Depends on the timescale

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:

> Once a post on these groups mentioned the number of downloads POV gets
> per month.  It was a very impressive figure.  Would there be any harm in
> advertising it on the homepage?

Collecting and compiling the data takes time and there are other things more
pressing right now. However...

If I am reading the www server stats correctly, the Windows version had around
16,933 downloads in the month of November alone. This doesn't take into account
the number of people who downloaded it more than once, had a dropped carrier and
had to start over, or people who intentionally or accidentally clicked the link
and decided not to finish the download for what ever reason. That is simply the
number of hits on the download link. Getting accurate individual download numbers
is intrinsically problematic and in no way fool proof.

-- 
Ken Tyler

Post a reply to this message

"ABX" <abx### [at] abxartpl> wrote in message
news:huottv8ip5lglngcmge0b7mq0u0o16oh8j@4ax.com...

>  In other words what you did to verify POV activity yourself?

He's verifying by asking in this server.

Take it easy gentlemen.  Just because you're tired of answering the question
doesn't make it an obtusively stupid one in all cases it's asked.

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:

> 
> Jim Charter wrote:
> 
> 
>>Once a post on these groups mentioned the number of downloads POV gets
>>per month.  It was a very impressive figure.  Would there be any harm in
>>advertising it on the homepage?
> 
> 
> Collecting and compiling the data takes time and there are other things more
> pressing right now. However...
> 
> If I am reading the www server stats correctly, the Windows version had around
> 16,933 downloads in the month of November alone. This doesn't take into account
> the number of people who downloaded it more than once, had a dropped carrier and
> had to start over, or people who intentionally or accidentally clicked the link
> and decided not to finish the download for what ever reason. That is simply the
> number of hits on the download link. Getting accurate individual download numbers
> is intrinsically problematic and in no way fool proof.
> 
Oh sure, but still, could that much interest each month be generated by 
a dead or invalid product?  Like I said, I found it impressive, but 
maybe I am easily impressed ;-)  If only 1% of the hits represent valid 
new interest, I am still impressed.  It suggests to me that there is a 
whole range of ways POV is being used that I can't even imagine.  I 
wonder what the download hits on the Blender site total per month.  I am 
sure its heating up now they went gpl, still it would be interesting to 
know.

Anyway, guys like me are safe to toss around odd ball ideas because 
there are guys like you who think it through more clearly.  Thanks for 
looking into it.

Post a reply to this message

ABX <abx### [at] abxartpl> wrote in
news:huottv8ip5lglngcmge0b7mq0u0o16oh8j@4ax.com: 

> On 16 Dec 2003 05:48:17 -0500, Giuseppe Luigi Punzi
> <lor### [at] onocom> wrote:
>> Is simple curiosity. Because PovRay 3.5 have a date of 2002 and i
>> dont know if the "project" stay alive, or 3.5 was the last pov.
> 
> What sign would you like to expect to see to know it is alive? In
> other words what you did to verify POV activity yourself? I do not
> expect you know every thread on this newsserver but no dubts large
> number of posts on this server has meaning. Why new entries appear in
> 'News' sections on the website with lack of 'POV-Ray is dead'? Why
> informations for Windows 2003 and note about beta for MacPOV-3.5.1
> appeared on download page? What is said in faq group about POV4? AFAIK
> 3.5.1 (bugfix release) is under development and IIRC will be released
> when will be ready, thought if you know any bug you would expect to 
> be fixed it has to be known with well written bug report first.
> Please, say to your friend that we all wish to have POV-Ray 4 with two
> zeros in year number ;-)
> 
> ABX
> 

I don't know if i understand.

Then. Pov-Ray 4 (or 3.5.1) is in develop phase. But with new internal 


And then, Pov-Ray 4 it will be someday of the next year (for example).

Thanks, and sorry for my bad english.

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 20:02:48 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
> LOL! Heheh... Now please calm down Mr. ABX...

That's probably my english formulation because I wasn't upset at all. I just
tried to describe what would I do myself to verify what's about POV4 and
current development. I'm surprised it sounded agresively and it wasn't my
intention. Sorry for that.

>   Have you had some coffee yet..?   ;)

Two at that time.

ABX

Post a reply to this message

On 17 Dec 2003 04:08:39 -0500, Giuseppe Luigi Punzi <lor### [at] onocom> wrote:

>I don't know if i understand.
>
>Then. Pov-Ray 4 (or 3.5.1) is in develop phase. But with new internal 

>
>And then, Pov-Ray 4 it will be someday of the next year (for example).

IIRC (If I remember correctly) Pov-Ray 3.5.1 is a maintenance release (bug fix).
Pov-Ray 4.0 is under development and will be released when it is ready. There is
no timetable for this.

>Thanks, and sorry for my bad english.
 It's not that bad :-}

Regards
        Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:
>It suggests to me that there is a
>whole range of ways POV is being used that I can't even imagine.

This is what always impresses me about POVRay and its versatility.  I use it
jsut about every day in "orthographic" mode as a 2D graphing calculator in
my classrooms (thanks to Freidrich Lohmueller for this idea!); of course,
it is invaluable when teaching vector calculus.  And I've hardly begun to
scratch the surface of the mathematical teaching applications, much less
those in research and visualization (witness what Paul Bourke, among
others, does.)  And that's just math. . . . And that's just educational
uses. . . .

POVRay 4 -- my goodness!  Hold your horses! (as we say in Midwest US.)  I'm
still struggling with 3.5.  It reminds me of when I was a student at the
University of Nebraska, and people complained about the lack of funding for
a new library (while the sports teams spent -- and generated -- their
millions.)  I used to reply, "So I guess this means that you've finished
reading all the books in the old one, huh."

When it comes out, I'll be overwhelmed by it; in the meantime, I'll just
continue to be overwhelmed by 3.5.

Dave Matthews

Post a reply to this message

Just my nickles worth, but having bought another program, Poser 5, and
finding that it was rushed to meet a timetable, complete with fatal bugs and
a poorly thought out interface, take all the time you need for the next POV.
Timetable shouldn't mean anything and there is no excuse for releasing
something as bad as poser was, before the 57 megs of patches to make it
work.  (And it's still unstable)

Cheers

Greybeard

"Stephen McAvoy" <mcavoys[at]AOLdotCOM> wrote in message
news:1g80uv03po0p0girj7d05tcvueh596akk3@4ax.com...
>
> IIRC (If I remember correctly) Pov-Ray 3.5.1 is a maintenance release (bug
fix).
> Pov-Ray 4.0 is under development and will be released when it is ready.
There is
> no timetable for this.
>

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:

> Oh sure, but still, could that much interest each month be generated by
> a dead or invalid product?  Like I said, I found it impressive, but
> maybe I am easily impressed ;-)  If only 1% of the hits represent valid
> new interest, I am still impressed.

I suspect the "valid new interest" level remains fairly high. There is no small
number of people who have been exposed to the images created by POV-Ray but I
also suspect that once they download the program, and find out it doesn't work
like Photoshop, their interest quickly wanes. Unfortunately, POV-Ray appeals to
a niche market and I doubt it will ever be a maintsream program for the masses.

-- 
Ken Tyler

Post a reply to this message