ASDG. However, I make no promises to lighten up… I don't think it's in the cards.