Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.Daz 3D is part of
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Haha that was my EXACT same reaction. As soon as I saw -Bryce- I started lookiing for Choloe's response :)
something else to consider is the enjoyment factor, most of the people selling content got into this as a hobby,in the same way that most of the customers got into it as a hobby,,and you just cant force someone to enjoy making content for a program they don't like using(in the same way Poser users don't want to use DS because they don't enjoy using it)
Poser for me had just become a chore to use,and had been for years,it was the one part of this job that actually felt like work...then one day I sat down to do the Poser version of Streets Of London and had a minor breakthrough, the realization that I didn't really have to make Poser versions anymore was awesome,I'd known for a long time that financially I could do without it but kept on clawing away at it out of loyalty to the handful of customers that did use it.it was a decision that was finally made in about 5 seconds and the best decision I think I've made in a long time regarding work,it has made this more enjoyable for me.if DAZ Studio wasn't around and I was still stuck on Poser then it's highly unlikely that I'd still be doing this for my income.
I do wish all the best for smith micro and hope those loyal customers get some good innovations in newer versions. you've certainly waited long enough.
As customers, a Daz Studio-only world is not in our best interests. With no competition in the software, there is nothing stopping Daz from charging for D|S. I don't mean the odd $20 pittance fee they had for 3.x, but real money, like $100, $200, or even more. That's cash they don't have to share with PAs. Forget the razor/razor blade marketing approach -- that only makes sense when there are others selling the same thing, and you want to get a lock on the market. Why do you think they call the current version "Pro," when there is no other version? It's pretty obvious where they are heading, and that's to eventually start charging for the software.
I'm sure the new version of Poser will reactivate some interest, and the PAs here and elsewhere that support both will reap the benefit, for at least a time. These things go in cycles. I doubt SM will simply give up, but they could sell Poser -- how many owners would that make it? Under new ownership, who knows. If I were a PA, I'd keep a toehold in Poser-land. Not all cross-platform products have to be time consuming. Come up with a business plan/product mix to keep yourself at least minimally invested.
DAZ make money from content,not from software,I can't see them charging for DS anytime soon
good insight in this thread and i have to agree with what Stonemason pointed out. I was a long time Poser user, started with version 5 and have all versions up to the latest. I tried DS2 several times and never liked the UI, then Reality came out and I made the choice to learn DS3 since I wanted to use Luxrender and the free plugins for Poser never really did the trick. The next few years I spent most of my time with DS and then Reality 3 for Poser came out and I decided to give it a shot since I had Poser installed but hadn't really used it in quite some time.
I then found that Poser felt more clumsy and less intuitive than DS had become to me and I found a lot of the simple tasks that I was used to with DS, had become major obstacles to my workflow with Poser. From that point on, I went back to DS because it made more sense to me and simplified my workflow. I will always have high regard for Poser because it got me started in CGI and I have many, many hours invested in it's use, but unless it is revamped in a drastic way it just won't fit in with my workflow.
I can understand die hard Poser users not wanting to use or liking DS, I used to be one of them, but it is definitely worth the time to get to know your way around the program.
Daz will make money from whatever sources make them money. It's silly to think that in a one-pony show they won't start charging for D|S. That as a business model makes zero sense.
Sure, they make money from content today. We're talking about toimorrow, the future if Poser becomes a deadend program.
DS3A was 150$ (well, as a PC member I paid 50$ for it on release), and I paid more than 100$ for DS4 Advanced upgrade (on sale, since it was at release, and still with PC discount). And the Pro version had an even higher price.
Even if you forget the fact that DAZ promised long ago that there would be a free version of DS as long as content sales support it (after all, promises can be broken), I really doubt DAZ will go back to paid versions of DS, and I certainly don't see them switching to only having paid versions.Their business model is selling content, not software, so it's their best interest to keep it free so they have a bigger customer base, and also a bigger content creator base since everybody can afford the content creation tools.
Actually, VHS vs Beta and HDDVD vs Blu Ray are two excellent examples of how innovation got beat to a bloody pulp by more aggressive marketing.
Of course they'll have a free or very low cost version! That's why they call the one version they have now Daz Studiuo PRO. With naming like that, it should be clear they are leaving open the possibility of forking off the versions, just as SM does with Poser.
Daz has ALWAYS been primarily in the content business, yet they used to charge for D|S. Obvioiusly charging for software is not beneath them -- nor should it be. They're a for-propfit company. To get a bigger market, they decided to give away the software. So far, it's had success.
But if Poser goes away, explain to me why Daz wouldn't go back to selling the Pro/Advanced/WhizBang version. Don't say it's because giving away free software will sell more content. Yeah, we get that. Given the current naming strategy, it's a foregone conclusion they'll have a free/cheap version. It's the Pro version that is at risk, should Poser no longer be a viable player in the market.
All I'm saying is that for customers, the death of Poser is a market changer in many ways, including the real possibility of paying more for software we now get for free. Businesses aren't in the habit of continuing to prime the pump when there's water already coming out. That's Economics 101.
I don't think DAZ would go back to the paid software model simply because the world is moving away from that - you sell the services related to the software, not the sortware itself. Part of the reason Poser is in decline is that Smith Micro doesn't get that. It's also what is fragmenting the Poser user base. With the current financial status of Smith Micro, this may well be the last version of Poser they put out, if there is another one it will be by someobody else. Not that that's a Poser issue - Poser is a very small part of the SM revenue stream, and that stream is in deep trouble.
Not to say DAZ will never change it's business model, I just don't think they intend to change it to a losing one.
If SM really wanted to dig in and get their customer base back, their best bet would be to bite the bullet on the software and beef up their content quality. DAZ's business model works, and that's because they started life as a content company rather than a software company. Smith-Mocro (and the others before them) were all software companies, and they look at making money back on software sales rather than the content.
It's like hiring the CEO of Mattel to run Electronic Arts. Box-goods marketing and methods don't work for video games-- two completely different animals. Products that are primarily digital data don't sell or market the same way as, say, a box of legos. Once the legos are out the door, that's it. There's no advancement in the tech, and the legos can be used for the next century.
The most successful software companies understand that content is king-- if you don't have it, then you're eventually going to get run over by someone that does, especially if their business model is based on the content rather than the thing you need to have to use the content.
MacOSX (and now Windows) have got that one straight up: If you want to buy the latest version of MacOS, then it's like $20. They make their money on overpriced PC hardware and their appstore. Windows went Free to Play with Win10, and the sales from their appstore have been trending upwards since. Draw them in, get them hooked, and then work them over with nickel-and-dime stuff until you've got more money than God. Rinse, repeat.
Micropayments are lovely things, because nobody thinks about them really hard-- Most DLC ranges from a dollar to ten, on average. Most people don't think about a $1 purchase any more than they think about trimming their fingernails. That's a lot of power packed into a small space.
Which would you rather do: Pay $400 for a program that you then have to hunt around for a source of content for regardless of quality, or pick up a free program with a ready source of content of substantial quality close to hand?
Smith-Micro can fix this, but they're going to have to wake up and smell the same coffee Microsoft did-- the brew that Apple and DAZ are making. When even mighty Autodesk has gotten a whiff of the coffee and headed for it, there might be something to it. In technology, it's change or die, much as I wish it were otherwise. The lack of Poser support in the DAZ store is the logical conclusion of the current economics. It's double the work for a quarter of the return.
Smith-Micro: cut the history loose, and build a more intuitive Library setup, a new renderer and follow it up by cutting the cost of entry. Then buff up your quality control, and start trying to attract more people to make content, which will raise the demand for your products. Pull on your big girl panties and get with the program. Even if you don't fall in line with DAZ, you can make your stuff good enough to draw the customers you need.
This makes no sense. If Poser is no longer a competitor, what happens to RDNA and Renderosity and Hivewire and others? They simply close up shop and go home? Or maybe Daz gets money from their sales, too. You're talking about a business model where the service is intimately connected to the software; the two are not separable That's not at all the case with 3D content.
If Poser is out of the picture, Daz's ONLY recourse is to sell at least the Pro version of their software (outright or subscription), because content competition in the content marketplaces will be stronger. Daz has to somehow make up for the sales going to the other marketplaces.
Finally, who said anything about a losing business model?! How did you come up with that? Can you show the numbers?
If you want a good reason why Daz likely will not go back to charging for the program.....it is completely opposite of the marketing strategy that is currently working very well for them. Giving the software away for free attracts customers, and selling content makes the money. This stradegy is working very well and making money. It has nothing to do with poser. It is simply a powerful marketing technique.
Also....Poser is not competition for them anymore...and has not been for a few years now. The existance of poser does not even come into play for how they grow their company.
was just about to say what RawArt just said..I really don't think Daz care anymore what Poser gets up to..we look on with curiosity but really Daz are forging their own path irrespective of what SM are doing.
I personally do not see the main competitor to DAZ as being Poser, indeed I do not believe it is a competitor at all, and whether it dies or thrives will not greatly affect DAZ's thinking. The competitors of DAZ are the other content market places like Renderosity. Yes DAZ did once charge for DS, but that was under different management, and given the huge increase in sales since going free (or so I have read), I really can not see them switching back to charging for DS, at least not in the short-medium term. Once you have multiple versions of a software product out there you need to support each individually for bug fixes etc, and as a software developer, I can ensure you that is not a cheap undertaking. Right now all its customers can move up to the latest version, including iRay, where they can sell iRay shader packs, HDR's etc. Imagine if DS 4.8 had been a pay version, and only 25% (at best) had paid out 100 or 200 dollars for the new version, DAZ would then miss out on selling all those iRay goodies to the remaining 75% that did not upgrade.
Tobor, I can see your point that DAZ are missing out on money by not selling a piece of software that they spend a lot of money developing, but the reality is they would almost certainly lose far more than they gained, so why bother? Whatever happens to Poser will not change this.
Renderosity and Hivewire will continue. Rendo already has a bunch of G3F & D|S content available, they understand which way the shiftis heading and have adapted to compensate. Hiverwire has the chance to still be around so long as they keep making their models compatible with D|S (which they already do)
Posers disaapearance would only be a death knell for those companies that chose not to change with the primary tech. The choice is theirs and has been the same since the dawn of time -adapt or die- it applies to life as well as buisness health.
Very true. I never used Beta. I heard it had better picture quality than VHS but the makers of VHS got and exclusive deal with some major film studios, so fiddling the market won there.
In the early days of the PC when we were still using DOS I had a PC at work and an Amiga at home. The Amiga ran rings round the PC, it was 32 bit when the PC was still 16 bit, it had a multitasking windowed operating system when the PC still had single tasking command line DOS, but most people thought that IBM was a "real" computer company so the PC won on company reputation.
And don't get me started on music players. You used to be able to get pocket sized MP3 players with hard drives, I had a pocket sized music and video player with 500 Gigabytes once. The latest "innovation" is that no-one uses hard drives any more and all you can get are silly little flash memory players.
Sometimes the better product does win, CD replacing vinyl and cassette and DVD replacing VHS were advances, but the free market ideology that the market always selects the best products is rubbish.
Sorry, bit of a rant, not really relevant to the topic in hand, I'll calm down now. But I still use Poser and I do like it.
I seriously doubt that.
As surprising as it might seem, this is not the only 3D content marketplace. Many of these other marketplaces continue to leverage Poser, as it suits their current business model. Some of these products are Poser-only, relying for example on Poser's shaders or other specific features.
Let's now consider if these other marketplaces have only D|S to develop for. Do you think the owners or Renderosity (and others) will simply give their content business to Daz? Some may fail, but others will not. Of those that remain, the ONLY possible outcome is that they must be more aggressive in going after the D|S market. Please explain how these things can't impact Daz's income as a content curator. Or how it doesn't impact the incomes of any Daz-only PAs.
A stiffer content marketplace has one result, and that's the same money getting spread out. Daz has the most to lose, because they're paying for the software development everyone else is reaping the benefit from. They MUST charge for their software if this were to happen. There is simply no other conclusion.
This is why customers should not welcome the untimely death of Poser, should it happen. Competition is what drives markets, and when competition goes away, everyone pays, one way or the other.
I should point out that until recently I was a die-hard Poser user. Iray and some other features made me try D|S again, after giving up on it about five years ago. And though I'm not using Poser much these days, I still want it to succeed in the marketplace. It serves my purpose (and cheapness) if the status quo remains.
Exactly. And that is SM's current problem. EG If you want to sell content using Posers latest tech that is only available in later versions, your sales are then at the mercy of those who are on that version. Those on older version are automatically discarded as a customer base. With a free app, everybody can use your content because to upgrade is free. There is no risk. The minute there is a price attached to upgrading, people will hesitate. The end result, your customer base becomes fragmented with people who will stick to different versions. By offering for free, the platform becomes standardized, making content support easier because everbody is on the same page, and everybody can use your content.
So will Daz sell the app or upgrades and split it's userbase? I highly doubt it. They stopped selling it because this was one of the reasons. Why is windows 10 free? Because Microsoft wants all users on the same page, making support more streamlined. Eventually they wont have to worry about support for older versions because in time, their platform will become standardized. Will they lose money, yes, but they will make it back by selling other packages for it. This will also attract more 3rd party support because eventually they won't have to worry with things like WinXP support:) From a business perspective, the Freemium model makes more sense for growth.
I gave both HDDVD and Blu-Ray a go, (and VHS/Beta before that). Both the winners were more aggressively promoted, but at the end of the day it became a function storage space. A standard VHS cassette could give me six hours of runtime, as oppose to a bit over four for a Beta cassette. Similarly, Blu-Ray offers 35GB of working space as opposed to just about twenty for HD-DVD.
Of course, the people pushing them had a part to play in it as well: Sony with Blu-Ray, which promised some expandability on top of already superior storage capacity (as well as the PS3, which had a huge stake in it), and Microsoft (and the 360) pushing HD-DVD as an expensive add-on, not only for the consumer but the people making content.
History tells us which won, and the way they were assembled tells us why the winner succeeded. Although honestly the death knell for HD-DVD came when Blockbuster saw the writing on the wall and threw it's lot in with Sony.
Silly double-posting thing.
This isn't quite true, is it. Iray requires a 64-bit OS, and it runs poorly (or not at all) on a machine with only 4GB of RAM. So "all" of its customers is a stretch, to say the least.
That said, I get your point, which is Daz stands to sell more of their content by giving away free software. By extension, that plan also aids their competitors, who sell D|S content but don't have to pay the same sofware development costs.
This works well when their competitors are still going after other markets, even dwindling and niche markets. But what else could possibly result if there's no other piece of consumer-level software to develop for? Facing the loss of their Poser-related sales, everyone will gun after Daz's business. That's inevitable. Do you seriously think Daz will still give away software that directly benefits their competitors? Never mind that with D|S specific content sales now going elsewhere, Daz will have dimishing choices, regardless of what old business models that used to work.
It's the old loss leader strategy perfected by Gillette. Give away the razor and watch the blades sell like hot cakes.
Hey! Don't forget the porn industry also sided with Blu-Ray. HD-DVD didn't stand a chance
Synergy is a wonderful thing.
The way things are, Renderosity, Hivewire, and Daz (and many others) have a symbiotic relationship. Success in any one sphere spills across to help others, because a customer's skill and library is self-reinforcing.
I can have a spaceship from Sharecg, some Greebles from Daz Store, some moonlets from Renderosity, and it all happily plays together.
Companies are, more and more, realizing how valuable that is, though this doesn't preclude Daz management from getting stupid and making bad decisions they think are sound. (F'in D&D 4e...)
You forgot to point out Gillete's free razors don't fit anyone else blades.
This isn't about Daz's approach to how they gained marketshare. That's a given, and it worked. This is about what happens now if Poser fails.
No Poser = other content marketplaces being going more aggressively after D|S content.
More competition from other marketplaces = diminished sales for Daz.
Less sales for Daz + paying for software development + giving away software that benefits their competitors, too = bad news.
True, this. That didn't help HD-DVD any either.
Butr then we know why they did that: It was cheaper to produce for Blu-Ray than HD-DVD, especially with Micro$haft and their nanny-rules holding the keys.
If this was really a concern, Daz could have implemented a royalty system where they would get a percentage on all Daz related content sold elsewhere, and charging rediculous amounts forcing them to sell at Daz. But they are not that evil:) By having content being sold elswhere, it is free advertising for them. End of the day, people have to come to Daz's site for the app and the related figure if they want to use the specific content they saw, and might decide to buy a product or two while they are here.
Tobor, I get your point about DAZ having to pay a lot of money to develop software that its competitors (ie other market places) do not have to bear, but do not forget the huge advantages that being in control of the software that the content markets are supporting gives you. DAZ would know months in advance about new advances, be it a new figure, renderer or whatever, and have numerous products ready for that launch time to grab the big money that happens at the release of something new. If another market place was selling some plug-in, that was popular, the underlying SDK could change to render that useless, whilst their own competitor plug-in adapted to the change and continued to work. Remember that Microsoft was accused of doing just this, releasing add-ons to windows that undermined competitor products (for example Internet Explorer, undermined Netscape).
Content is king, and being in control of the software that drives that content, makes you the king amongst kings.