well.....

well.....

Post by Kathleen Bake » Mon, 12 Mar 2001 18:47:36



Thanks, but i have psp 5.0.
did not see a point in buying the new version. I mean its kinda stupid, you
buy it then you cant just upgrade to it for free.
and any ways theres  not enough new stuff in psp 7.0 to go out and spend the
money on a newer version.

But thanks for the help kris.
sincerely
will
P.S:Filters is the best but ill look.

 
 
 

well.....

Post by Kathleen Bake » Mon, 12 Mar 2001 18:49:23


Oh yeah all so, What is vector ive not exactly had psp for a while. and i
have no idea what vector and all this stuff your talking bout is.
Sincerely
willy

 
 
 

well.....

Post by Pixel Tickle » Mon, 12 Mar 2001 20:45:25


Depending on what you use PSP for you may not need to upgrade.
However, I do a lot of photo editing and the added features that PSP7
has over PSP5 are well  worth the money.
In addition to the photo editing tools themselves, there are several
new built in filters that have saved me much time and frustration.
I've gone back and reedited some of the original photos and compared
the PSP6 edited version and the PSP7 edited version and the PSP7
version is clearly the winner.
I was slow to switch from PSP5 to PSP6, but with version PSP7, I
waited with baited breath for its release.
As for vectors, I haven't been able to live without them since v6 even
though I'm not the master as Ron Lacey and others are at using them.
Many many many companies do not offer free upgrades. If they did,
they'd go out of business.
Marian


Quote:> Thanks, but i have psp 5.0.
> did not see a point in buying the new version. I mean its kinda
stupid, you
> buy it then you cant just upgrade to it for free.
> and any ways theres  not enough new stuff in psp 7.0 to go out and
spend the
> money on a newer version.

> But thanks for the help kris.
> sincerely
> will
> P.S:Filters is the best but ill look.

 
 
 

well.....

Post by Kris Zaklik » Mon, 12 Mar 2001 23:00:44



> Thanks, but i have psp 5.0.
> did not see a point in buying the new version. I mean its kinda stupid, you
> buy it then you cant just upgrade to it for free.
> and any ways theres  not enough new stuff in psp 7.0 to go out and spend the
> money on a newer version.

> But thanks for the help kris.
> sincerely
> will
> P.S:Filters is the best but ill look.

Let me make a suggestion if you don't mind. If you were to
REPLY to your own posts instead of posting NEW messages,
all the related posts from you would appear in one newsgroup
thread and would be much easier to follow.

Long ago, I once had a car. It was a simple and cheap car.
It had no radio, the heater had no fan, and the windows
were operated by hand. Now my car has a radio, electric
windows and a sophisticated temperature control system
including air conditioning. Should I have received the
upgrade from my first car to my current one for free? After
all, I paid the first time, right? Shouldn't all the
improvements be free after that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kris Zaklika              Jasc Software, Inc.                   The



----------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

well.....

Post by Shamma » Tue, 13 Mar 2001 01:40:50


But you do get free upgrades, in version, as most other companies do.
Version 7, to 7.01, 7.02, etc., all free.
A jump to the next version, i.e., Version 6 to Version 7 (considered a major
release)  is what you pay for (and rightly so, most major releases contain
new features and improvements) and for the increasing scope of PSP, you
don't really pay an outlandish upgrade price.

BTW, exellent analogy, Kris, I'm still grinning.

Don (Shamman) Knight






>> Thanks, but i have psp 5.0.
>> did not see a point in buying the new version. I mean its kinda stupid, you
>> buy it then you cant just upgrade to it for free.
>> and any ways theres  not enough new stuff in psp 7.0 to go out and spend the
>> money on a newer version.

>> But thanks for the help kris.
>> sincerely
>> will
>> P.S:Filters is the best but ill look.

>Let me make a suggestion if you don't mind. If you were to
>REPLY to your own posts instead of posting NEW messages,
>all the related posts from you would appear in one newsgroup
>thread and would be much easier to follow.

>Long ago, I once had a car. It was a simple and cheap car.
>It had no radio, the heater had no fan, and the windows
>were operated by hand. Now my car has a radio, electric
>windows and a sophisticated temperature control system
>including air conditioning. Should I have received the
>upgrade from my first car to my current one for free? After
>all, I paid the first time, right? Shouldn't all the
>improvements be free after that?
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Kris Zaklika              Jasc Software, Inc.                   The



>----------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

well.....

Post by Kris Zaklik » Tue, 13 Mar 2001 01:40:52



> But you do get free upgrades, in version, as most other companies do.
> Version 7, to 7.01, 7.02, etc., all free.
> A jump to the next version, i.e., Version 6 to Version 7 (considered a major
> release)  is what you pay for (and rightly so, most major releases contain
> new features and improvements) and for the increasing scope of PSP, you
> don't really pay an outlandish upgrade price.

> BTW, exellent analogy, Kris, I'm still grinning.

I'm still hoping for the free car :)

> Don (Shamman) Knight






> >> Thanks, but i have psp 5.0.
> >> did not see a point in buying the new version. I mean its kinda stupid, you
> >> buy it then you cant just upgrade to it for free.
> >> and any ways theres  not enough new stuff in psp 7.0 to go out and spend the
> >> money on a newer version.

> >> But thanks for the help kris.
> >> sincerely
> >> will
> >> P.S:Filters is the best but ill look.

> >Let me make a suggestion if you don't mind. If you were to
> >REPLY to your own posts instead of posting NEW messages,
> >all the related posts from you would appear in one newsgroup
> >thread and would be much easier to follow.

> >Long ago, I once had a car. It was a simple and cheap car.
> >It had no radio, the heater had no fan, and the windows
> >were operated by hand. Now my car has a radio, electric
> >windows and a sophisticated temperature control system
> >including air conditioning. Should I have received the
> >upgrade from my first car to my current one for free? After
> >all, I paid the first time, right? Shouldn't all the
> >improvements be free after that?
> >----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >Kris Zaklika              Jasc Software, Inc.                   The



> >----------------------------------------------------------------------

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kris Zaklika              Jasc Software, Inc.                   The



----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 

well.....

Post by mik » Thu, 15 Mar 2001 02:32:54





>>=Long ago, I once had a car. It was a simple and
>>=cheap car.  It had no radio, the heater had no fan,
>>=and the windows were operated by hand.

>>They seemed to last a lot longer then, didn't they?

>That just isn't true.  Perhaps you never owned a car in the 60s or 70s
>but trust me, they build them way better today.

Its all very subjective Ron. Youre right that many people look back
with the 'rose coloured glasses' syndrome, but on the other hand I
currently have two pre '71 cars on the road that are faultless,
troublefree, cheap, easy to fix etc, and one post '90 Range Rover that
has been nothing but trouble. You cant even really say that the modern
car is *structurally* better built unilaterally, as I know of an
instance when an artic fell over sideways on top of a Minor and broke
both the occupants legs. When PC Plod came along he said had it been
any other car the occupant would not have survived.  I have three more
pre '71 cars (I'm a sucker for punishment) in the process of build,
none of which will cost more than about 5000 to restore, will cost
nothing in road tax (all exempt), do 40+ mpg, appreciate rather than
depreciate, attract attention in the way no modern car can, and go on
a group insurance policy that means I insure 25 thousand pounds worth
of cars comprehensively for about 250 quid. The Range Rover costs more
than that to insure and its one car....
Still, on your original point you have to define *better built*.
'Course these were the bad old days of car production and cars often
left the factory with screwdrivers left behind panels etc, but is that
really any different today? Do you define longevity as better built?
Made from thicker grade steel, a newly restored Moggy now will outlast
a new modern car by several decades. Safety? Well theres an argument
that people tend to drive to compensate for added safety features. For
example, which car would you drive more carefully; one with so many
airbags that you couldnt possibly harm yourself, or one where both
bumpers are packed with dynamite and will blow up at the slightest
impact? So, weve dealt with care of construction, duration of use,
safety features and not really come up with anything definitive to say
newer cars are in any way 'better'. Its not really that unreasonable
to say 'they dont build them like they used to', you just have to
temper it against dodgy recollection...

Mike Dean
www.TheMinorSite.co.uk
Unsolicited mail SpamCopped

 
 
 

well.....

Post by Porte » Thu, 15 Mar 2001 02:35:04


Quote:> >=Long ago, I once had a car. It was a simple and
> >=cheap car.  It had no radio, the heater had no fan,
> >=and the windows were operated by hand.

> >They seemed to last a lot longer then, didn't they?

> That just isn't true.  Perhaps you never owned a car in the 60s
or 70s
> but trust me, they build them way better today.

> Ron

Naaa, It's just that you can now afford better models.  :)
 
 
 

well.....

Post by Joe Cilinceo » Thu, 15 Mar 2001 03:23:20


I don't know I still have a 1970 Datsun 240 Z in great shape. g

--

Joe Cilinceon
http://newdawn.gzinc.com/




> >Naaa, It's just that you can now afford better models.  :)

> Naaa, all the models are better now, remind me to tell you about my
> bio degradable '62 Mercury sometime<gr>.

> Ron

> *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
>                        Ron Lacey
>                       Murillo Ont.
>               ron at ronstoons dot com
>                 http://ronstoons.com/
> *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

 
 
 

well.....

Post by Kris Zaklik » Thu, 15 Mar 2001 03:29:23




> =Long ago, I once had a car. It was a simple and
> =cheap car.  It had no radio, the heater had no fan,
> =and the windows were operated by hand.

> They seemed to last a lot longer then, didn't they?
> And you could work on them yourself without half
> a million dollars worth of diagnostic equipment. It's
> almost like they build them to die in a few years
> nowadays, and to be impossible for the owner to
> maintain..

This car had sealed-for-life bearings. Life proved to be
30,000 miles. It is good the car was easy to work on since
I worked on it a lot. That's how I learned enough to get
a job as a garage mechanic when I was in college.

Quote:

> =Now my car has a radio, electric windows and a
> =sophisticated temperature control system including
> =air conditioning.

> Costs a fortune to fix all that *when it screws up,
> doesn't it?  I heard these accessory packages are
> where dealers make most of their profit. You almost
> have to special order a car *without* all the goodies.

I've yet to do anything other than check the oil, add air
to the tires and washer fluid to the reservoir. All the
maintenance is absolutely free for three years. Not only
that but they come to my house, pick up the car, fix
whatever (not much) and return it later in the day.

Quote:

> =Should I have received the upgrade from my first
> =car to my current one for free?

> This is your most important point, I guess. When you
> compare software to a physical product like cars, it
> seems obvious that the new product needed additional
> development time, but the similarities end there. Car
> companies have to physically build every new model
> that comes off the assembly lines, and there are raw
> materials, labor, factory overhead, etc. The software
> company can make copies of its new version -- or
> patches -- for nothing but the cost of the media (which
> is nothing, if distributed over the internet).
> I agree that a software company should be able to
> charge for upgrades, but software is unique when
> compared to any physical product.

So stamping the CDs is free? Printing the boxes is free?
Delivery is free. Licensing watermarking or compression
software is free. Perhaps you'd like to do without
documentation too? Or we could pay the writers nothing.
Certainly you want printed documentation right, which
is printed for free too. Localization costs nothing
because translators are free. Computers cost nothing,
software engineers receive no pay, it costs nothing to
provide a huge pipe to the net to download evals, and
none of the other personnel need to be paid or have
health care coverage. Tech Support? Of course they'll
work for nothing. Nobody needs to pay anyone to put
stuff in a box, in shipping containers, on a palette.
In reality, creating software is a factory operation
like any other. It just requires more creative and
harder working people than the typical factory job.
The product is delivered in a concentrated form on CD.
This makes it look cheap and worthless, but of course
it isn't.

Quote:

> =After all, I paid the first time, right?

> That's certainly a possibility.

> =Shouldn't all the improvements be free after that?

> With some companies they are. Some products --
> Irfanview & Pegasus Mail come to mind -- are free,
> period, and upgraded on a regular basis.

"I've always depended on the kindness of strangers"
quoth Blanche Dubois.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> I'd be careful about comparing software to any other
> mass-produced product. Cars & software both cost
> money & time to develop, but
> * Software isn't bought anymore these days; it's
>   licensed.  A cynic might say this is an attempt to
>   sidestep various implied warranties, fitness for
>   merchantibility, etc.  This might be closer to
>   leasing a car than buying one.
> * You can read your car warranty before you buy.
>   EULAs show up after you've "bought" & opened
>   the software.  A lot of stores won't let you return
>   opened software. Convenient for the software
>   companies, too bad for the consumer.
> * As I said above, after you have one program ready
>   to ship, you can mass-produce for next to nothing.
>   You can't do this with cars. If you could, people
>   would be copying cars themselves instead of buying,
>   leasing or stealing them.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kris Zaklika              Jasc Software, Inc.                   The



----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 

well.....

Post by Kris Zaklik » Thu, 15 Mar 2001 17:16:25






>  --snip--
> => =Should I have received the upgrade from my first
> => =car to my current one for free?
> =>
> => This is your most important point, I guess. When you
> => compare software to a physical product like cars, it
> => seems obvious that the new product needed additional
> => development time, but the similarities end there. Car
> => companies have to physically build every new model
> => that comes off the assembly lines, and there are raw
> => materials, labor, factory overhead, etc. The software
> => company can make copies of its new version -- or
> => patches -- for nothing but the cost of the media (which
> => is nothing, if distributed over the internet).
> => I agree that a software company should be able to
> => charge for upgrades, but software is unique when
> => compared to any physical product.
> =
> =So stamping the CDs is free?

> I didn't say it was free, but compared to rolling a car off
> the assembly line, it may as well be free. What does it
> cost to stamp CDs -- pennies per unit?

> =Printing the boxes is free?

> Is the bulk of software still delivered in factory boxes?
> I get the impression that more and more is distributed
> over the internet. M$ depends on online upgrading a
> lot.

I don't work for Microsoft. We sell a lot of boxed product.
People like the manuals you get in the box.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> =Delivery is free.
> =Licensing watermarking or compression software is free.
> =Perhaps you'd like to do without documentation too?
> =Or we could pay the writers nothing. Certainly you want
> =printed documentation right, which is printed for free too.
> =Localization costs nothing because translators are free.
> =Computers cost nothing, software engineers receive no
> =pay, it costs nothing to provide a huge pipe to the net
> =to download evals, and none of the other personnel
> =need to be paid or have health care coverage. Tech
> =Support? Of course they'll work for nothing. Nobody
> =needs to pay anyone to put stuff in a box, in shipping
> =containers, on a palette. In reality, creating software is
> =a factory operation like any other.

> Please. I never said there were *no* costs involved.
> A car company could make a large list of its costs, too.
> I admitted that it costs money & time to *develop* the
> product. The analogy with cars fails after the first car/
> program is completed, due to the ease/cost of copying
> software vs. assembling each car from the ground up.
> This is why software copying is a problem and copying
> cars isn't.

Wrong, I'm afraid. Have you heard of a chop shop? You steal
the car, use it's parts to create another and sell it. The
analogy to software cracking and resale is rather good.

Without trying to start a hare on another topic, you might
want to think of two other analogies. A drug company does
years of research and finally discovers a successful drug.
After that, it's just a question of squashing some powder
into pills - pretty cheap. Consider, however, the cost of
medicines. Or 3M develops Scotch Brand tape. Years of
development go into developing optimal adhesives, backside
release coatings, polymer film and coating technology. Once
that is done, they can run off miles of the stuff at a
trivial comparative cost. Copying of branded products is,
of course, a problem as well. It is not just restricted to
pseudo-Rolex watches. Counterfeit * abound - you are
just not in the right part of the world to see it.

All manufacturing - including software - involves amortizing
the development cost over the life of the product. If the
product is stolen in sufficient quantity then it is not
possible to achieve balance between what you spent and what
you earned and the company goes out of business.

Quote:

> =It just requires more creative and harder working people
> =than the typical factory job.

> Harder-working? How so?

They have release deadlines, factory workers have standard
shifts. You haven't been here so you don't know how late
people work (and there is no overtime by the way). Have a
little think about my participation in this newsgroup and
how I hold down a separate real job at the same time. When
do you think I get it all done? How many hours a week do
I work? (And I have no claim to uniqueness here.)

Quote:

> =The product is delivered in a concentrated form on CD.
> =This makes it look cheap and worthless, but of course
> =it isn't.

> I didn't say the *product* was cheap. I said the cost of
> mass-producing the product was dirt cheap, compared
> to cars.

And the software is dirt cheap compared to the cost of
a car too. The price might be comparable to the cost of
a toaster and you can bet a great deal less work went
into creating the toaster.

Quote:

> => =After all, I paid the first time, right?
> =>
> => That's certainly a possibility.
> =>
> => =Shouldn't all the improvements be free after that?
> =>
> => With some companies they are. Some products --
> => Irfanview & Pegasus Mail come to mind -- are free,
> => period, and upgraded on a regular basis.
> =
> ="I've always depended on the kindness of strangers"
> =quoth Blanche Dubois.

> Your point?

My point is this. When a hobbyist programmer decides to
give up his free software hobby, you are stuck. No more
file format support enhancements, no more new features.
The charity is over. Meanwhile, here - where you paid -
we are already working on new things for the future. And,
moreover, you expect it from us and foresee us staying
around to deliver it. If you wish to do everything with
free software I have no wish to stand in your way. What,
bye the bye, would be your choice of image editors?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kris Zaklika              Jasc Software, Inc.                   The



----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 

well.....

Post by Vicki & Ray Pag » Thu, 15 Mar 2001 22:42:04


Please Stop, you're making me homesick (Fairbanks, Alaska).
Vicki




> ><gr> Well, given that you live way up there in the frozen tundra,
> >shouldn't be much of a problem.

> Got another 4 or 5 inches of snow yesterday, we're dreaming of a white
> Easter<gr>.

> Ron

> *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
>                        Ron Lacey
>                       Murillo Ont.
>               ron at ronstoons dot com
>                 http://ronstoons.com/
> *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

 
 
 

1. Better jpeg, better compression!

Hi,
Just to prove we could compress anything, we compressed the download
size of our "Better JPEG" Photoshop plugin for Windows down from a meg
to 500k.  This is a free trial so that you can see the compression
savings of using our jpeg algorithm rather than Adobe's!
ftp://pegasusimaging.com/pub/PS_SHARE.EXE
JPEG screensaver included.
You will notice the difference!
jack
--
********************************************************************
      Jack Berlin - http://www.jpg.com/ - 813-875-7575 x303

********************************************************************

2. OpenGL Technical FAQ

3. Best of the Best

4. Download lightwave

5. what is the best way to achieve best quality of animation on VHS through 3dstuio

6. Possible Contract Work - UK only

7. better processor or a better graphics card?

8. question: fabric, textures, copyright

9. Better Monitor vs Better Graphic Card?

10. What's my best option for best video upgrade?

11. Better plot than SigmaPlot? (Re: The best IBM PC graph program)