Talk:Animation:Master

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Que's Changes

Just added a few points, feel free to change them back.

[edit] NPOV

No way this article is neutral. It's more like an atvertisement converted to a wikipedia article.

edit: I've reverted the article to a few edits in the past. The article is much shorter now, but pretty much neutral. Cristan 20:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed edits by 83.70.34.89

As a user of the software, I'm sympathetic to what the unregistered user was trying to do, but the mention of a project "currently" in operation by the company for its userbase has a certain timeliness that is inappropriate for an encyclopedic reference. Additional links added were also removed, as they can be accessed by navigating through the main site already listed. MDonfield 01:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Developer Name

So what's up with the Dr. Mr. Esq. thing? Using all those titles is a little advert-like, and pretty presumptuous if you ask me Inigo07 (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

So you've met Martin, then? :) JeffJonez (talk) 18:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Nope. But as 3D animation is my profession, I've talked with colleagues about this program. It's supposed to be a joke and the sales hype from Hash is supposed to be ridiculous. Inigo07 (talk) 17:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
A joke, I'll agree with. My school's 3D Animation courses use it, and I dropped a second quarter because the software was so horrible. I'll bet it was that sales hype that got the course provider to use the program in their educational materials. I personally don't think A:M is worth the $200 price tag. I'm probably violating TPGs here, aren't I? :) Tuvok[T@lk/Improve] 07:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Ranting aside, I've found sources that indicate Mr. Hash is both a PhD and a Lawyer, but I've conceded that these honorifics aren't relevant. And yes, ranting about the quality of the software on it's talk page is off track. :) JeffJonez (talk) 04:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)