You know, there used to be a saying. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

Why can't big companies adopt this same philosophy?

I despise Windows. Really, I do.

Here I am working on a commission for and the entire image is built and setup and ready to render, and what happens when I render?

It renders 3/4 of the way and then it crashes on the bottom two rows of pixels. And I don't just mean getting an error about memory. Oh, no. I mean crash as in "Poser has encountered an error and needs to close. Outta luck, sucker!" *BOOM!*

Grrrrr.

And the image isn't even all that memory intensive. I've spit out some images here that were a LOT more memory involved than that. Images where I'm good for ONE render, and then Poser can't read the texture maps yada yada and I have to close the programme down and reopen it and reopen the file to get it to render again. And do this every time.

No. It's nowhere near that memory intensive. And I'm using the same darned memory settings as I use in every other image that I render. So why is it JUST THIS ONE that it won't render???? It's bloody infuriating.

WHY can't slagging SmithMicro get their ducks in a row and actually do a PROPER job coding and programming this thing?! They want to charge proffessional grade prices for a product that you have to jump through hoops to make it work right? HELLLLLLLL no. No way. Not happening. I've been using Poser since version 4, and while I will admit that it has come a LONG way over the years, it still has a VERY long way to go before anyone can even try to tell me it's a proffessional quality CG art suite. LOL

And THEN we get to the way Poser handles dual processors. Dual-processer support my lilly white A--!! If I can immediately reduce the number of crashes by about 60 percent by simply setting a processor affinity to JUST ONE processor, then it DOES NOT SUPPORT dual processors in my opinion. Sorry, SM, that's bunk.

And NOW we come to Win-DOZE. Yes, Win-DOZE, not win-DOWS. Because XP is a complete and utter piece of GARBAGE. So is Vista. So was Millenium Edition. The ONLY windows OS I have ever operated on that worked correctly and was actually STABLE, was Windows2k Pro. I had that installed for FIVE YEARS and never once saw a the Blue Screen Of Death. In less than three MONTHS on XP I have seen more slagging BSOD's than you can shake a stick at, let alone COUNT.

Go ahead. Try, just TRY and tell me that XP and Vista are all that and are great operating systems. They're GARBAGE. They're complete and utter CRAP. And this isn't the first time I've had issues with an XP installation. The LAST THREE TIMES I attempted to use XP I had the EXACT same problem. It was unstable, it was crashing on a consistent, multiple-times-per-half-hour basis, and I got so ticked at it that I ripped it off, formatted my drive, and threw Win2k Pro back on.

Vista? Same track record. Pile of garbage.

Well, seeing as I don't have my old 2K system disk anymore, I suppose this means I'm completely done with windows as a whole, now doesn't it? Because I REFUSE to install XP or Vista ever, ever, EVER again.

So where does that leave me? Linux. Which I have worked with in the past, and while I wasn't on the OS for long (was using Red Hat at the time), it certainly was a LOT more stable than any Win-doze OS with the exception of Win2k Pro. So I guess tomorrow, when I can get everything burnt to a CD and I have gotten this five-freaking-page psychology paper written and turned in, I'll be spending my evening installing Linux and getting it up and running.

Windows can kiss my ....