Virgil Johnson Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 I am thinking of dropping the subscription and wait for the dust to settle. The only thing I need a new Max for really is for the rendering engine. A new mental ray probably is not worth the disaster that may be waiting for me having to make the choice. Vray will fill the bill I think. Virgil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Wow! A lot of misinformation is out there. Sorry about that, we try to get to all these forums but there is only a couple of us qualified to help out. The self-select program for subscription users is intended to help you make a decision about which flavor to move towards for the 2010 release. Here are some facts to help you make the decision: 1) There are no new (incremental) feature differences between 3ds Max Design 2010 and 3ds Max 2010 2) Both are the SAME binary - we have one dev team building one release that is configured by the install with different choices in the UI color, presets, configs, tutorials and docs. They are 100% data and plug-in compatible. 3) Unlike 2009, when we shipped both flavors in a single box that used a single license for both versions, the new licensing is unique per flavor. This means we cannot provide you with both flavors in one box and you choose. This is why we are giving you another opportunity to choose at zero cost. 4) Because we now have two licenses, it means customers can install and use both on a single machine if they are both authorized. Many of you wouldn't care about this, but there are a lot of resellers and schools that do. We had to move to unique licenses for each flavor. 5) The crossgrade price will be more than zero in the future. We can offer it for zero dollars this time because we're batch processing the requests to transfer. It would be my hope that we can do this in the future too - but we're required to tell you that this is a one-time opportunity because we can not lead you to believe that this will happen year-after-year. We cannot make those kinds of promises. 6) The only feature difference is that Design has Exposure (which was recently validated by Harvard/NRC-IRC against Radiance and physical measurements) and it does not ship with the SDK. 7) In hindsight, our desire to give you maximine time to consider the switch by sending out the email prior to announce was probably a bad one. Though, there are plenty of users that have already made the switch according to our monitoring. So, a lot of people could make the decision with what information they had. Since the cut-off for this offer is not flexible, we thought more time was better than less time. At this point, you should have all the data to make a decision. No one knows what the future will bring. We're not permitted to tell you details around the future. However, you can see that for two releases we've kept the delta between these two releases to things that made sense for each flavor. We know of noone who can't decide based on the releases that exist. We know of many who are concerned where this will all go in the future. I'm not sure why anyone thinks we'd go down the VIZ path when we just went through a lot of trouble to retire VIZ. The rationale for the flavors is that 95% of customers can pretty easily self-select into Entertainment or Design/Vis. Since 99% of the features are identical, it generally is a preference as to which you'll use. 3ds Max is so customizable that you can pretty much get either and make it look like the other. Finally, if you find you're in the wrong version over time, or if your preferences or job changes, then simply crossgrade to the other one. All your data and tools will move over. Why would we make this a painful process for you? Why would we make this a hugely expensive transition for you? Unfortunately, what you want to know is where will 3ds Max or 3ds Max Design be in 5 years. That is really hard to say. It is our stated policy that they will remain a single binary and 100% plug-in and data compatible. There are huge implications of this policy that limit what we could possibly do in the future. The future is unknowable, but I hope the present is a little more clear for you. I'll try to hang out and answer any further questions - but we're a little busy with the announce right now. ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Warner Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 So if the ONLY difference is the Exposure and the lack of SDK, why bother with two versions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy L Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Is there a valid non-Autodesk solution out there at the moment? I was just thinking about Softimage XSI, so I went to their site and its gotten Autodesk written all over it.......meh. Any others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trick Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 (edited) Wow! A lot of misinformation is out there... Why would we make this a painful process for you? Why would we make this a hugely expensive transition for you? ... This leads to the questions: Why not official announcements for BOTH versions before the 26th ? Why with such a minimal difference 2 versions ? And why a fee at all for crossgrading in the future ? With all these uncertainties in a company policy, how can you not guess that WE do not understand this all ? In the past there was a complete Max and an incomplete Viz. That's why I choose Max. However now I do not hear a word of certainty that there will be ONE version that is complete !! I want this certainty to choose for the one and only complete version...with the future in mind of course !! Edited February 9, 2009 by Trick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Cassil Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 So if the ONLY difference is the Exposure and the lack of SDK, why bother with two versions? Also wondering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy L Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Also wondering? Quoted for agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Because we wanted to optimize the user experience for different sets of users and we felt this was the best way to do it. Yes, you can second guess us, but we felt this gave VIZ users a better place to land than elsewhere. You can't look at these things in isolation, we had a lot of VIZ users that we wanted to welcome into the max community. The conversion of VIZ users into max users is a good thing because it eliminates the need for two separate products with different features and a lot of data compatibility issues. We're far more efficient building a single binary and you don't have to worry about data and plug-in compatibility issues. Just because we gave VIZ users a landing place doesn't mean we want to turn max into VIZ. That would be a total disaster in my opinion. I can also see a world where we might add a feature - say it is a special importer that only Civil3D users might use. That would go into 3ds Max Design and not 3ds Max. Or, say there is some special Sony PSP tool that is only useful for the PSP. That would go into 3ds Max. 3ds Max has grown up. It has the largest community of professional users on the planet. It's OK if it we make it a little more approachable for different communities of users. As long as we're not disenfranchising anyone by doing this, it is a good thing. So far, 99% of people easily fit into one or the other groupings. The only concern is about the future - and we've just demonstrated with two releases that we're not doing any dramatic divergence (as many did predict). Ask your reseller what Adsk charges to xgrade between same priced products. It is generally less than 10% of the SRP. We're not out to rip anyone off. If you want to xgrade in the future, go ahead and xgrade. I fail to understand why this is considered such a big decision. It's probably because I don't think there will be much feature delta and you probably think there will be lots. I've said what I can about that. I cannot promise the future - but no product can. That is just being realistic. I'm not going to come on this forum and tell you something just to make you happy. The future is unknowable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Did the forum eat my extensive reply to this thread? Sigh... When I get more time I'll try to explain it again. Sorry, the announce/launch of 3ds Max 2010 has me a little busy right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) Did the forum eat my extensive reply to this thread? Sigh... No it was not eaten. (look back one page) You said it all in your point 6. On that vast amount of information we are supposed to make an intelligent choice? Autodesk is turning on its most loyal customer base. Customers have a long memory. Did Autodesk invent some new business model? Virgil Edited February 10, 2009 by Virgil Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Cassil Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Wow! A lot of misinformation is out there. Sorry about that, we try to get to all these forums but there is only a couple of us qualified to help out. The self-select program for subscription users is intended to help you make a decision about which flavor to move towards for the 2010 release. Here are some facts to help you make the decision: 1) There are no new (incremental) feature differences between 3ds Max Design 2010 and 3ds Max 2010 2) Both are the SAME binary - we have one dev team building one release that is configured by the install with different choices in the UI color, presets, configs, tutorials and docs. They are 100% data and plug-in compatible. 3) Unlike 2009, when we shipped both flavors in a single box that used a single license for both versions, the new licensing is unique per flavor. This means we cannot provide you with both flavors in one box and you choose. This is why we are giving you another opportunity to choose at zero cost. 4) Because we now have two licenses, it means customers can install and use both on a single machine if they are both authorized. Many of you wouldn't care about this, but there are a lot of resellers and schools that do. We had to move to unique licenses for each flavor. 5) The crossgrade price will be more than zero in the future. We can offer it for zero dollars this time because we're batch processing the requests to transfer. It would be my hope that we can do this in the future too - but we're required to tell you that this is a one-time opportunity because we can not lead you to believe that this will happen year-after-year. We cannot make those kinds of promises. 6) The only feature difference is that Design has Exposure (which was recently validated by Harvard/NRC-IRC against Radiance and physical measurements) and it does not ship with the SDK. 7) In hindsight, our desire to give you maximine time to consider the switch by sending out the email prior to announce was probably a bad one. Though, there are plenty of users that have already made the switch according to our monitoring. So, a lot of people could make the decision with what information they had. Since the cut-off for this offer is not flexible, we thought more time was better than less time. At this point, you should have all the data to make a decision. No one knows what the future will bring. We're not permitted to tell you details around the future. However, you can see that for two releases we've kept the delta between these two releases to things that made sense for each flavor. We know of noone who can't decide based on the releases that exist. We know of many who are concerned where this will all go in the future. I'm not sure why anyone thinks we'd go down the VIZ path when we just went through a lot of trouble to retire VIZ. The rationale for the flavors is that 95% of customers can pretty easily self-select into Entertainment or Design/Vis. Since 99% of the features are identical, it generally is a preference as to which you'll use. 3ds Max is so customizable that you can pretty much get either and make it look like the other. Finally, if you find you're in the wrong version over time, or if your preferences or job changes, then simply crossgrade to the other one. All your data and tools will move over. Why would we make this a painful process for you? Why would we make this a hugely expensive transition for you? Unfortunately, what you want to know is where will 3ds Max or 3ds Max Design be in 5 years. That is really hard to say. It is our stated policy that they will remain a single binary and 100% plug-in and data compatible. There are huge implications of this policy that limit what we could possibly do in the future. The future is unknowable, but I hope the present is a little more clear for you. I'll try to hang out and answer any further questions - but we're a little busy with the announce right now. ken I should extend some thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed reply for us, especially during what must be a very busy time. It does answer some questions and resolve some concerns. However, in my mind there is one questions that is yet unresolved, which has been stated by myself and others in this thread. 1. What is Autodesk's strategy for having two versions of Max? If there is so little difference between the two, why have two versions at all? I've read your detailed thread a few times and don't see this question addressed in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic H Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 its a money grabbing scam imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 1. What is Autodesk's strategy for having two versions of Max? If there is so little difference between the two, why have two versions at all? I wrote another long post to answer this - but that got eaten yesterday. Basically, we have two versions because it allows us to approach two different sets of customers with optimized solutions. You have to remember that this was done at the same time as we killed VIZ. We certainly weren't going to abandon thousands and thousands of users. We created a home for them: 3ds Max Design. They liked that home so much, they massively converted to it. This was the most successful EOL in Autodesk history (I'm making that statement up, but you get the point). You could ask this same question about cars, why does one look slightly different than the other one that is built on an identical chassis/engine. Because you want to appeal to different customers. 3ds Max has been the most successful professional 3D product on the planet. It grew up and reached the point that further success mandated focusing the customer experience around Entertainment and Design/Vis. I'm not sure why anyone thinks this is a bad thing. The only concern that I've ever heard expressed is "what about the future?" Well, if you can tell me what the world will look like in 5 years, then maybe I can tell you what max will be doing. I'm NOT dismissing your fears of the future or that you'll be "stuck" with one product instead of the other. I am telling you that I also think that would be a disasterous outcome. The consequences should be mitigated by the fact that Autodesk seems to have a policy of pricing crossgrades between identically priced products at less than 10% of the SRP. Yes, this policy might change. But why would we want to punish loyal customers? The very fact that we have offered you a free xgrade if you're on subscription suggests that this isn't our intent. I know it is popular to bash Autodesk these days, but then you're complaining for the sake of complaining. Not because we actually did something that affected you. Does this make any sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 . . . Does this make any sense? So, about $350+ to crossgrade in the future because we may make the wrong choice now? No, that does not make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 So, about $350+ to crossgrade in the future because we may make the wrong choice now? No, that does not make sense. Is it really that hard to figure out which one makes sense for you? You're implying that there will be significant feature deltas in the future when we've actually demonstrated that over the course of two releases, there are very few. Can you not decide with what you have in front of you? Why is it important to know what will happen 5 years from now? I can guarantee you that no one knows this answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Homeless Guy Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Why is it important to know what will happen 5 years from now? I can guarantee you that no one knows this answer. The design Viz business is not a highly lucrative business. People nervous about what AutoDesk is doing with 2 seperate versions stem from the fact that everyone is trying to make economical decisions to follow a certain path or workflow. The users want to know that the area where they are investing there time and money in now will allow them to continue and grow for the next five years. Stating that it is AutoDesks plan to keep the versions similar because they have for the previous and current versions is not enough to reassure everyone. AutoDesk's word on this does not have the street cred within its own user base. I know Autodesk has a relatively new CEO, and apparently a business plan that has been been refined or changed over the last couple of years. This may mean that the decisions made today are different than the ones made in the past, but we do not know that. When a company is buying up its competitors left and right, creating products in its own line with redundant toolsets it makes its users wonder what is going on. When a company takes the product you have been using, and begins breaking it into two versions it makes its users wonder what is going on. We are hardcore users, and a lot of us have seen things fall apart in AutoDesks hands. We lack the trust. We are 3dsmax users who montior the industry constantly. Things that happen to the products we are using effect us directly on a daily basis. Sometimes those things solve problems we have been facing, somtimes those things cause us a great deal of headaches. The users are trying to figure out which one this will be. A solution, or a headache? Truth betold, as it stands now, 99% of the users on this board need the Design version over the SDK version. The design version solves the problems we are currently facing. In two years, the problems we are facing may be different, we don't know. We may then need the SDK version instead of the design version. Switching creates a headache. It is going to cost additional money in licensing fees, and hourly wages for installation, and troubleshooting. Did I mention the design viz business is not highly lucrative? So in the end, know one know what will happen in five years, but we are trying to plan our next five years. Just like AutoDesk is planning its next 5, 10, 15 years. We are trying to make sure that your plans, and our plans are compatible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markf Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Some of us are also concerned that this will be the same as the split up with Viz. I for one am very glad I never took advantage of the offer to crossgrade to Viz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Let's break it down: Today: - You have all the information you need to make a decision about what is in front of you. Correct? 2 years from now: - If your job changes, if your work changes, if your industry changes, then you might have to reconsider which tools you use. Isn't this always and will forever be the case? You neither know that 3ds Max is right for you in 2 years - nor if 3ds Max Design is right for you. What tools do you use that you're absolutely positive will be relevant in 2 years under those exact conditions? So why would it be totally predictable which flavor of 3ds Max will be important to you? As you've said yourself that things change at Autodesk, it is just one reason of many that the future is not knowable. I'm just suggesting that our actions are not as nefarious as some seem to claim on this thread. Back to the facts: 1) We didn't mess with things for two releases now 2) We have given a FREE xgrade to subscription users 3) No one is forcing anyone to make a change - stick with whatever you want We're simply trying to ensure that when we ship the release to all of our subscription users - they get the right one and don't call us to complain that they were supposed to get "the other" one. I fail to see why our motives are so suspect. Yes, I know I work for the "evil Autodesk" but come on, do you want to base all your decisions on that fallacy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markf Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I appreciate your taking the time to have this discussion. You are not forcing us to make a change, you are forcing us to make a choice. The issue of choosing between two currently identical products is baffling and difficult. The last time this happened was with Viz and that did not go well. Some are justifiably concerned. The stance that you seem to be taking on this is that the customer is always wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Forreal Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 What tools do you use that you're absolutely positive will be relevant in 2 years under those exact conditions? So why would it be totally predictable which flavor of 3ds Max will be important to you? ALL the major tools i buy i expect to be using 2 years from now. i may have to upgrade/renew them, but i expect to be using the same tool. with an app like Max, it can take a new user 2 years just to learn how to use it! so what you're saying is 'buy our product, invest lots of time and money learning how to use it, but we can't guarantee we'll keep giving you the same features unless you're prepared to pay xgrade fees'. i am preparing myself for freelance work and luckily i have been learning several different applications. this WILL give me the power of choice. Is there a valid non-Autodesk solution out there at the moment? I was just thinking about Softimage XSI, so I went to their site and its gotten Autodesk written all over it.......meh. Any others? depends what you want to do: Lightwave + LWCAD - good dwg support and great CAD tools modo - great modelling and rendering. 401 coming out soon and that's the one i'm waiting for. if that doesn't have the improvements the modo users have asked for, i'll be going for lightwave. FormZ (they have recently released a 'sketch modeller' similar to SketchUp but with nurbs. great modelling but lousy interface. rhino - nurbs based - not for me but very good CAD tools and freeform nurbs cinema 4d etc etc there are LOADS of alternatives but they will need time to learn. but if you want more freedom... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Cassil Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Basically, we have two versions because it allows us to approach two different sets of customers with optimized solutions. You have to remember that this was done at the same time as we killed VIZ. We certainly weren't going to abandon thousands and thousands of users. We created a home for them: 3ds Max Design. Here is where I think some of the confusion is occurring. Autodesk is assuming (some would say forcing us to comply) that design/viz and entertainment/fx are two different sets of customers. There have been many who have strived to bridge the gap between the two that has existed and to infuse more of a cinematic experience into design viz. (Nils, please feel free to go ahead and comment here). As well, every year at Siggraph I see more and more of a push to infuse more physical accuracy into FX and entertainment, not to mention I remember seeing Autodesk touting what a benefit it was for Sony to be able to use the Revit data from the IRobot sets in developing the FX shots for it. The point I'm trying to make is people in the industry (the customers) want to be more the same rather than different, but it seems that Autodesk is wanting to tuck us away into our own separate corners. As far as the car analogy goes, I'll go ahead and use that to illustrate my point as well. I have a Chrysler Town and Country (don't heckle me because I have a minivan... it's like a mobile living room, and my kids love it!). There are 3 different versions. The LX, Touring, and Limited. However, when I choose to go up one step, I'm not sacrificing anything that the lower model had. I'm just paying more. If I want sto and go seating but don't care about satellite radio, than the LX will do me fine. If I need both of those and I just gotta have 17" wheels too, then I better get the Limited. But I never have to give up the sto and go seating (this has been fantastic btw for those impulse stops at IKEA). The car analogy would be similar to how things started with max and viz. To be honest, I never really had a problem with it, because I could get max and have everything. But now we are choosing between one or the other and the only way to have everything is to buy both. I guess that would be like having two minivans (as if I weren't already enough of a nerd!) If the differences stay limited to the light analysis and the SDK, then sure, it's an easy decision. I think we all know that is not likely to remain the only difference. Again thanks for taking the time for us. Truly, most of us aren't hating. In fact, it's quite the opposite. We are trying to protect something we feel a great deal of ownership in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Homeless Guy Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) I was just starting to think down the same line. I have heard a lot recently that AutoDesk is trying to listen to their customer base, and tailor tools that help them get the job done. So if this is true, then I have to think, which customers were they talking to that wants 2 versions, what customers were they talking to that are concerned with lighting analysis for LEED certification. I will tell you who I am thinking they were listening to, ...Architects. Basically, people who don't do the visualization. These are people who would likely say, hey, wouldn't it be nifty if Max could analyze the light, and give us feedback on the intensity. I mean hey, it already casts the lights, why not do the analysis. The problem is, these are the same people who might say, hey... we are not really concerned about character animation tools. They only bloat the piece of software we are using. Then what, are those going to be stripped out of the product also, and only availble in the SDK version? The people that are using Max Design will be the design visualization field, not architects. The design visualization field has been saying over and over that they do not want a split off version. So if we are saying this over and over, then why are we getting a split off version? AutoDesk may be listening to quite a few people, but it doesn't seem like those of us from the design visualization field are being heard on this. We are typically artists who have a background in design. While the packages are similar now, there is nothing that is making ne beleive that they will not continue to grow further and further apart. Where the Design version only has the tools to analyze design, and link into Revit or Inventor, loosing all tools that are viewed by architects as only being relevant to the entertainment industry. And the SDK version retains all character and entertainment tools, with no tools built specifically for linking to Revit or working efficiently with architectural CAD files. When you make statements that basically say so far the only differences are Lighting Analysis and SDK. This implies that there will be additional differences in the future. So, now we need to try and analyze what those differences will be. If AutoDesk wants to come out and state what their future plans are for these beyond tailoring icons and defaults to each work group, then it would be greatly appreciated by the community. Ken, I am not aiming out you personally, you just happen to be the person who we have contact with on these boards. A person who can offer insite on what is going on. I imagine their is a great deal of things that you know that you are not permitted to reveal, this is not your fault. Every message board I go to I see concern amongst people in the design viz community about what direction AutoDesk is going with the design version. So far the answers that have been offered by AutoDesk does not give a clear insite into their plans. If their plans are to create a tightly knit work flow between max Design and their other tool set, then they need to say so. If their plans are to remove some of the tools that are considered to be only for entertainment, and not for design, then that is something that we would like to know. It is obvious we have questions, and we are answering them by speculating about the path we are heading down. We are the artisit who are using this tool, and are curious about its future plans. Personally, I can't wait to start using Max2010 Design. It sounds as if it is going to provide a lot of solutions to current headaches. I'm giddy about that. ...but also concerned about releases beyond this current release. The community is simply asking for a general outline of what the future will provide in regards to Max Design. What are AutoDesk's ambitions for it beyond lighting analysis and tailored icons /default settings? Edited February 10, 2009 by Crazy Homeless Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trick Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 ...Back to the facts: 1) We didn't mess with things for two releases now 2) We have given a FREE xgrade to subscription users 3) No one is forcing anyone to make a change - stick with whatever you want... I really appreciate the patience with which you try to explain what is going on. But it does not change the facts as they are presented: - there is no garantee that there will be ONE flavor of Max that has the complete toolset for the future. - this again implies that when you just incidentally need a toolset from the other flavor, you have to pay a Xgrade fee, next to the subscription fee you already pay - you are indeed not forcing anyone to change, but you DO force us to choose - there is no single word about Xgrade pricing, except that it will be cheaper then half of Max price !?!?! So what are exactly the financial consequeces for Xgrading upgraders and Xgrading subscribers ? Wouldn't you think it to be fair to announce all these things so loyal users know what to do regarding making a choice both what flavor to choose and whether they should stay on subscription or not ? By telling us that we shouldn't worry, because today the choice is not such a big deal and that in 2 years we might need to reconsider the tools we use anyway, then give me one good reason why I need a subscription scheme as a loyal user. Because if there is a risk that I can not have a complete feature set, unless I buy both flavors, I think my money is better spent on other tools that complete my toolset !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgrant3d Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 The design visualization field has been saying over and over that they do not want a split off version. So if we are saying this over and over, then why are we getting a split off version? AutoDesk may be listening to quite a few people, but it doesn't seem like those of us from the design visualization field are being heard on this. We are typically artists who have a background in design. Exactly what I was thinking. I couldn't agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Cassil Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I will tell you who I am thinking they were listening to, ...Architects. Amen brutha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now