CompuServe Messages

No doubt I will. Gary has already mentioned at least one new feature for r"5" that will be an actual new feature in the program itself (even complete with a USER-INTERFACE and not just a 3DS.SET parameter!), not a plug-in, extension to the plug-ins API, or performance increase. Do you know just how many such features r"4" has? NONE! ONE if you remove the requirement that it should have a user-interface, and even that one seems to need a lot of work before it's ready for prime time! I don't blame Gary for this. Gary's a VERY good programmer and an all-round great guy. I blame Autodesk. It is their policy, not Gary's, that prohibits any user-interface changes (however tiny and/or desirable or even necessary) in interim releases. The fact that r"4" has no such changes (other than "Release 4" appearing in the About 3D Studio dialog box instead of "Release 3," but I hardly think that one counts! <grin>) that is the primary basis for my stand that r"4" is actually at best r3.5, an interim release marketed as if it were a major new release. r2 and r3 were true major releases with great new features. I expected similar from r"4". Silly me, both from having such expectations based on both the history of this program itself and the traditions of the computer industry as a whole in reserving the integer portion of the version/release number for MAJOR releases with MAJOR changes, AND for feeling "cheated" as a result. Silly me for accepting the word of an official Autodesk Press Release (one that leaves no legal "out" for them!) on the Spline Patch Modeller, feeling major disappointment at the realization from that Press Release that r"4" was really r"3.5" at best with some add-on goodies tossed in, and basing the decision that the upgrade price was still worth it on the basis of the value of the promised goodies INCLUDING THE SPLINE MODELLER, and feeling "cheated" when it didn't show up. I suppose I should just accept that in these days of politicians who feel that promises are made to be changed on a whim, that corporations who sell software our business depends on should not be held to a higher standard than our elected leaders. I should not feel cheated when they simply do what our elected leaders do all the time. I suppose that if I bought a car that was advertised as including a surround-sound CD system for $XX,XXX.XX, and that said sound system was a major factor in my decision to purchase said car, but the manufacturer of the car lost the rights to include said sound system but still charged me the same price as was advertised, "but, to make up for it, we'll throw in this nifty piece of cardboard you can put in your windshield when parking out in the sun to keep the vinyl of the dashboard from bleaching and turning brittle!" even though said piece of cardboard doesn't even approach the value of the sound system AND I already HAVE one of those cardboard thingies, I should not feel cheated. I should not expect the automobile manufacturer to either lower the price from what was advertised, nor substitute something of at least EQUAL value for the lost sound system. Shyeah, ROIGHT!