View Full Version : Our Apologies - Mac 7.5b Withdrawn

03-11-2003, 06:46 PM
A Note to Our Valued Mac LightWave Customers: We have confirmed that there are issues that we need to correct with the Mac version of the 7.5b update, and we are removing the current version from our download areas. We will correct the issues as rapidly as possible, and will post the corrected files for download. Our apologies for any inconvenience.

Thank you for your patience!


03-11-2003, 07:45 PM
I may be wrong, but I imagine that when the 'fixed' LW7.5B is released that users will have to remove their existing copy of Lighwave and reinstall from LW7.0.

03-11-2003, 11:07 PM
Thanks for getting this straightened out Chuck.. I look forward to the revised version.

Karl Hansson
03-12-2003, 12:24 AM
Will we be able to install over the existing 7.5b version? Or do we have to reinstall the entire 7.5 before installing the new upgrade?:confused:

03-12-2003, 05:28 AM
I won't know that for sure until we are at the point where the new installer has been built, but traditionally our patch installers are meant to place files in an existing folder, without the need to remove or re-install an older version.

03-12-2003, 06:18 AM
Thanks Chuck I look forward to the revised 7.5b release :)

03-12-2003, 07:58 AM
Thanks guys,

Looking forward to the update.
Keep up the great work!


03-12-2003, 09:37 AM
Originally posted by Chuck
A Note to Our Valued Mac LightWave Customers: We have confirmed that there are issues that we need to correct with the Mac version of the 7.5b update, and we are removing the current version from our download areas. We will correct the issues as rapidly as possible, and will post the corrected files for download. Our apologies for any inconvenience.

Thank you for your patience!


Chuck as long as you understand we want the same quality we will wait and we DO trust you.
Keep up the great work!
Take your time and get it to us when you believe it should.
BTW any posibility of adding some G4 optimisations in that update?

03-12-2003, 11:02 AM
Yes, please take the time to do it right. However, the PC version seems to be working for me. Thank goodness for the Duo. Hey, here's a bad joke-

Q: What's required hardware for a Mac?

A: A backup PC.:D

03-12-2003, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by Schwing
Q: What's required hardware for a Mac?

A: A backup PC.:D

You got that the wrong way round ;)

03-12-2003, 11:20 AM
What's required hardware for a PC?
A big door... to stop... javascript:smilie(':p')


03-12-2003, 11:55 AM
I did say "bad joke.":)

03-12-2003, 12:00 PM
Yes you did!

But I couldn't help tossing out...
a "good" joke...


03-12-2003, 12:15 PM
Another strange day today.

Q: What do they call Mac LW 7.5B?

A: 8.0

Sorry, I got the giggles today.:D

03-12-2003, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Schwing
Another strange day today.

Q: What do they call Mac LW 7.5B?

A: 8.0

Sorry, I got the giggles today.:D

/me giggles

03-12-2003, 01:43 PM
NewTek- When you repost 7.5b, please include the linux render like the pc upgrade does, and make sure it acually works with macs.


03-12-2003, 08:13 PM
I can't believe I did the right thing. I heard about the upgrade. I checked the boards. Heard rumors of nastiness. Waited. Did not install update. Update retracted.
Thank god for the forums and this community. It rocks.

03-12-2003, 11:29 PM
One possible idea I had that might help to smooth the transition for future releases and also cut the amount of angst from Users.

Newtek could release a beta version of future updates to the general public, say four weeks prior to doing the official update. The beta version would be a time limited version. Kind of like what Apple does with Quicktime Pro updates.

Then Users who wanted to get the heads-up could trial the soft and report bugs. Something like that app that's built into netscape 7 that reports crashes back to the netscape dev team would be good. Then Newtek could get whatever other systems config info they needed with the bug report. It would save the tech guys from scratching their heads, wonderring what system the bug was reported on.

Plus Newtek would have a come-back after the official release, becuase Users wouldn't be able to complain about any nasty surprises becuase they'd been given the chance to trail the beta version and submit their feedback.

It gives power to tha people 'thefore less angst' and a safety net for Newtek.

Some other companies do something similar to this. For instance if you go to mozilla.org you can download the latest browser update or if your feeling adventurous you can trial the beta version.

This would give Newtek access to a wider range of free beta testers, ie people who are willing to beta test and not upset Users who unwittingly become beta-testers.

Okay just a thought.

03-13-2003, 12:50 AM
mozilla is open source, lightwave isnt. But u make some good points, this day and age one cannot afford to fall behind in users contentness, LW8 should definetly be beta test available.

03-13-2003, 07:56 AM
I think the suggestion of public beta testing is very positive but I would hesitate before going that way.
The advantages of public beta testing are obvious but there are drawbacks as well.
First of all, you don't improvise yourself software tester. "User" does not mean "tester", or, in other terms, it is not because you can drive a car that you can test-drive it. Testing is not "using until you bump into a bug".
Of course, you could answer that, if there are enough people out there using the beta, statistically, they will spot out a maximum of bugs. Hmmm, quantity for quality, I suppose I could agree.
Secondly, I still firmly believe that it is newtek's sole responsibility to deliver a product that is as free as possible of bugs (there is no such thing as bug free software). Asking the user community to beta test the software is, in my view, a shift of that responsibility.
I think withdrawing the update and posting the apologies message was the only thing to do and it honors Newtek that they did so. As for debugging, I will leave it to the pros and wait patiently for their diagnosis, cure, and a shining "gold" version.



03-13-2003, 08:18 AM
at the very least Newtek should preview-release an upgrade with its plug-in developers. Commercial and Free developers alike.

It's been 3+ years without a substantial modeler upgrade, the only tools Newtek has released(Bandsaw pro, Bandglue) have been woefully underwhelming compared to even the 'free' development by the likes of D-storm, Fujio, Daz3d, Pictrix, Carl Merrit, etc.

in the absense of a full, feature release, Newtek has to make sure that it doesn't break the backs of 3rd party fauna when it does a bug-fix release. It's especially important given that many of us are smart enough to adopt these better-made 3rd party tools. One could also argue that these developers are the ideal candidates for a larger, more-controllable, soft-release. They're familiar with the code, familiar with the idea of trouble-shooting, and Ntek has the happy byproduct of strengthening relationships, as it adopts a dialog with these developers within a beta program.

I know that Newtek does this to some degree already--It doesn't go nearly far enough and encompass more of the smaller, smarter, grass-roots developers. it needs to. Heck, It would even put Newtek in a position to nudge/incentivise development of Mac tools. After our lousy handling these past years, Newtek should use whatever method it can to make sure the Mac community is treated better.

03-13-2003, 08:31 AM
That's why we love Newtek :D
Apple on the other hand has not payed any attention to the bugs in 10.2.4 version "clock restting and stuff"
Hope the fixed version will be online very soon :p

And yes, please give us the linux renderer, we also could benefit from it, just as mutch as the pc guy's.

03-13-2003, 08:40 AM
I will leave it to the pros and wait patiently for their diagnosis, cure, and a shining "gold" version.

We left it to the pros last time. It only took the Userbase a couple of hours to work out that something wasn't kosha.

03-13-2003, 11:28 AM
this last little episode does'nt exactly inspire confidence in newteks mac beta testers does it? The "pros" seemed to have missed what i would consider major issues(evidently newtek considered them the same, as is evidenced
by their pulling the patch)
like riki stated it only took an hour or so after the release of 7.5b before
the "forumtesters" started to find "holes in the roof" so to speak.
i am not so sure about public beta testing, but it seems Newtek might want to take advantage of a major resource available to them....the users of the mac forum.

03-13-2003, 12:02 PM
Paintboy, might I add..."free resource.";)

03-13-2003, 03:33 PM
I think I didn't explain myself very well. I wasn't suggesting that Users do the beta testing. That could continue on as it currently does with the tech-pro-dev guys. The beta version that I mentioned would just be a precusor to the offical release.

Anyway just an idea

03-13-2003, 03:48 PM
Originally posted by Schwing
Q: What's required hardware for a Mac?

A: A backup PC.:D


Please let's not turn the mac side of the forum into a poop-fest. if your setup is so rockin', shouldn't you be creating stuff?


03-13-2003, 09:01 PM
Do you recommend removing 7.5b and reverting to 7.5? I haven't had many issues yet, but I've only been modeling.


Capt'n Hector
03-13-2003, 11:10 PM
what exactly is wrong with 7.5b? I haven't been having problems, but if it turns out all my files have been corrupted, I'd like to revert back to 7.5. But if it's something silly and not dangerous, I'll keep it the way it is and continue working.

Karl Hansson
03-13-2003, 11:24 PM
There's a problem with lost expression functions. Thats what I have encountered so far.

03-14-2003, 03:20 AM
And what about improving the general Mac compatibility of LightWave, for exemple by optimizing the rendering engine for AltiVec ;)

You also need to improve the speed of displaying an animation as a backdrop.

03-14-2003, 05:47 AM
Originally posted by riki
I wasn't suggesting that Users do the beta testing. That could continue on as it currently does with the tech-pro-dev guys. The beta version that I mentioned would just be a precusor to the offical release.

Ok, so I misunderstood the idea. Leave the testing to the "tech-prod-dev guys" and post a beta release for anybody who feels bold enough to debug the beast. That seems reasonable.
And speaking of feeling bold, I wouldn't touch a beta with a pole. I like to use the software, and nothing else. Allow me another vehicular analogy: I own a car to drive it, not to spend my time with the hood popped open trying to figure out what is wrong with the engine. That is why I bought a Mac in the first place.
What about you guys, any beta tester out there ?


PS: It seems that my using of the term "pros" caused some reactions. What I meant by "pros" was "pros who can do their job". Pros who can't are called "amateurs".

03-14-2003, 07:27 AM
I am NOT on the NewTek/LightWave beta team, but I do some beta testing and software development. I can tell you from the trenches it can really SUCK when you have a large package to debug. Sometimes the obvious things get missed because you are looking for the obscure problems, or you have to set up a VERY specific scenario, or a VERY unusual situation to create the problem.

I've never owned or developed a bug-free piece of software. I doubt I ever will. I don't approve of such a big bug getting past the testing team, but I also recall numerous voices SCREAMING for some sort of update from NewTek. Sometimes you jump the gun to try and soothe your consumer base, and sometimes that bites you back...

03-14-2003, 08:17 AM
Originally posted by mlinde
I also recall numerous voices SCREAMING for some sort of update from NewTek. Sometimes you jump the gun to try and soothe your consumer base, and sometimes that bites you back...

That's the problem, isn't it ? That whole "version number/feature race" ? It is taking ridiculous proportions. As users, our message to the developing company should be that we want rock solid software. And if the price is waiting for it a little longer, so be it. What's the point of new super-features if they are also super-crashing ?
I have read up the thread that no new major functions had been added lately to the Modeler. That might be so but I would be surprised if somebody could not model what he/she wants because of the Modeler "limits".
The way I see it is that a piece of sofware like LW packs way more power than a lot of us will ever need. I am not, of course, saying that improvements and new versions are not necessary, I am just saying that the limits come from us, the users, most of the time, and not from the software. So let's stop the "I want a new version" chant and we -users and developpers- will all come out winners in the end.


PS: BTW, anybody knows when LW8 is due ? :D :D :D :D

03-14-2003, 08:17 AM

I agree the clamoring mob can be an unruly beast, but I'm uncomfortable when people imply that the customer is to blame for this mess, even to a lesser degree.

There was a point release to Lightwave in May of last year--10 months later we have a bug patch that's dead-in-the-water. There have been known bugs and UI glitches with the software that have persisted for years without eradication(as with all software, I suppose).

And while I haven't been harping for a new release, I have been pleading for fixes to known problems(many of them Mac specific)that put holes in my workflow. I think there's a pervasive feeling that Newtek has fallen short of reasonable expectations--certainly when it comes to it's attentiveness to the Mac platform.

And while this does not make Newtek evil or malicious, it certainly does not make them candidates for my praise.

I can't agree with you that Newtek rushed a product release: I would agree that Newtek was horrible with time-management and delivered a bug patch late, broken, and below expectations. I look forward to the day Newtek manages to actually exceed expectations: that's a scenario that would be beneficial to both Newtek and it's customers(ka-ching!).

03-14-2003, 09:00 AM
Originally posted by Johnny

Please let's not turn the mac side of the forum into a poop-fest. if your setup is so rockin', shouldn't you be creating stuff?



All I can say is, I love the duo. Now it's back to making money.;)

03-14-2003, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by mbaldwin

There was a point release to Lightwave in May of last year--10 months later we have a bug patch that's dead-in-the-water. There have been known bugs and UI glitches with the software that have persisted for years without eradication(as with all software, I suppose).

I completely agree with this. After 10 months, we're given this patch with no clear idea of what it does. This harkens back to the days of v6 through 6.5. Sure it's great to get new features, but why can't the development team take a few months, iron out some bugs and release 7.5.1?

I suggested this a long time ago on the old forums, and someone from Newtek (Chuck, I think) agreed with me: Newtek's site should have a list of documented bugs. When patches are released, it should document which bugs are fixed. End of story....standard software developer practice. Take a look at Adobe's site or what Alias does with the Maya documentation. If a bug is acknowledged and fixed, post it. If there's a workaround, post it.

The discussion with Riki's bug list is great way to address these problems, but should be merely be a starting point (discussion threads tend to get cluttered with workarounds, opinions, rumors and conjecture).

Let me close by saying that I always find using Lightwave a joy and I love the pace at which Newtek is adding all these great features...I just don't want to have to forgoe using them because the latest patch is going to throw a wrench into my workflow.

03-14-2003, 05:26 PM
I'm a bit worried about what changes Newtek are doing. The big problems that I've come across so far are (LW7.5b for OS9.2).

1. I can no longer zoom in on an object properly in modeler, you can only zoom a little bit and then the object completely dissapears and the perspective Viewport locks up.

2. I get these crazy distorted patterns onscreen when using modeler, they come up randomly and effect the entire GUI.

3. QTTools doesn't work. (Newtek have fixed this problem for me).

4. You can no longer save the Font List, you have to keep loading it everytime you boot modeler and what to use a font.

5. A huge problem for me is that I can no longer have 2 panels open at the same time. If I click to open the Surface Editor, then click to open the Preset Shelf, the first thing that happens is that the Surface editor dissapears beneath the main Layout or Modeler window. This also happens with other panels it's really annoying. I really hope that it's not intended as a new feature , purposely built into Lightwave. Sometimes you need to have two panels open at the same time.

Julian Johnson
03-15-2003, 12:49 AM
Hi riki,

With the first issue, do you not get the same results in 7.5? Modeler perspective view is at its most zoomable at the origin. If you create a complex object at the origin and zoom in you can get to some pretty wild magnifications. If, however, you move the object 1km to one side and try and zoom in on it you normally find your zoom is quite limited in perspective and that the viewport stops getting any closer. I think it has to do with rounding alogorithms in the maths involved. Can you try centering your object such that the part you're zooming in on is at the origin and see if it still locks up?

I certainly have always had this in 7.5. If it's different in 7.5 and 7.5b, then it sounds like a bug. Have you still got an install of 7.5 around to check?


03-15-2003, 01:30 AM
Hi Julian, no I've never had this problem before. I think this is a really serious bug.
It happens everytime single time I try to zoom, without fail everytime, no exceptions, the same results.

Okay here's an example. I open modeler. I hit the 'a' key to reset all the Viewports. I check my Grid Size, it's 500mm.

I create a box, with the default settings, that gives me a box which is 1m x 1m x 1m and it's centerred around the origin.

okay this is what my Viewport looks like at this point.


Now I try to zoom in, I get this close and all of a sudden the box looks like a rectangle and in the other wireframe viewports you'll see that it has dissapearred altogether.


The Grid size is 0.1um and the Viewports have locked up.

If I hit the 'a' key it looks like this, which is normal and the grid size is 100mm which is also normal


Now I rotate the perspective and try to zoom in, I can get about this close.


And then it jumps to this, in the flash of a second.


The Viewports have now locked up and and the other wireframe viewports appear empty.

03-15-2003, 03:15 AM
Q.What do you call a simultaneous release of stable versions of Lightwave?

A. No one knows yet.

funny, huh? Who is the joke on? Loyal LW users who choose to use a Mac?
Funny or sad, NT?

Apparently, around here, humerous is ONLY a bone in the upper arm.

Darth Mole
03-15-2003, 03:45 AM
I'm hugely torn by recent events; it's great to see some LW development, but the lack of testing (how long did it take the community to notice these problems?) - and LW's inability to address older, more serious issues - is really annoying.

My personal impression is that this update is merely a flag to say 'hi, we're still here doing LW' when in actual fact, the NT/Luxology team is beavering away on a bigger project - rumours of a next-gen 3D app have been bandied about (64-bit native maybe?). And, of course, there's still LW 8 to come as well, presumably.

So while this update is welcome (they'll fix the current issues swiftly, I'm sure), I wish they were a little more often. I for one really don't mind downloading 5-10MB file every month or two if it's been checked, doesn't break LW and fixes existing bugs. If a patch just fixes one serious bug properly, then it's useful.

Oh, and some documentation would be nice - I've noticed some pixel filters I'm sure I haven't seen before, but can't rememebr if these were 7.5 additions or not...

03-15-2003, 04:26 AM
One thing Newtek have been really bad with FULL STOP is OS support. When 10.2 was released I know people who where practically refused support because they where running 10.2!

Considering the advancement of 10.2 over 10.1 why should users be compelled not to upgrade just to ensure they recieve support. Apple allows Developers access to beta versions of OS X so why was NewTek unable to release 7.5b a few days after the release of 10.2 in order to support the New OS.

There is also the fact that alot of the newer Power Macs won't even boot into 10.1 :rolleyes: .

Julian Johnson
03-15-2003, 07:56 AM
Hi riki,

For the first screenshot, where you zoom right up to .1um, I get the same as you under OSX - a kind of isometric cube appears at about 20um. So, if you start right back at the beginning with the 1m cube centred in the viewport, as you zoom into the cube you get closer to the polygonal sides, pass through and then keep zooming into nothing until at 20um you get a weird cube. You can't select the vertices of the cube but you can select the polys. If you pull out (with 'a') then the polys of the 1m cube are also selected. This only happens if I zoom into the origin of Modeler, only at extreme magnifications and happens in 7b, 7.5 and 7.5b.

If I centre any vertex on the cube and zoom in, the 'ghost' cube doesn't appear. I wonder if it's something to do with zooming into an invisible origin? In my normal work, zooming into specific points or polys I've never seen this before :-) even though it's been around in OSX since 7b at least.

In 9.2.2 I don't get the 'ghost' cube at all. Just OSX.

The second problem you cite where you seem to jump from a magnification outside the cube right down to a tiny one where you can see the 'ghost' cube, and your viewports are locked up because they're at maximum, I can't duplicate. Zooming is really predictable here.


03-15-2003, 08:11 AM
I've also noticed that if i zoom in on a blank layer I can watch the grid size change, it goes 500mm then 200mm, 100mm 50mm, 20mm and then 0.1um

But If I try to do the same with the cube it jumps straight from 500mm to 0.1um not matter how delicately I try to zoom. The only way I can get close to certain sections of my model is by selecting points around an area that I want to work on and using the 'Fit Selected' command.

03-15-2003, 08:19 AM
as you zoom into the cube you get closer to the polygonal sides, pass through and then keep zooming into nothing until at 20um you get a weird cube.

I can't do this. It just jumps straight from 500mm to 0.1um, there's nothing in between.

Julian Johnson
03-15-2003, 08:46 AM
Hi riki,

That's what I thought. The 'ghost' polygons that appear at extreme magnifications at the origin don't seem to be a problem. It's just the fact that your zoom steps are very odd. Here, I go: 500mm, 200mm, 100mm, 50mm, 20mm, 10mm, 5mm, 2mm, 1mm, 500um, 200um, 100um, 50um, 20um, 10um, 5um, 2um, 1um, .5um, .2um, .1um. In both OSX and 9.2.2 with 7.5b. You seem to bypass a lot of these and just go straight to max zoom very quickly (where, by coincidence, the odd polygons appear). Strange. Almost as if you've got a very sensitive key repeat rate set or something so that a single '.' is doubling or trebling up...


03-15-2003, 09:01 AM
With Julians mention of this problem in OS X I thought i'd attempt to reproduce the zoom bug that riki has identified.

Similar to Julian this bug only becomes apparent when zooming into the origin and only with a grid size lower than 20um. This wouldn't be a real concern for most users as there are no editable parts at that zoom level however for riki it is clearly a very bad situation. I've not had time to test OS 9.x yet as it will require installing LW on another computer. I will attempt to do this asap :) .

03-15-2003, 04:43 PM
Hi Julian and cremegg thanks for your help.

There's one other thing I should mention. I'm not sure if it's related. I initalized my hard drive before doing the 7.5b update. I used the OS9.2 disc that ships with OS10.1 (but I haven't installed OSX). Anyway everything is working fine, but I noticed one problem. Ocassionally when I open a folder and then click the close window button it stays open for maybe 5 sec, which actually seems like a long time.

So I'd be keen to see if cremegg can duplicate the zoom problem but also wondering if it relates back to my OS in some way??

03-18-2003, 04:08 PM
Chuck, do you have any idea when the new 7.5b patch for OSX is ready and how is progress? Any hints..? One week, two weeks... a month..?

Would be nice to know. This is like standing outside in pouring rain without an umbrella, waiting for a bus and not knowing when it'll arrive...

Arne :)

03-18-2003, 06:08 PM
I think it would be a good idea to post the status on the forth comming 7.5B update even if it's a trickle of info. :cool:

03-19-2003, 05:02 AM
Originally posted by riki
So I'd be keen to see if cremegg can duplicate the zoom problem but also wondering if it relates back to my OS in some way??

The zoom problem is identical in OS 9.x and OS X. I can zoom into the origin to about 50um and from there on the isometric cube appears. I'm also not noticing any delayed window closing.

What System are you using riki?

03-19-2003, 05:39 AM
I think I worked out the closing window problem, I had a tab/docked folder at the bottom of my screen which containned over 5000 image files. I've gotten rid of that but still have the zoom problem in Modeler. I'm on a G4 400 OS9.2 LW7.5b

I hope someone from Newtek will follow this up.

03-19-2003, 09:48 AM
Chuck is on a press tour so his responses may be a little late....He should be back in the office early next week.

03-19-2003, 10:20 AM
I'll take it.

We have been working on 7.5b since the release, and since the removal of the Mac version tracking problems and removing them.

Timelines are hard to state, we want to release a patch that addresses the main concerns with all the platforms.

We are just about to a point of testing the installer. I want to have that version in the hands of the testers to run through and check all the t's and make sure all the i's are dotted before releasing it.

I am hopeful for a release sometime next week, but don't hold me to that. I want to make sure that the release fixes the main primary "showstopper" issues that were reported. Those are the reasons that the patch was pulled down.

03-20-2003, 06:35 PM
Thankyou DigitalDeuce
It's nice to hear nfo on the patch.

03-21-2003, 05:27 AM
Thanks NT. It is good to get feedback.
Can't wait till the update is released again!

(Ah, it's like two Christmas's...)


edit: It's funny, but I haven't had any problems with 7.5b...;)

03-21-2003, 05:36 AM
Thanks for letting us know, Deuce. :)

03-21-2003, 05:53 AM
I was trying to rotate a simple object in layout and Pitch jumped from -90 degrees to -6000 degrees.

03-21-2003, 01:30 PM
Riki, I noticed some of these posts you are talking about ultra small scale. I don't know if it's related, but I just ran into problems at the other end of the spectrum, which required significant rework on my part. Basically, LW couldn't handle extremely large scales, and my objects would FREAK out. I was working at Mm scale (1,000,000 m) and everything freaked out. When I dropped the scale by 100 - 1000, things worked again. I know, you probably don't want to work at an enlarged scale, but you might try it, and see if the problem exists at both ends of the spectrum...

03-21-2003, 01:45 PM
There is a known issue about scale and even what I call the 'distance from origin' issue.

What it all points to is the math that LightWave is doing isn't 'tight' --- and believe me -- it's on my list.

03-21-2003, 02:08 PM
hey duece... if your trying to win points around here, your doing a helluva job! Go MAN! TWeak it!!! make it MO' bettah!

03-21-2003, 11:02 PM
If I hold down the Control + Option Key and drag left and right in the Viewport, I seem to Zoom in and out okay, no problems.

The magnify Tool also works fine.

But if I use the Zoom button on the Viewport Menu it messes up as previously described.

It's strange that this worked okay in previous versions but not now. I never had a problem in 7.5 it always seemed to work okay. It leads me to think that something has obviously been changed between the 7.5 and 7.5b update.

03-21-2003, 11:34 PM
Okay Must be time for another bug report :-)

If I open a panel in Modeler, (for instance the 'Display Option panel') and move the panel by clicking and draging as you normally do. When I release the mouse I get a systems 'beep' noise.

What's even more bizzare, last night I was working and I had my email window open in the background. But when I closed Modeler I noticed that some of my email messages had be labeled with different colour codes.

It's really odd.

03-22-2003, 04:11 PM
I can't upload images anymore to this thread???

03-22-2003, 04:44 PM
Does nothing work for you riki ;)

03-22-2003, 04:49 PM
Thanks Cremegg everything seems to be working fine now.



03-23-2003, 06:31 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by riki
[B]Thanks Cremegg everything seems to be working fine now.


Hey riki.
Those colourfull window's look familiar. I installed maya 4.5ple on my g3 350 with a radeon 7000 pci card, hey I live on the edge. Your screen shot looks exactly the same as mine did, I couldn't do anything without the fancy colour redraw problem, so I ended up taking Maya off my machine. So maybe it's an opengl problem?.

Something to think about.

03-23-2003, 06:48 PM
The thing I don't understand is that the 7.5 was actually the most stable of all the LW releases that I've seen to date. Even though it has been widely acknowledged that it's standard of performance was well below par on OS9.

7.5b was meant to be a maintenance update, fixing bugs from version 7.5. But 7.5b actually messed up a lot of stuff which was working fine on version 7.5. Which means that it was actually a step backwards.

I don't understand how it can be an openGL problem if version 7.5 worked fine. The only thing that has changed is the update.

03-26-2003, 06:20 PM
For me, preformace is acually much better in OS X than in OS 9, both in rendering and opengl. It is also extremely stable for me. About the only problem I have is that opengl has some display glitches in it sometimes, although this could be the drivers fault, not NewTek's.

03-28-2003, 09:01 AM
OK. Over 2 weeks now since the update was pulled... Has their Mac engineer gone on vacation?

03-30-2003, 03:04 AM
Probably waiting for 10.2.5 ro release which is very soon.
Open GL optimises rumoured to be in this update.

03-30-2003, 05:14 PM
Or maybe waiting for 10.3 with a 64Bit patch:p

03-31-2003, 12:57 AM
:confused: Am I the only one to use a 7.5b version?
I haven't noticed any kind of bugs on a OS10.1.5.
Does all that mess deal with Jaguar?
Am I lucky?
Do I use Lw only at 5 percents?

03-31-2003, 01:25 AM
maybe they beta test with 10.2 only?

Karl Hansson
04-02-2003, 12:41 PM
Hey brownie I use the same system as you. My only problem with 7.5b is that the expressions has stoped working. Try using a simple floor() expression (rounds fractal number to the nerest lowest integer, ex. 3.324 becomes 3) for instance. It seems like layouts expression tools cant find the library where these functions are. Resulting in a error no such function. However when using the same functions in lscript it seems to work. Strange.

Also I opened an "old"(7.5) scene in 7.5b. And it acted very sluggeish and the actors were all missplaced. The sene was about 800frames long and had quite a few expressions and IK. I suspect something in my expressions in the scene is broken thus making long calculation times?

04-04-2003, 05:08 PM
Hey Newtek, any word on the progress of the 7.5b update? no rush, just wondering!;)

Don't forget us!

04-05-2003, 09:37 AM
it would be great to know if currently known mac-only bugs will be fixed with the 7.5b patch. please newtek, can you post a list of corrected/know bugs when you release it? imho. this would contribute a lot to make us (a bit) frustrated mac users happy again :)

Karl Hansson
04-05-2003, 10:33 AM
"However when using the same functions in lscript it seems to work. Strange."

I take that back...

When trying to write to a da.source[] data member Layout returns with an error: "unknown data member: source". Seems like the exact same problem as with expressions. :( It's like Layout has lost contact with LScript. :(:(

Thats it, first thing tomorrow I'll reinstall the good old 7.5 again. Hope the new update is not far away. Considering the amount of time it has been since they withdrew the 7.5b update there must be tons and tons of bugs.

04-09-2003, 02:39 PM
Ok, its about a month after they pulled 7.5b.
Any news NewTek?

04-09-2003, 03:39 PM
development update would be nice:)

04-09-2003, 09:27 PM
Hi, first post here.

I just bought Lightwave-- reading through these, maybe I should've done a little more research, but it still gives the best output available on Mac (in my opinion).

Anyway, the CD I got has version 7.5b on it, and obviously I don't have any earlier versions to fall back upon. Right now I'm just in the education phase, so I am not pushing the program much. And since I have never used the program before I don't know if any problems/crashes are the result of the "b" or not.

So what do you think? Should I just wait it out until the fixed 7.5b shows up, or should I start acting like a jerk to get Newtek to hook me up with an older version?

04-09-2003, 09:44 PM
I never had 7.5b crash, the main problem was that everything rendered was a little bit brighter than normal. You will probably be fine with 7.5b for now.

04-10-2003, 04:42 PM
Now I'm getting impatient.

I don't want start a new production untill I get a stable update.

whats taking so long? 7.5B must be really screwed up.

I hope atleast they were just waiting for 10.2.5 so it will be any day now

Karl Hansson
04-10-2003, 11:05 PM
Hi theosmekhanes. I reinstalled LW 7.5 and most of my problems went away. If you dont have the 7.0 to 7.5 patch you can find it at ftp.newtek.com.

04-13-2003, 06:22 AM
Maybe they were busy with NAB around the corner and VT3. What seems hopeful is that Siggraph is next, and its predominately LW. We should at least get 7.5c there.

NT, please no obnoxious VT demos at Siggraph this year... they distract from LW. I don't mind the VT or demos for it during siggraph, just keep the obnoxious garage editor/ham radio operator schtick to a minimum. It really is a turn off and cheapens your image. Loud, obnoxious Mac fanatics are just as bad, but you don't see them hosting the apple booths...

04-14-2003, 05:37 AM
That's great! One month, and the mac version is still in development.
I see two explainations :
They don't remember that the mac exist.
or They are optimizing the soft like never before, and we will get a full dual processor and a altivec support. It will be also ready for the PPC 970 as a native 64bits application.

But, I'll be happy if can get at least correct open GL support. We are on mac, why spending time for this dead platform.

04-14-2003, 06:10 AM
Originally posted by FLGB
That's great! One month, and the mac version is still in development.
I see two explainations :
They don't remember that the mac exist.
or They are optimizing the soft like never before, and we will get a full dual processor and a altivec support. It will be also ready for the PPC 970 as a native 64bits application.

But, I'll be happy if can get at least correct open GL support. We are on mac, why spending time for this dead platform.

Mac users really should stop slagging of there own platform. You don't like it you know where x86 is.

Why all the crying over 7.5b? LightWave 7.5 is perfectly useable, notice I didn't mention performance, and there was hardly a ton of additional features in 7.5b which we are missing out on.

I doubt Newtek are Optimizing the LW 7.x code but are probably trying to work out all the bugs as this will most likely be the last update to 7.x and it needs to be in a finalised state for those users who dont wish to upgrade to the next MAjor release.

Regarding 64-bit, well LW allready uses 64-Bit Floating Point operations in rendering. 64-Bit Processors merely add 64-Bit address pathways and 64-Bit Integer pathways. FPU in the G4 are allready 64-bit and in some x86 CPUs they are 80-bit (I believe).

Of course I dont know but I can assume and hope that LW 8 has been a massive re write and they are ensuring it is fully SMP aware. The Altivec optimizations where evident in the 7.0b release of LW wether they are able to or inclined to add more or optimize further i again can't say but I'm not at all disappointed with my Dual 800 Mhz performance with rendering.

04-14-2003, 03:06 PM
Cremegg, actually, the 64 bit you mention regarding LW is its color precision. I believe it has nothing to do with a CPU having 64bit address pathways. . Also, I think, it you lump all channels, LW's precision is 128bit, not 64, NT correct me on this. What you are comparing is like saying that a 128 bit graphics card (128 bit pathways) gives you 128bit display on your monitor. Your monitor can only display 24 bit with perhaps an 8 bit channel for a total of 32bit. That is color depth while the other is the size of a data pathway... both are completely independent and have little to do with each other opther than a wider pathway will give you a faster 32 bit display, but not a 128 bit display...

Whats great about the 64 bit pathways in a new CPU is memory speed. That would be great for flip books and so forth. Obviously it will speed up other things, but just to name one fundamental improvement.

Also, tis not jsut hte dual 800 rendering performance that I am unhappy with biut its also the 3D display.

I got one of those shuttle PC, the cubed PC's. I call it my $1600 X-box since I have it for games, but its quite the LW box at only 2.4 ghz but with a 9700. Fact is PC's are faster, but I can't run FCP and iDVD on it...

Interestingly, the motherboard on this shuttle supports hyperthreading, where with 3 ghz CPU's and up it can run a task more than once. I believe this is like setting the multithread in LW to 4 instead of 2 on a dual mac, and it runs faster. Seems like the CPU is faster than the cache, I/O, etc. so it can run two instructions instead of one and still be faster. This hyperthreading seems to be hardware based in the new pentium. it would seem great if macs could do that on any software, as opposed to having to explicidly set it in a software package... or maybe its just that mac software isn't written to well, say compare combustion's dual support to adobe's AE.

You propellerheads correct me if I misstated tech facts.....

04-14-2003, 04:15 PM
This is way too complex a subject to deal with fully. LW has been '64-bit clean' since v6.5, but it is not clear what advantages one would gain with a massive conversion to actually using 64-bit data everywhere. For many math op.s, LW already uses 64-bit double precision math. Where 32-bit floats can be used, it is probably faster and definitely less of a RAM burden to stay with this type of math. Perhaps running these operations on a 64-bit processor will simply double the speed? For integer operations, I would also hope to see some speed-up of operations on 32-bit ints. If not, then using 64-bit ints will just take more RAM to run at the same speed. It is not clear what the performance boost or penalty on existing, 32-bit compiled apps will be when running on a 64-bit CPU, so it is not obvious that building a new LW version for a 64-bit CPU will be worthwhile. If Apple does things right, 32-bit apps could get a nice boost without the serious memory footprint bloat that could occur by just using 64-bit data types indiscriminately. Alot will depend on the compilers available too.

Thats a quote from Arnie at Newtek.

The color Precision you refer to is 128-bit not 64-bit, 32-bit x 4 colour channels. LightWave switched to floating point operations for rendering with LW 6.x, floating point operations in current CPUs use 64-bit/80-bit pathways.

Thank you for your lecture on monitor depth I do infact understand it all entirely. I in no way referred to data paths being related to colour depth.

Hyperthreading is completely different to SMP (symetric multi processing). Hyperthreading allows one CPU to be treated as multiple CPUs and then the OSs SMP support can better assign processes to it and improve performance. Hyperthreading would hardly benefit the Mac at current clock speeds as HT is designed for use with a single CPU. Dual CPU Macs can utilise 2, 4 and 8 threads in LW due to the OS Xs SMP support and a PC can do the same.

I don't doubt that 64-bit CPUs will be good for the Mac but it is not the hardware which makes the machine. Software must be written to take full advantage of any hardware available to it. All I am trying to say is you can wait for the PPC970 and LW 8 but if LW 8 doesn't fully utilise SMP, Altivec and the new 64-bit Integer and address pathways then your just buying a glorified OS machine.

The Mac hardware architecture and OS X is an exceptional consumer PC, OpenGL is much improved under OS X. Its all sitting waiting for applications to take advantage of it all like they do on the PC, which is why PCs perform so well. It's not the grunt under the bonnet its whats driving the engine. Lets hope that as OS X second birthday has passed that Newtek and other developers will begin to tap into all the potential of the Mac.

04-15-2003, 02:34 AM
Thanls for the clarification cremegg. However, i still don't get arnie's theory that a 64 bit CPU will speed up a 64bit render. The quote almost make it seems like a 1:1 correlation. LW uses 64bit math, as oppose to standard 32 bit math, to generate 128bit data (images). So theoretically, all other things being equal, a 64bit data pathway would provide no bottlenecking to to a 64bit rendering engine? How is this related to macs currently supporting 64 bit in the FPU, other than having 64 bit archtecture speeds up all other I/O tasks...

As it stands now, Alot of mac software doesn't take advantage of the vector registers. I think you need assembly for that. So the full specs of a cpu isn't as relevant compared to whats written to support it. I think AE is guilty of this. we've all seen how Jobs does his near-surgical precision comparison of, like, three photoshop filters on the mac and PC. He never factors in the other, oh, 97% of funtionality of just photoshop in speed comparisons, let alone other apps. ąThat being said, I see alot of green on my CPU meter during FCP and Combustion.

What I don't understand is why do we have to force a dual proc mac to use 4 threads to speed things up. Why can't the software calculate the amount of threads based on the hardware? And if running 4 threads on two CPU's, isn't that treating one cpu as two, hence a dual proc as 4? How is that different than hyperthreading on a single CPU, other than being user defines and not automated? its obvious that running two threads on a dual mac is not taking advantage of the total processing power, we have all seens this. So why then isn't hyperthreading relevent to macs if we all here have complained of not seeing enough green from our CPU's? Granted alot of that could be attributed to I/O, cache, compiling, clean code, etc,

04-20-2003, 11:04 AM
I thought Arnie was saying a 64-Bit CPU won't speed up rendering, as was I, since all the math is currently executed in a CPUs FPU which currently runs at 64-Bit/80-bit allready and they will still be 64-Bit in the PPC970. We may however see an improvement in general application workflow assuming the coding is good.

I have to admit I don't fully understand threading but it in no way directly translates to the number of CPUs. So 4 Threads isn't treating it as 4 CPUs its just a more efficient way of feeding the CPUs information from the OS and therefore keeping the CPUs crunching data continuously. Your talking about 2 completely different architectures. A Mac isn't a PC and so why do you think Hyperthreading would even apply? HyperThreading is about trying to achieve with a single CPU what a Mac allready does with its Dual CPU architecture.

I don't want to rant anymore but i don't see what everyone is so upset about. On all the benchmark tests my Dual 800Mhz G4 (1.6Ghz) can perform roughly on the same level as a Dual 1Ghz PIII or a Single 1.9Ghz P4 and the new Dual 1.42Ghz (2.84Ghz) isn't to far from the 3Ghz P4. There _may_ be a few more optimizations that Newtek could give us, I believe GI could do with a boost on the Mac, but other than that we are staying fairly competitive IMHO.

Even cost wise I don't think Macs are bad Value for money. A Boxx Technologies 2.5 Ghz P4 with identical spec to a Dual 1.25Ghz G4 is the same price! I'd rather use the Mac with OS X. I know you can 'Build your own' PC for alot cheaper but If you wanna compare properly you need to look to a decent manufacturer of PC systems. Even Alienware systems cost the same. I'm also sure a renderBOXX would cost the same as an Xserve.

Don't get me wrong I have great respect for alot of 'PC' technology. But if you consider what the Mac achieves with 100/133/166Mhz busses you've gotta be really impressed with the efficiency of the architecture and the PPC chip.

I suppose what I'd really like to see is more love for the systems and the critisism aimed directly, with no reference to the hardware, at the developers because its these people who make our hardware look bad. Thats what I find hurtfull. LW may render well but its far from performing as it could do on the Mac which is odd dont you all think, since apparently 'LW has sold more copies for the Mac than the PC.' Wheres our development to justify this claim? Apparently on a single 400Mhz G4 :mad: .

04-21-2003, 03:21 AM
Threads, or the number of threads, to my understanding, is the amount of concurrently running portions of code. In this case, the portion of LW that renders, i think, or a portion of rendering. So if at 2 threads, with dual CPU's, I'm running 1 thread per cpu, I believe. For reasons that i don't know... bandwidth, buss speed, efficencly of code, etc, the cpu's run at half their speed. Put it on 4 threads, and it appears that the CPU's are being maxed out, hence you're firing on all cylinders.

Hyperthreading on a pentium is the ability to run multiple software threads on one CPU.

yes, from a propellerhead standpoint, they are different. From a technical savy but untaped glasses, above average joe, they are similar. Basically both are ways to make up for wasted clock cycles while a cpu is waiting for new instructions, be it because of bandwidth, code, I don't know. So yes, while Hyperthreading is designed for a single CPU, setting 4 threads in a dual proc system is, to this laymen, similar in that each CPU is running more than one thread to not waste clock cycles. Oh wait, that sounds familiar.... hyperthreading...

So how does hyperthrading relate to dual proc macs? Well if Lw needs to be told how many threads it should run at, I'm guessing there is mac software out there that also needs to be set as such, in particular AE. You can have and 800 mhz cpu or 3 ghz cpu, if you can avoid wait cycles with hyperthreading, or multi threading, then how are macs too slow, especially when my dual 800 proc need 4 threads to be running Lw efficently in like 90% of the types of renders?

If I had a signle proc 800 or 1ghz mac, I'd still would have to use two threads to max out the clock cycles on my machine. I'd imagine hyperthreading would prevent me from having to be conscious of setting that. More importantly, it would run multi-proc software on a single proc mac more efficiently (in theory). You say that mac CPU's aren't fast enough to justify that features. I ask then why do I have to set 2 threads per cpu on my 2 year old 800x2 mhz mac 90% of the time in software as intensive as 3D, where you'd figure the CPU would max out?

Again, this is all academic in that I'm not a programmer or a hardware engineer. However in practical study it seems a valid question...

Your comparisions in mac to PC render times seem accurate. And we can be proud in knowing that our machines are perhaps a bit more efficent, especially in aps like FCP and combustion. However, that doesn't stop one from seeing that single proc 2.4 ghz pentium 4 (on a motherboard that supports hyperthreading in compatable CPU's) in that pimpin' shuttle case and ATI 9700 is perhaps not much slower than a dual proc 1.42 ghz mac that cost $1200 more similarly equiped, without a superdrive. And thats after apple's recent price slashing.

And in the end, LW, or any cross platfor software is the same as far as the users, except that on the PC its faster. Its it by a factor equal to the difference in proc speed, well no. Thats a testament to the G4 and some good software.

Thats not complain, its a fact. However, another fact is that I can run FCP (at all) and for that matter Shake along with other cross platform apps. This makes the mac more usable at least for me. And Windope XP is a big leap from the 98 dayz, but it ain't no X.

There's a reason why Pixar and disney and everybody went dell and not apple, an it ain't just 'cause of moody Linex....

04-21-2003, 03:30 AM

even better check out this link...


As close to apples to apples as you can get. Granted, the mac surprised me in how it kept up. A 3 ghz hyperthreading proc was running about $600 a month ago. this would raise the price of my shuttle to $2000. Still ~ $800 less than the mac that I posted above. And as proud as we can be for the underdog, you can probably get a dual proc 3ghz system with that extra $800 (all of my pricing is from real world fry's pricing with tax included so you can probably do better). At that point, you would be at roughly 2X the speed of the mac for the same price. this is rough numbers, but tangable...

Still no FCP.... but this ain't no FCP forum, its LW!! :D

04-21-2003, 06:19 AM
0k I read a little more about Threads/HyperThreading. 0n a Dual CPU system the system has available 2 sets of resources, each CPU being 1 set of resources. Threads is the number command streams sent to the CPU/CPUs each one targeting a resource within a set of resources (CPU). Should 2 threads both request the same resource then one has to be dropped until the resource becomes available. 0n a Dual CPU system however there are allways 2 identical resources so the likely hood of a clash is reduced. A normal Single CPU can't handle multiple threads from LightWave but HyperThreading enables a single P4 to utilise multiple threads. However should 2 or more threads conflict for a resource then cycles would be lost.

So by setting 2 or more threads you are specifying to LW how many command streams to send to the CPU/CPUs (resources). Sometimes this can have a detremental effect on render times as I saw with Variations, presumably with 8 threads there are to many resource conflicts and therefore alot of cycles are being lost. So a Dual CPU won't max out with 2 threads as your not efficiently using all the available resources, but sometimes you can overuse those resources by sending to many command streams.

In a way I think Dual CPU systems allready use a technology similar to HyperThreading to share there resources.

HyperThreading with recent updates has eliminated the negative effect so you either see no gain or upto 12% gain in performance. With LW you tend to see only around 1 second improvement in speed.

Again saying Apple should impliment HyperThreading is a bit over simplified. It's patented technology, the architecture just may not be able to take it (similar to why the mac can't use DDR pathways on its FSB, the PPC simply can't use the technology) and lastly I'm afraid that its prob just not cost effective for Apple to impliment. They are far better pushing the Dual CPU systems than implimenting HyperThreading for there single CPU systems.

Hope I didn't repeat myself or you to much, also helps my understanding to get somethings written down.

04-21-2003, 07:38 AM
Originally posted by archiea

even better check out this link...


As close to apples to apples as you can get.

What I don't get it why no one seems to use dual cpu pentium systems for these tests. Adobe didn't, and neither did this guy. Hyperthreading is not the equivalent of having 2 cpus, it simply allows better use of clock cycles on a single pentium. Which is why quotes like this on that page make no sense:

"...As suspected, the Mac's Unix based OS X operating system was more efficient with multi-threading (aka hyper-threading)."

Of course the Mac should do better multi-threading. It has two physical cpus, not a single "hyperthreaded" one. Mac OS X may be more effcient, but this test doesn't prove that.

Does anyone have a link to a real "apples to apples" test, with a dual cpu pentium vs. a dual cpu Mac? That I'd like to see.

04-21-2003, 02:35 PM
yet another week ticks by and no 7.5 b patch...

Whats up Newtek? Did you forget about us?

04-21-2003, 02:54 PM
Well you don't have Dual Pentium 4 systems, only Dual Pentium 4 Xeons, hence the implimentation of HyperThreading. The Xeon however is a server class chip and although a Dual Xeon would be faster the price would be bloody astronomical.

HyperThreading is not Multi Threading. HyperThreading is part of the motherboard which allows the OSs Multi-Threading to act as though it has more resources available to it. Also it isn't the Mac which should do better Multi-Threading its the Software which needs to address the Multi-Threading/Symetric Multi Processing.

BareFeats I'm afraid isn't what I consider a reliable source of technical information and I don't entirely trust there benchmark results comapred to results seen at PC test sights.

04-21-2003, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by cremegg
Well you don't have Dual Pentium 4 systems, only Dual Pentium 4 Xeons, hence the implimentation of HyperThreading. The Xeon however is a server class chip and although a Dual Xeon would be faster the price would be bloody astronomical.

Not really. I purchased my midrange (at the time) dual 2.0 P4 Xeon workstation from Dell last year for $2700 bucks. You can get a top-end dual 3.0 P4 Xeon workstation from Dell right now for $4400, with a Quadro900.

I've used pcs for years before getting my Mac early this year, and they were always dual cpu. I can't imagine using a single cpu anything for 3D animation, as dual systems are so much better. (I'm a multitasking nut.. Rendering in Lightwave, working in AE, running Outlook, etc...)

04-21-2003, 04:02 PM
Didn't realise you could get Xeons that cheap I was thinking of a Boxx Technologies system, mind you I wouldn't buy a Dell if you gave me the money :p . Thats just a niggle I have against Dell not PCs. I have been thinking about buying a PC but I have colleagues who say there PCs rival there Vaccumm cleaners in noise level and that would be far to inconvenient for me. Theres also that M$ OS issue I have ;).

I know Pentium IIIs where popular in Dual CPU configurations but I've literally not heard anything about Dual P4s (apart from the Xeons). I do agree with the Multi-Threading though, I luv my G4 and it never gets a moments rest normally ;).

04-21-2003, 09:19 PM
I've known people that have had bad experiences with Dell, but I'd recommend them highly. I've owned several and they've all been great, including the one I mentioned, and it is very quiet (with the exception of the CD-ROM, which is amazingly loud.. it's my one complaint about the system). You can get a very good deal on their systems refurbished from the Dell store, and their warranty service has been very good when I had to use it. Very few problems from an OS standpoint as well.. the only time I've ever had system instability is when inadvertently set different OGL acceleration settings to each of my dual displays... Maya frowned on this quite a bit.. ;)

PCs/Windows get a bad rap on stability, both from the Win95/98/ME oses, which are crap (I've run nothing but NT based OSes for years, and they are a world better), and from people who buy cheap pcs from best buy full of lowest bidder parts, which is asking for disaster. You get what you pay for. If you buy a workstation class machine from Dell or another top tier vendor, you should expect to get a great, stable system, much like you do from Apple (though not quite as dummy proof)... and you'll probably pay an Apple price for it.

If you are really big into Lightwave, right now I'd recommend PCs, just because Newtek seems to focus more energy in that direction (and complaining loudly in the forums won't change that-it's been tried), and because a new dual cpu P4 Xeon is going to render much faster than my shiny new dual 1.4 PMac. That said, things may change on the speed front in the fall with the PPC970, but I don't have my hopes too far up.. We've been waiting for the G5 for a long time, and I don't see it jumping ahead of intel in the first iteration. But, hey, never can tell...

04-21-2003, 10:35 PM
I think this thread is creating a LW 7.5b Mac Withdrawl Syndrome. People are starting to halucinate. Waiting often cause that. This definately needs addressing by the NT medics. So whats on the presciption Dr NT?

04-22-2003, 08:59 AM
Progress on update?
Please fix the rotate in perspective freeze up in modeller.

04-22-2003, 10:14 AM
OK everyone,
Now we are back to talking about getting into PCs again? Have you looked at the PC forum yet? They are having tons of trouble over there. The problem is that we Mac users are spoiled, and are not accustomed to having to fix our systems all the time. If the PC people have to hook up a car battery to there machines, or use gum wrappers and paper clips to speed up thier processors, they don't complain because that's just what you do. This isn't Jethrows Auto Repair. We use Macs, the Ferraris of the computer world! Newtek just installed the wrong stereo system; that's all. Common Newtek, what gives? Where are we with our upgrade? Give us some feedback so we don't have to listen to anymore of this PC neurosis chatter. These people are like cancer for crying out loud! :rolleyes:

04-22-2003, 05:57 PM
crying out loud!

Isn't that a song??

.... don't keep it inside, da da da da dahh don't learn how to hide you lightwave upgrade info.... da duh (something like that :-)

04-23-2003, 04:42 AM
I really dont know why to switch to pc,
"I made the switch to mac" 8 month's ago and i love this machine. I love everything about it...
So mutch nice stuff in the os
I work alot faster etc...

04-23-2003, 05:57 PM
I'd sooner switch 3D apps than I would platforms.

04-24-2003, 10:43 AM
Still waiting Newtek....

How about giving us patient Lightwave users an ETA on when we might join parity with the Windows version.

Thank you in advance...

04-24-2003, 10:45 AM
i don't see what's wrong with having a peeC just for LW and using the mac for everything else - (assuming you can afford both) you can get screaming render times in the bargain

And when your OS corrupts or your hardware melts you can always switch back to the mac :D

04-24-2003, 04:31 PM
Don't do it! Save your M00ney fer a 970 :D . If you dont wanna do that though I'd suggest the PC for rendering only, I'm only thinking of your health ;) .

/me shudders at the thought of windoze....

0h and although I'm normally patient along the lines of updates just an ickle post from someone at Newtek would be nice it feels like theres no one there anymore :confused: . First there was an installer test but that can't have been this bad can it?

04-25-2003, 09:46 AM
The team is still working on it, is all I can tell you at the moment...

04-26-2003, 10:34 AM
Good Chuck!
Us mac users maybe fussy but we are loyal, we usually stick with the scene till we die...Thats the trade off for our obsessive fussiness.

04-26-2003, 12:28 PM

I noticed some asymetrical activity in you CPU meter. You must be mutlitasking a lot....

04-26-2003, 07:20 PM
Its an anger/patience meter..

04-28-2003, 01:19 AM
I bought inot LightWave with the totally buggy 5.0 version. I've remained loyal. upgrading all along, when many of my friends skoffed. Naturally, I was thrilled to see a pretty solid version with 7.5. But, there were issues that needed resoving...so come on...where is the Mac version? We see NewTek pouring its energy into PC updates...marketing new toasters...yet still no hint that our 7.5b is going to be ready any time soon. Come on, toss us a bone...will ya?

I've remained Mac-only now sicne 1986. 51 (personal) Macs later, and I am not about to "switch" to a PC. There are many others like myself, and we often take the lead in promoting the best technologies among our collegues. I have stood solidly behind LightWave in the face of many motivations to switch to Maya. I hope you guys at NewTek read these forum posts? Support us...like we support you, why don't cha? Thanks guys!

04-28-2003, 01:57 AM
51 Macs? thats like two a year or something... Oh are you one of "those" mac users?

04-28-2003, 05:32 AM
Always have a few around. Part of a Mac diet. Buy enough Macs, and you'll have little money left for food. "I lost 10 pounds on the first 3 Macs!" (Now, if NewTek would only LW 7.5b fixed, I'd not only be thinner, but get rid of all those unwanted hours of free time as well...hint!)

04-28-2003, 08:05 PM
HA! Dorian.. I see a whole new line of switch ads...

Dear Apple...

"I switched... from being fat to skinny when i got my iMac..."

"When I got by powerbook, I called it a Thigh-top, not a lap-top, as I was so fat, I could balance it on one thigh. Now I'm so skinny I need a table!!!"

"two computers for the price of one, Apple, thanks!! When I got my new iBook just six months after I got the old iBook, I had no money left for food that the pounds just dropped. Since then, I had found my old powerbook 5400 tucked away in one of my fat folds. Sow now I have two laptops!! Thaks Apple!!

05-03-2003, 12:29 AM
Archiea and Dorian, you should both do stand-up.
But as for all this Mac business...
Chuck, thanks for keeping us posted all the time. It's probably hard when a bunch of little Mac addicts (heh heh.. I collect that magazine..) won't give ya all a moments peace. If you can survive the craziness, keep it going.


05-03-2003, 12:34 AM
the light it's so pretty!

05-03-2003, 02:54 AM
[Mutiple angels voices with high frequency roll-off and a bass response as thunder, at a crisp 48KHz] "Yes...go into the light. It is the brightness of a new Mac PowerBook's polished aluminum case and silver Apple Logo...and it is good. Let the backlit keys of the new Apple 17" PowerBook be your guide...to lead you into the new experience. Computers do not need to bite. Do not invest your worldly talents on the machines of the evil ones...wait. Be thee of good cheer, and have faith. Let the LightWave pass through you. The day of revision 7.5b will come at last. Have faith."

[Gullible newbee] "But...but...they promised me that if I buy a non Mac, I'll experience eternal pee-cee! I was told that Apples byte, and not to eat of the fruit thereof, for it will surely die. I was told this in '85, in '86, and in '87, '88, '89, '90, '91,'92, '93, '94, '95, '96, '97, '98, '99, '00, '01, '02, '03..."

[An 8-bit, mono hissing sound...] "There you go...think PC. The Apple bytes, and as a PeeCee owner, you are as the gods...who only worship on the day of Pentium! This is your Windows...of opportunity. Apple is dead, long live the CISC processor. Worship the image of the cow. Buy the GateWay to eternal night, or, go to Dell with me. Enter in at the Gates. Narrow is the way that leadeth to Infinity Loop, and few there be that find it...but broad is the Gates that leadeth to eternal rendering nights, and many there are that go thereat."

05-03-2003, 11:24 AM
Back on topic,

Ok, nearely two months have passed.

Now I'm pissed!

What the heck is going on Chuck? isn't two months enough time for a bug fix on a bug fix?

Your guys had better be re compiling the whole kit and kaboodle for Altivec and Q-master for it to take this long.

I have been a Newtek customer since 97 and NT has failed every single time when it comes to a Mac release. Please tell me changes are afoot Chuck!

If there are any major issues with this next release I am done with NT! I am sick and tired of spending time and money waiting for you to get your act together!

05-03-2003, 03:17 PM
I gotta say, you points regarding mac releases are correct, however harsh. No mac only program would be so hindered.

I got that Lighting book for LW. On the CD they say in big letters "Includes the 7.5b discovery edition!". So this has even affected peripheral products related to LW. Poor author proabably didn't know at the time.

05-03-2003, 07:26 PM
I'm sorry, but I'm just so damn happy to have ANY version of LW actually work on the Mac I could cry. Running 7.5 on my PBG4. Actually completing tutorials without crashing all the time. I'm in heaven. The durn thing actually works! Let me know when 8.5 is out---'til then I'll jus' bogey...:)

05-03-2003, 11:11 PM
perhaps the NT developers have run out of Duct Tape and String?

Or maybe, finally NT have run out of suitable hacks to keep LW Mac running.

Perhaps the NT Developers have just.. Run Out altogether,

Which would explain why there's a draft coming from the downloads page at newtek.com...

they were in such a hurry they left the back door open.

-- May 2004 NewTek releases LW 7.5c for the mac and LW 8.0 for the PC. --

I'm loosing my patience here.

05-04-2003, 03:39 AM
Could be worse, its ver 8.0c for the PC and ver 8.0b for the mac. would you pay for that upgrade!?!?


05-04-2003, 09:14 AM
The development team has been working long and hard to get a new maintenance patch ready, and yes, are being very conservative and careful about the matter. We've added a number of additional Mac beta testers, and given what was clearly missed last time around, the test crew, old and new, are being very thorough and active in their testing, and very conservative as well when polled as to how they feel about the readiness of the update.

The developers and the beta testers have always, always been fully dedicated to insuring that only the best possible product goes out to the LightWave community of users, and having missed a step on 7.5b, we certainly, and I hope understandably, want to be absolutely sure that those issues are properly fixed and no new ones introduced.

We are very grateful and appreciative for any and all patience you can exercise, and ask that you please bear with us. We do expect to have the update out very shortly.

05-04-2003, 10:18 AM
Thanks for the update Chuck!:)

05-04-2003, 08:35 PM
We appreciate the reassurances Chuck. I have to reinstall LW on a new Mac, and don't want to do so until I can put the new update and all my plug-ins at one time. Would it be too much to ask if "sometime before June 1st" would be an accurate guess as to the date of this (b) release? Any news would be good news. Thanks.

05-05-2003, 04:18 PM
We're working on getting it out just as quickly as we can, but I'd rather not attempt to estimate how close that is.

Any attempt at guessing pretty much has been guaranteed to get us bit! :)

Keith Henery
05-08-2003, 02:16 AM
News is encouraging Charles, Thank You.

05-12-2003, 12:27 PM
I heard rumors about a 7.5c version. What about a mac version of that? Or are we mac user stuck with 7.5b when windows user can take advantage of new cool features in 7.5c?:mad:

05-12-2003, 04:37 PM
Yet another week...

so do we just get skipped on the 7.5b ?

even though NT attempted to deliver 7.5b , they did not. Mac users are getting seccond class treatment again.

Chuck, 10.2.6 is out and 10.3 is due within a few months. Are these releases in your plans, or do we have to wait til' 2004 for NT's Mac department to catch up with Panther?

are any of your staff going to WWDC?

you can atleast tell us that

05-12-2003, 08:33 PM
It would be comforting to know that there would be a bit of LW mac representation @ WWDC

05-12-2003, 11:02 PM
Think it's time for another incouraging update comment from chuck. ;)

Boulster the morale of the Mac users.

Maybe even a thankyou for your patience extra something included when 7.5c arrives?

05-13-2003, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by claw
I heard rumors about a 7.5c version. What about a mac version of that? Or are we mac user stuck with 7.5b when windows user can take advantage of new cool features in 7.5c?:mad:

7.5c is maintenance only, meaning all fixes and no new features, and the difficulties in the Mac version are the primary reason for there being a 7.5c. The update will be released for both platforms simultaneously.

Keith Henery
05-13-2003, 08:48 AM
Thank You Charles.
News is good.

05-13-2003, 10:34 AM
Thanks for the info Chuck! Made me feel a bit better.:)

I hope 7.5c fixes the stupid Radeon-OpenGL bug that was introdused in 10.2.5!

05-13-2003, 03:07 PM
Your the man chuck. Updates like that rest our little mac hearts.:p

05-14-2003, 08:50 AM
Originally posted by claw
Thanks for the info Chuck! Made me feel a bit better.:)

I hope 7.5c fixes the stupid Radeon-OpenGL bug that was introdused in 10.2.5!

Hmmm. Be sure you send info about this to [email protected], but if the OS update introduced the bug, it may be something that another OS patch, not a LightWave patch, would need to address.

05-14-2003, 08:52 AM
Actually, i notice the 10.2.6 update is now out, and specifically addresses some OpenGL bugs - does it address the one you mention?

05-14-2003, 10:30 AM
Hi Chuck, Yes I updated to 10.2.6 and thought it would fix the problem but it didnt:(

Well actually the problem seems to be ATI-radeon based since no mac-nvidia user gets the problem. So maybe its not Lightwave, but why would apple update their OS if it only get worse?:) It could be a major change in the openGL engine that causes the crash in Lightwave.

well more on this issue is here: http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3257

05-14-2003, 01:35 PM
Hi claw,

Its not Apple fault.
It's always ati, check the pc forums on ati, its a nightmare (their drivers).
I Never buy or trust one again.
for that reason i payed more to my g4 to get de gf titanium

05-15-2003, 05:15 AM
Thanks for the reply Pensart.

I know ATI has sometimes bad drivers, but how come Lightwave worked in previeus version of Jaguar. And, isnt it Apple that writes drivers for ATI-cards?

05-15-2003, 09:19 AM
I have no idea.
But i wont buy one again.

05-15-2003, 05:46 PM
The 7.5c update is posted! The OSX version does include three of the plugins previously not in OSX - Reduce-Polygons, Reduce-Points, and Rest_On_Ground.


Oh, and then there's this HTML Help File thingie we did.... :)

05-15-2003, 05:48 PM
Thank god for the Help file.....:D

05-15-2003, 06:00 PM
Should I install over the top of 7.5b? (Mac OS9)

05-15-2003, 06:28 PM

05-15-2003, 07:44 PM
:D :D :D :D :D :D

Thank You Chuck!

Okay, any one who has 10.2.6 installed please be sure to let the rest of us know if the modeler bug still exists! ;) ;)

05-15-2003, 08:52 PM
Call me paranoid but I think i'll wait and see how things pan out.

Cheers anyway NewTek,

especially Chuck for keeping us informed.

Oo, Oo.... and the new help files look great!

05-15-2003, 11:34 PM
I love the help system file. Well done, but not to sure how that is supposed to intergrate with LW :)