bugs 2005-05-07 - By Bernard Lebel
Back
I second that pretty much. XSI 4.0 was one of the most unstable build I have
used, but 4.2 have been nice so far, though not as 3.5.11.
Only rendering seems to play hard with me, but that has been since XSI
1.5as far as I'm concerned.
I guess this has a lot to do with hardware, drivers, and OS configuation.
The difference in stability for various users with the same software can't
be blamed solely on the software.
Cheers
Bernard
On 5/7/05, kim aldis <kim@(protected)> wrote:
>
> My experience is that it's pretty stable. I could probably count on it
> crashing less than once or twice a week this past 6-9 months. It got a bit
> weird for a while when I was pushing hair quite hard but nothing I
> couldn't
> work with and I was using a viariety of machines at a number of sites. Ít
> has to be machine or workstyle specific.
>
I second that pretty much. XSI 4.0 was one of the most unstable build I
have used, but 4.2 have been nice so far, though not as 3.5.11.<br>
Only rendering seems to play hard with me, but that has been since XSI 1.5 as
far as I'm concerned.<br>
<br>
I guess this has a lot to do with hardware, drivers, and OS
configuation. The difference in stability for various users with the
same software can't be blamed solely on the software.<br>
<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
Bernard<br>
<br>
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/7/05, <b class="gmail_sendername"
>kim aldis</b> <<a href="mailto:kim@(protected)">kim@(protected)</a>>
wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb
(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
My experience is that it's pretty stable. I could probably count on it<br
>crashing less than once or twice a week this past 6-9 months. It got a bit<br
>weird for a while when I was pushing hair quite hard but nothing I couldn't
<br>work with and I was using a viariety of machines at a number of sites. 
; Ít<br>has to be machine or workstyle specific.<br>
</blockquote></div><br>
|
|
