[Pperezu]

OK

Y change the enviroment in regedit

MAXWELL_ROOT
C:\Program Files\Next Limit\Maxwell\

Path
C:\Program Files\Next Limit\Maxwell\

And reboot, and now it´s OK...

[Becco_UK]

Worked for me first time. However, I can understand the annoyance of other C4D users that did not enjoy the same good fortune.

It is very poor that the moderator makes threats when people complain of valid problems - that is the idea of a forum not simply to write how good Maxwell is.

Interesting to see other application specific sub forums are not reporting the same problem of installing Maxwell.

It is now 2007. I was having to mess with environment variables back in the 1980's. I would not expect to do so today.

If the moderator cannot accept that people are justified in being annoyed when something does not work correctly then perhaps it is the moderator who should stand aside?

[macray]

it was just that the Path is missin when installing. The root is set. So studio works....

[Rochr]

I agree.
If testing procedures seem to be failing over and over again, we as customers have all the rights to voice our concerns.
After all, we did pay for a working software.

On any serious forum, this wouldn´t be a problem.
Unless you´re planning to re-introduce the nazi-moderation this entire forum suffered from a year ago? You know, at the time NL lost about half of their customer base.

This time, it wasn´t so bad, but it was still a bug that should´ve been spotted quickly. Even more so if it´s XP related, considering the majority still uses that OS.

Btw, it works here now as well. Rebooting did the trick. Thanks.

Rochr,

You know that I pretty much practice hands off most of the time on the forum. The end of line is here for those that release after release after release have the same comments over and over again. Stated once is fine, we may choose to agree or disagree, most of the time, the smart comments are just left as they are as it does nothing to deter the hard work that has been done. But if every one of your post must restate the same low point over and over again. Then you will be shown the door.

Regardless of what you may think of me or my posts, i find no particular joy in having to repeat myself over and over again.
I simply want a working product which can be used for production work, and trust me, no one would be more happy than me to see that come through, along with a thriving forum here where people share wips and techniques rather than comparing bugs.
Now that the initial bug has been resolved, this release may very well be the one that most of us have waited for. I can´t tell until i´ve tested it thoroughly myself.
Personally i would find it to be very liberating not having to bring up the same old issues all over again, and despite our differences, i think we can agree about at least that.

I can say right now though, that if i spot a bug, i will bring it up again(in a polite way), just as i would with any other product i´ve bought.
If you feel that you need to ban me for that, so be it.

[Mihai]

If testing procedures seem to be failing over and over again

On any serious forum, this wouldn´t be a problem.

Unless you´re planning to re-introduce the nazi-moderation

So this is courteous? You write things like this thinking you have the right because you're a customer, but you know there are actually real people coding the stuff you're using, so don't get all so sensitive when you get the same talk back, eventually.

Are you using any other software besides Maxwell? Does everything work perfectly there and if it doesnt' you talk like this to their developers as well?

If everybody have had this problem it would have warranted heavy criticism, but now if a few users have it, you behave the same. So test and post bugs but ease up on the insults please......

[Rochr]

So this is courteous? You write things like this thinking you have the right because you're a customer, but you know there are actually real people coding the stuff you're using, so don't get all so sensitive when you get the same talk back, eventually.

I don´t know if it´s a language barrier or something, but none of those posts above were meant to be insulting. There was also a little irony involved, but apparently that was missed completely.
I´m not that sensitive though, so go ahead and talk back in the manner you like. I don´t care.

Are you using any other software besides Maxwell? Does everything work perfectly there and if it doesnt' you talk like this to their developers as well?

Yes, No & No. The few companies i´ve had problems with all have very different relationships towards their customers. And they all follow European laws.

If everybody have had this problem it would have warranted heavy criticism, but now if a few users have it, you behave the same. So test and post bugs but ease up on the insults please?

Well, i don´t know how much you´ve used the C4D plugin, but there have been serious issues all along, as well as heavy criticism towards the plugin.

However, as i´ve just said in my last post, i´m not dismissing this new release at all. I haven´t even had the chance to test it yet.

For further questions, see my previous post.

[juan]

Hi all,

Regarding the title of the thread, is anyone still experimenting this issue? It was not a bug in the plugin but a problem with the main installer that was affecting only C4D and FormZ plugins in some windows systems. We are very sorry about that, we tested the installers for much more time than in any other release, any time we update Maxwell we have to upload mxcl, mxst, mxed and many plugins for many platforms, plus manual and additional contents like the new hdri collection. It's about 30 different packages, a bit crazy

We fixed this issue immediately yesterday and we uploaded a little patch that fixes it, you can get it from here:

http://download.nextlimit.com/maxwell16/fix/patch.exe

We will reupload the installers the first days of the next week for the public release.

Now we are looking into the motion blur issue with the Cinema plugin, comparing with other plugins. Since there is a limitation of 2 substeps sometimes it might seem that it fails when it isn't, but anyway we are debugging it, if there is a bug we will try to fix it as soon as possible. Many thanks for your support!

Regards,

Juan