CompuServe Thread

Very good observations, David. Perhaps the main reason why there isn't much negativity here on the ASOFT forum is because I wouldn't stick around if there was. I can deal with wishlist items and constructive comments until the cows come home, but I can't deal with negative emotional dumping. No application program is perfect, and I can find as many problems with 3DS as anyone else can (more, I'd bet). But that's not what ASOFT is about. I've made that clear here in the past when things started to get out of hand. I suppose that that's helped to create a space in which people try to help each other and find ways to make future versions of 3DS better. That's what ASOFT is about. Plus, I've got the power to move messages that I feel aren't in the spirit of this forum into section 0, and I use that power (infrequently, but I do it). That has contributed much to the peace within this space, I'm sure. If people want to flame about 3DS, I recommend to them that they jack into the internet and do it there. – G

David, BG<<What's especially worrisome about the PC Magazine call for letters though is that they have targeted it for thier new "second looks" column. Since they generally praised 3DS in the past , it seems to me they are looking for an opportunity to print negative user reactions to the program.>> DG<<<So what is wrong with that?>>> What's wrong with that is the false impression a focus on negative comments will leave with the readers. An impression that PC Magazines' original shallow but positive reviewers were somehow hoodwinked or fooled into reccommending the software. The second looks column seems to be shaping up as a gotcha feature, and in the case of 3DS that will be unfair. But I'm waiting to read what they print before totally condeming them <G>. << One thing you don't find in the forum is truely critical messages against 3D Studio >> Are we talking about the same forum ? There has been no shortage of healthy discourse following the release of new versions. After that, things settle back down to true focus of this section — technical support. <<Is this forum a model of a utopian community where everyone works in harmony and without tension?>> It's pretty darn close. <<Too often people hold loyally to a piece of software or hardware(Applites) with a bitter passion and nothing you can say or do will change their opinion. And too often the only thing they are basing this loyalty on is their opinion rather than hard facts.>> Are you accusing ME of that ? Anyone who has read my columns over the years, starting with True Imaging, on to MicroCAD News and now with TV Technology magazine, knows this is not true about me. I recently uploaded the original text of my Pennello review as PNLO.TXT to Lib 1 . Give it a read and let me know if you think I was too rabidly and blindly cheerleading, or if it's an in depth, entertaining, and balanced report. <<Maybe Gary and the gang should receive the 1995 Nobel Peace Prize? They sure have made a way of keeping the peace here in this little section of the world.>> Gary has my vote. <<When was the last time there was ever a good flame war in this forum. In my short time here I've never seen one.>> Emphasis I guess on *short time* , there have been several regrettable flame wars here on the forum in the past year alone. Some have been over the 3DS feature set, some have bordered on the personal. Bruce N. Goren

David: I'll address your post only in part – The computer graphics industry is awash in endless literature. Much of it is about almost nothing. There are not many people prepared to write legitimate appraisals of 3-DS. For one to write responsibly about 3-DS they would need a thorough understanding of the core program, be comfortable in all 5 modules and have a strong basis in IPAS functionality. There are many writers who have written articles about 3-DS without the above knowledge, and to an experienced operator it comes across as drivel. Now I won't go on a tirade about irresponsibility in commercial publishing, but can tell you that I have read criticisms directed at 3-DS that were absurd. Several times I was actually moved to call a few publications, outraged. Where it is true that 3-DS does seem to generate a very passionate user group that appear to really feel there is much more here than a product being marketed, the ASOFT forum has given us all a place to solve problems and discuss shortcomings in the program. The nature of on-line BBs can unfortunately give highly aggressive individuals with unquenched needs to be very very nasty an opportunity to spew flame and vapor. Thankfully, this forum seems free of most of that, and flame and vapor is contained to their proper IPAS applications, besides they take too long to render (I am eagerly awaiting multithreading P6s). But don't think that there have not been some feisty discussions. There are things about 3-DS that bend me out of shape, and I have openly discussed them, and as a result received very interesting responses from other users, tech support and Gary, both on open BB and through e-mail. Frankly, consider the thought of this forum being blind a pretty good script for an animation, but far from fact. Jeffrey (grain of truth stuck on rose glasses)

David: /_______________________From your message________________________\\ Why aren't people more openly critical of 3D Studio? Is it because they are loyal or there is a community or cult spirit in this forum? Maybe it is a bit of both. Criticism comes in the form of wishlist items rather than blatent "Why the hell doesn't it do this?" type of questions. Is this forum a model of a utopian community where everyone works in harmony and without tension? __________________________________________________________________ Personally, I would be devilishly inclined to give out completely false information to anyone asking a question with all of the attitude and flame of "Why the hell doesn't it do this?" I think total flame messages are counterproductive for the person inquiring. Over the couple of years I've been hanging here there have been a few messages as you've described. The authors are often shown that what they are demanding is already part of the program and often end up as simple RTFM situations. Serious problems are given serious attention and I guess that helps to diffuse most potentially nasty situations.

I think there isn't much negativity here because a)there IS a wishlist, b)we all know the wishlist ranks VERY highly w/ the Yost Group, as an indicator of the direction their user-base would like them to be heading, and c)because through their constant presence here, their over-abundent personal support, and their tight, fast, well thought-out code, we know that YG and Autodesk (at least the MM division <g>) care about us and our work. Now, check out the AutoCAD forum…. There's plenty of outright hostility, and I can't honestly say it's all misplaced. For instance, r13 FORCES automatic stacked fractions in dimensions, and (in the c0 release) the numerator and denominator were FIXED at 50% of the full text height — this means that when architects and engineers use their standard 1/8" or 3/32" text heights, they get 1/16" or 3/64" high fraction characters — which are unreadable after plotting and bluelining. Now, how long has Autodesk been providing drafting tools? Did they have ANY architects or engineers beta the thing? Did they listen to them if they did? Heck, 30 minutes after the first shipping copy was in the hands of an end-user this stuff is apparent, but Autodesk (CAD group and marketing) spends countless hours defending its actions instead of listening and helping. (That said, every day, there ARE more and more Adeskers in the forum, and the developer responsible for the stacked fraction stuff is on-line and asking for input.) This sort of "lack of fore-thought" is something we just don't see from YG — on the contrary, it always seems we discover they've given 2-3 times MORE thought to things that we've been ranting about when a new release comes out than what we expect them to! I think criticism is good, but it's just often hard to recognise here, 'cause it's among people who respect one another. Dave