what the heck is going on with HASH

giantkiller · 2003-01-26 05:35:24 UTC

Looks like Martin sent Kevin in here to defend the company.
Too bad Mr Hash shot all his credibility with that letter.
I’m outta here, my time will be better spent elsewhere. I’m not listening to any more propaganda.
Actions speak louder than words.

Kevin_Sanderson · 2003-01-26 06:32:13 UTC

Originally posted by giantkiller
Looks like Martin sent Kevin in here to defend the company.
Too bad Mr Hash shot all his credibility with that letter.
I’m outta here, my time will be better spent elsewhere. I’m not listening to any more propaganda.
Actions speak louder than words.

No, I’ve never met Martin Hash. I came over to check out the forum and I see me misquoted or taken out of context and trashed. If you believe I think A:M is crash free you’re nuts. It is, though, pretty stable for me. My tips help that for me and some others. If you’re too smart to check out whether Windows is causing some of the problems, fine. Some of the people on this forum are correct in many of their criticisms of Hash. But any thinking person would know the software isn’t the only problem.

artfan1 · 2003-01-26 07:31:03 UTC

Kevin wrote

I tend to believe that if you don’t get a lemon PC, you are fortunate. Too bad there isn’t a lemon law for those yet like there are for cars.

And for software too!

<grin>

artfan1

Amanda · 2003-01-26 08:03:42 UTC

Originally posted by Kevin Sanderson
If you’re too smart to check out whether Windows is causing some of the problems, fine. Some of the people on this forum are correct in many of their criticisms of Hash. But any thinking person would know the software isn’t the only problem.

There are two sides to this coin. On the one hand, it’s certainly true that Windows and device drivers can be a source of instability–anyone with a PC has experienced this.

On the other hand, software that works most stably on hand-picked or individually tweaked machines is fragile. A:M doesn’t do anything magic that should require a cleaner system than anything else. Plenty of other software is memory intensive, does lots of file I/O, or puts the video driver through the wringer. Testing on a wide variety of machines, and avoiding things which trigger problems even though they “should” work is just part of being a Windows developer.

It’s also one of the biggest challenges of being a small developer. They’re too small to do internal testing on a broad range of machines, so they rely on external testing. This is good when it lets them find problems that don’t occur in house. This is bad because a “public beta” means they’re releasing untested software to an often unforgiving audience. Public betas work great for open source stuff (where no is paying for anything anyway) or games (where buzz is more important than reality). For commercial software, it can hurt business as much as it can help.

This is where a company with the resources of Alias|Wavefront or NewTek has an advantage. I respect the decision to keep A:M at a $200-$300 price point and keep the company small, but it does make it harder to deliver a tested, stable product, particularly running on Windows.

Amanda Walker

Sil3 · 2003-01-26 08:52:38 UTC

Originally posted by Amanda
[B]This is where a company with the resources of Alias|Wavefront or NewTek has an advantage. I respect the decision to keep A:M at a $200-$300 price point and keep the company small, but it does make it harder to deliver a tested, stable product, particularly running on Windows.

Amanda Walker [/B]

Take a look at PMG, the makers of Messiah, only 3 programmers (3D Artists themselfs), sure development is dam slow, but the prog is ROCK SOLID :bounce:

Sil3

Amanda · 2003-01-26 09:07:32 UTC

Originally posted by Sil3
Take a look at PMG, the makers of Messiah, only 3 programmers (3D Artists themselfs), sure development is dam slow, but the prog is ROCK SOLID :bounce:
Sil3

Sure, that’s another way to address the tradeoff. Rhino & Flamingo are similar (though I think McNeel is a little bigger)–very slow development schedule, but very, very stable. Since they also cost 8x or more than A:M, they don’t have to ship nearly as many boxes to generate the same cash flow.

Some people would pay $1500 for a copy of A:M that had the same degree of stability. Most of their current customer based would not. Since part of Hash’s goal is to keep the price low, this means the tradeoffs happen in different places. Many small companies rely on frequent releases and inconsistent quality–it’s not just Hash. Personally, I prefer higher-end tools, but that’s because I have money to spend on them. I still respect their goal of building a 3D animation package that anyone can afford.

Amanda Walker

EROMLIG · 2003-01-26 09:23:24 UTC

I think one has to be very careful with the argument that its your system that are causing any of these problems. The system I use at home is a few years old and runs Lightwave without a hiccup, as well as all the Adobe products etc. The only application that nose dives on a regular basis is AM. Those of you who have used AM for any number of year no doubt remember the difficulty they have had with hardware.
The first of which, that I had to deal with, arose from the graphics card compatibility problems. The company anounced that the only cards they would reccomend for use with AM were from Oxygen. They later said that they supported no specific cards. They later made an attempt to implement dual proccesor support, that was such a complete falure, (stange and persistant renedering artifacts) that they abandoned that in no time. Hardware seems to be a problem for them.
What makes all the arguments Hash is putting forward regarding their product hard to beleive is when you look at their deceitful marketing strategies. Nowhere on their literature, site or at one of Greg Rostrami’s demonstration will you ever hear the word subscription.
Yet that is what you are getting. From when you buy it till the end of that calender year. What if that version of the software doesn’t work when next years comes out? You the buyer either fork over another 99 bucks or you go home and play with software that will never work and that the company will not fix.
And what happens if the next years version has other problems.
Cough up another 99 bucks buddy.
When you factor in how slow the renderer and modeler is, (when adding geometry to large models) how many work arounds and compromises one must go through to get the modeler and renderer to put out “world class” results and a lack of usable documentation…well enough said.

Sil3 · 2003-01-26 09:23:38 UTC

A:M is cheap because it doesn´t work correctly, simple as that, dont think it is because the maker of it have pitty for us poor artist´s who would love to do 3D and have no money to get the so called PRO Aplications, they are in the business to make money, like eveyone else who starts a business. Even if A:M worked like they say in the Box, i doubt anyone would pay $1500 for it, it lacks features, you cant export from it (animation), you are stuck to work and make everything on it.

Even for $299, and if i was a new user venting into 3D, after reading all these threads, i wouldn´t buy it, and i advice no one to buy it, it´s cheap, but it doesn´t work, these kind of cheapness will become expensive later down the road, as soon as you start to try to push the software, you realise that it wont do what you want ( or it will take huge amounts of time and hacks to do it) and shortly after you start looking for another 3D prog, you wasted time and money on something that wasn´t ready but it was ok because it was cheap, i regret it, i had that experience.

Sil3

Amanda · 2003-01-26 10:08:24 UTC

Originally posted by Sil3
A:M is cheap because it doesn´t work correctly, simple as that,

Or it doesn’t work well because it’s cheap. It’s a little hard to determine cause and effect.

Either way, $199 (which is the discount you can get pretty much for the asking) is a much lower barrier to entry than a product that costs four or five digits. Someone looking for a way to stick their toe in the CG water is simply not going to spend $1400 for Messiah Studio or $2K for Maya Complete, no matter how much better they may be.

You get what you pay for. If anyone thinks that they’re getting the same stuff for 1/10 the cost, perhaps this expectation is not entirely the vendor’s fault.

I still think that for $199, A:M is pretty impressive. Even if all it does is help someone get up to speed enough to figure out what will really do the job they need, that seems worthwhile. Look at the A:M veterans here who’ve moved on to other packages: A:M got them started. Could that have happened if they’d had to buy Maya a few years back (when it was a lot more expensive)? Seems unlikely.

Amanda Walker

walasek · 2003-01-26 10:31:04 UTC

I was going to keep quiet, and let the others defend me on the list, but I had to say something…

Originally posted by Kevin Sanderson
I’m glad you feel that way Arthur. Your obj importer needs some work but it is quick and doesn’t crash. The results aren’t as smooth as using Howard Trickey’s modified Xroad app to convert a quad obj to a quad dfx and importing into v8.5L, but what the hell. Since you’re a programmer…maybe you need to hear from the real world where Windows and assorted hardware causes crashes.

I realize that my OBJ importer/exporter needs some work, but here is the kicker - I gave it away free. I also did it, kinda, out of the goodness of my heart, thought it was something that the community needed. I’m not asking people to pay for it, cause in all honesty, if I did charge them, I would be in support hell. I’m glad Xroad works well. I use it too. By the way, I’ve worked at a major pc help desk, so I do know what causes crashes.

Oh, really. Wish more software companies hired you.

me too

Sure, great software should do what you suggest, Arthur. Even yours so I could get to the bottom of why it disfigures an obj file of mine.

Funny, I don’t think I’ve gotten email from you with the problem…

I respect everyone’s opinion on this forum. Yes, A:M should be more stable for those trying to do work. But you should also realize, many of us are not running into these problems. We are doing OK with what we are using. Don’t put us down because we believe the software to be stable for us. It is stable for us.

Software is fairly stable for me too. Reproducable crashes I immediately mail off to Steve. You will see my name on the bug fix list, cause I do send em in… I don’t think I ever “put you down” because I believe the software is stable for you. I just don’t agree with your argument that hardware is the issue. Yes, it can be. But my system has been tested - hell it runs for months at a time (never shut down), and I develop on this machine. I know the drivers are the latest, interrupts are set correctly, unnecessary programs disable (I do have auto CD notification on - and I have no problems with it - perhaps its a conflict in your DMA).

I just don’t like the attitude that I have to fix my system, or tweak it to get AM to work, when everything else in the world works. If I have to shutdown programs, or have more available memory, then they (Hash) are not checking available memory when allocating structures - simple as that.

davef · 2003-01-26 11:55:27 UTC

I think hash could make the price of AM $500 or $600 easy and still get the home user today. I mean what else are they going to use. TS is like $600 and have a huge user base and most of them are home user’s. I would pay that for AM if they would just fix all the stuff we are talking about on here.

Raist3d · 2003-01-26 12:18:57 UTC

Originally posted by Kevin Sanderson
No, I’ve never met Martin Hash. I came over to check out the forum and I see me misquoted or taken out of context and trashed. If you believe I think A:M is crash free you’re nuts. It is, though, pretty stable for me. My tips help that for me and some others. If you’re too smart to check out whether Windows is causing some of the problems, fine. Some of the people on this forum are correct in many of their criticisms of Hash. But any thinking person would know the software isn’t the only problem.

Kevin, the only problem I have with what you posted on the A:M list and to an extent with what you continue to post is that you seem to assume (meaning, you come off that way ) that the rest of us seeing these problems in many (most) cases is machine problems.

In the light of the glaring truth that A:M is one of the most unstable applications done on a PC, this comes out as somewhat insulting or denialist. This is why I asked you what specifically are you doing with A:M that it seems oh so stable for you.

So by the same token you ask people to assume A:M does run stable on your machine, by the same token don’t assume that many or most do not have a stable hardware/windows configuration.

Personally, look around and see how many people are complaining about this yet mention other apps on their very own machine run fine. Sorry, but this is A:M, not the other way around.

Raist

PS: I am not saying with this that your tips can’t or don’t help. They are sound and good to check out, just that this is not the real issue of what goes on with A:M, even if there are instances that more stability is achieved by following your tips.

JoeW · 2003-01-26 13:26:59 UTC

In regards to stability of the app, it depends a huge amount on how you use it. I have the opportunity to see how some of the best AM users in the world work, and for those who know where the “mines” are, AM can run for weeks without bombing (just as an aside, I STILL tend to get it to implode from time to time).

Some of the things I’ve learned from the likes of Jeff Bunker and Tyler Lybbert:

Try to not have more than one window open at a time -and if you must, maximize them so that they don’t overlap - or if you have two open simultaneously, use the “Tile” commands under the Windows menu item to make sure they’re using up the screen space.
Don’t use the tabbed “Workbook” mode.
Save often, and it’s a good idea to save versions. Tyler told me he can easily go through the alphabet in a day of working on a model (Bottle_a.mdl, Bottle_b.mdl, etc). I tend to save after every major change, and I don’t see crashing nearly as much as I used to.
Use Undo with patience. Undo used to be an instant crash - in 10, it’s actually pretty good - NOT like Cinema or LW, but still pretty dependable and useable. I still save versions, though…
One key is patience - let the software catch up to you, and if you make it through a huge copy/paste or Undo, save your model immediately. One thing I can thank AM for, is my vastly improved “Save Discipline” in all the software I use…
AM is a memory and CPU hog. Don’t run it simultaneously with another memory hog - like Maya, Max, or Photoshop - expecially if you don’t have a ton of memory (512 MB or more). I try not to run it with anything going in the background (except Winamp, maybe
Of course, make sure that your drivers are updated, etc, etc.

Joe W

JoeW · 2003-01-26 13:29:50 UTC

One more thing - the guys that get it to run pretty stably spend 90% of their time in wireframe mode - and don’t leave background windows in solid shaded mode. They switch into solid shaded to check something - then pop right back into wireframe. Jeff tells me it’s a habit he picked up a loooong time ago working in V4 and earlier…

Joe W

degauss · 2003-01-26 14:16:46 UTC

Originally posted by JoeW
[B]

I’m not going to get into an argument over your view of the world. IMO, rigging in most packages could be drastically simplified - that does NOT mean that it would be any less powerful or extensible, it just means that rigging would be more intuitive and flexible. Interface design is one of the most ignored components of modern applications - it’s usually left up to programmers to do it, and that’s a mistake. [/B]

To be fair, I’ve seen some reasonably good design from programmers (KDE/GNOME on Linux, for example), but I’ve seen the results of how some programmers can take the tools provided and use them in rather off-center and unexpected ways. K3D comes to mind. In some cases, the user is forced to participate in the programmatic logic, rather than working strictly within a paradigm that’s easily recognized and understood. To be sure, K3D has some cool features, but I think it could really benefit from a greater focus on the user experience.

Raist3d · 2003-01-26 14:39:16 UTC

Originally posted by JoeW
[B]In regards to stability of the app, it depends a huge amount on how you use it. I have the opportunity to see how some of the best AM users in the world work, and for those who know where the “mines” are, AM can run for weeks without bombing (just as an aside, I STILL tend to get it to implode from time to time).

Joe W [/B]

Joe, I can corroborate that saving often is one of the best workarounds to make A:M more stable.

I usually have found A:M more stable if I do two things:

* Limit the UNDO to 2-4 (yeah, sucks but...)
* Save often.. like every 10 minutes to a *different* project- as you very well mentioned as well.

I think for some reason save is doing something with the way A:M is using its memory so that crashes are more avoided.

I did not know about the "avoid workbook mode" and "overlapping windows" tip... I'll try those out.

Kevin_Sanderson · 2003-01-26 15:20:49 UTC

Originally posted by walasek
[B]I was going to keep quiet, and let the others defend me on the list, but I had to say something…

I realize that my OBJ importer/exporter needs some work, but here is the kicker - I gave it away free. I also did it, kinda, out of the goodness of my heart, thought it was something that the community needed. I’m not asking people to pay for it, cause in all honesty, if I did charge them, I would be in support hell. I’m glad Xroad works well. I use it too. By the way, I’ve worked at a major pc help desk, so I do know what causes crashes.
[/B]

Good. Then maybe you know what the CBS/IBM help desk guys tell me about Windows! I do know you give the apps away free. I think that’s great and I appreciate that very much along with others. That’s why I hadn’t bothered you about the problem. I was thinking of emailing you this weekend with the links to pictures and files, but then this jumped into my face. I never told anybody to get a new video card. Yet from your and Jay’s post, that’s what you basically tell everybody. All I was doing was telling the mail list that it was great that Hash was going to work on stability…but…people should check their systems first to see if that could be causing problems. I mentioned the guy who couldn’t load A:M after loading a brand new copy. To my knowledge, nobody told him to buy a new video card. There were several of the regular suggestions of uninstall/reinstall and the like (which doesn’t always work). Obviously, he felt he should for some reason, be it past issues or maybe he just wanted to justify getting a spiffy new video card. He installs it and solves his basic problem. Now he may be getting crashes, maybe not if he’s not too deep into it. But my point was that Hash instability is not always the software. I couldn’t say on the list that it crashes terribly for some folks. But many of do have a pretty stable existence with the software for what we do. And the tips due help keep Windows more stable and all the other crap that goes along with that.

[b]
Funny, I don’t think I’ve gotten email from you with the problem…

[/b]

I still am planning on it as it should be something you may want to see. It could be as simple as me missing a proper setting.

Software is fairly stable for me too. Reproducable crashes I immediately mail off to Steve. You will see my name on the bug fix list, cause I do send em in… I don’t think I ever “put you down” because I believe the software is stable for you. I just don’t agree with your argument that hardware is the issue. Yes, it can be. But my system has been tested - hell it runs for months at a time (never shut down), and I develop on this machine. I know the drivers are the latest, interrupts are set correctly, unnecessary programs disable (I do have auto CD notification on - and I have no problems with it - perhaps its a conflict in your DMA).

Well, I thought I made it clear earlier that the hardware issue is not what I think but I was writing in the middle of the night when I’m usually dead to the world. Yes, Hash has crash problems, as Raist and a couple of others have shown me with v9.51e crashes…detailed bug reports which I thought were excellently detailed, by the way. Much better than the normal “I did this ____ and it crashed.” I want this stability issue to become something of a dead horse. I thought it was long dead since I wasn’t having problems and I only skim the mail list due to the high noise level…so any others I was missing. Then it became a hot issue and I saw mostly newbies posting, so I think, oh they don’t know to check drivers, etc. Then after I post my original tips, then I see Gilles imploding and go “oh crap!”

I just don’t like the attitude that I have to fix my system, or tweak it to get AM to work, when everything else in the world works. If I have to shutdown programs, or have more available memory, then they (Hash) are not checking available memory when allocating structures - simple as that.

And most people don’t like having to strip down how they work just because Windows and some PCs can’t get along. It’s very common in the regular work-a-day world.

The tips weren’t meant for the pros. I should’ve made it clear it was simply for the beginners or people hitting a dead end in case they hadn’t heard these before. I guess I assumed you guys already knew this stuff so you wouldn’t give a hoot since there’s not much new…most of the stuff has been in books and magazine articles since 1999. And besides, you would have better machines than regular folks like many of the newbies running into problems. But my past experience lo these many years of static has been that some people, especially newbies, forget or don’t know to check the obvious. After that, it definitely becomes a Hash problem! I don’t disagree there at all!!!

Kevin_Sanderson · 2003-01-26 15:25:38 UTC

Originally posted by Raist3d
I did not know about the “avoid workbook mode” and “overlapping windows” tip… I’ll try those out. [/B]

Oh, that’s a very old one. I didn’t think that still caused problems. It did when it was originally put in. I don’t use it because it eats up more screen. But I noticed other people do in their screen shots. So I figured it had been fixed but I just never bother with it.

Kevin_Sanderson · 2003-01-26 15:40:34 UTC

Originally posted by Raist3d
[B]Kevin, the only problem I have with what you posted on the A:M list and to an extent with what you continue to post is that you seem to assume (meaning, you come off that way ) that the rest of us seeing these problems in many (most) cases is machine problems.

I hear you, Raist. I was up very late last night…as I told you I usually get up around 4am so I guess I didn’t make myself clear.
Mostly I was in fight mode from the attacks I was getting with stuff twisted around and I was pissed I was losing so much sleep over this.

Yes, Hash is buggy as can be as you showed me with the crash report and I reproduced it.

I do not assume the pros on this forum have PC/Windows issues. I assume the majority of newbies do. Just from the regular stuff I see posted when I do take time to read the mail list. Before I used these tips myself, I was running into crashes with lots of programs (Microsoft of course, Adobe, MP3 conversion programs, Pinnacle Studio), other than A:M. Those problems are mostly gone except for A:M when it is something I don’t normally do like your example.

PS: I am not saying with this that your tips can’t or don’t help. They are sound and good to check out, just that this is not the real issue of what goes on with A:M, even if there are instances that more stability is achieved by following your tips.

Thanks, Raist. I’m glad you find them good as do some others who have emailed me.

Kevin_Sanderson · 2003-01-26 15:44:41 UTC

Originally posted by JoeW
[B]In regards to stability of the app, it depends a huge amount on how you use it. I have the opportunity to see how some of the best AM users in the world work, and for those who know where the “mines” are, AM can run for weeks without bombing (just as an aside, I STILL tend to get it to implode from time to time).

Some of the things I’ve learned from the likes of Jeff Bunker and Tyler Lybbert:

[/B]

Wow, Joe…I never thought about it but those are habits I’ve had for years thanks to the workarounds discovered way back then.
Glad to know I’m in good company, though I wish I was even a smidge as talented as those folks!