Pangolin overpriced?

[Pangolin]

Did I miss any?

We would argue quality differences. But WHERE IS Buffo when you need him ?

I'm planning on slowly building a three-projector beam show system - each projector with its own DAC. In autumn last year, three FB3's cost more than twice the price of three miniLumax's with some respectable software (HE Laserscan, if memory serves).

Could be... As I wrote, we have had a hardware-centric licensing model basically for the past 23 years. So this means you buy the hardware, and then you can run lots of software on that piece of hardware.

We would argue that, if you buy three FB3, you can use it from one computer driving three projectors, or you can use it from three separate computers (for example, at three separate gigs) each driving a single projector. We believe this flexibility is of utility to our clients.

If we didn't do it that way, then we would need to provide our users with a "dongle", and then sell the software separate from the hardware. At Pangolin, we have some old ideas -- one of those old ideas is that we hate dongles for a large number of reasons (easy for hackers to crack -- easy for customers to lose being two of them). So the hardware-centric model allows us to get away from dongles.

We reserve the right to change our minds at some point in the future, but for now, that's the model we have chosen.

The trouble is, it's really hard to tell how true this is without a try-before-you-buy option for the software bundle.

Another one of our old ideas is that demo software does not encourage sales, but certainly encourages competition. That's one of our mantras. Of course, we could be wrong, but that's our current thinking.

We'd rather have demo videos showing how good a product can be, and we'd rather back the product up with the industry's only 90-day money-back guarantee.

Despite all this, if the FB3 was priced separately from its bundled software or if second and third FB3’s were priced lower than the first, I might still have gone for Pangolin because of the overwhelmingly positive reviews.

We certainly appreciate your views and, as I wrote above, we reserve the right to change our minds in the future. We have considered allowing our software to run on other people's hardare, but so far we really don't see the quality of the laser output from their hardware that we see from ours. We also have a fail-safe design methodology, and, from looking at "the other guys" stuff, I am not even sure if they can spell the word "safety"... So, so far we really have tried to stick with our old tried and true strategies.

Pangolin has been in business for more than 23 years. Over the course of that time, we have seen many competitors come and go... If you have already purchased another software, I hope we can earn your business in the future.

Frankly, I think once we release QuickShow it's going to be a real game-changer. This thing is so cool and the philosophies so new, basically -- as usual, "the other guys" will be scrambling for years to try to catch up. We'll see if I am right .

Bill

[allthatwhichis]

Frankly, I think once we release QuickShow it's going to be a real game-changer.

[Things]

Need any beta testers? I always manage to find a way to crash software

[buffo]

Oh man... I get a little busy at work, and look at all the fun I miss!

Where's Buffo when you need him ?

Working my balls off, to be perfectly honest! Between the heat, the humidity, and these damned thick cotton uniforms that they made us switch to because of arc-flash hazards around the motor control center breakers... I swear one of these days I'm just going to burst into flames at work! (That, or melt...)

We would say that there is a substantial difference between the FB3 and easylase...

Although Heroic did a nice job comparing the features of each controller, the comparison needs to go beyond the data sheets. I (and several other attendees at the first FLEM) have seen *first hand* the differences between a Pangolin controller and an EasyLase USB controller. And the fundamental problem with the Easylase comes down to sample jitter: small timing irregularities in the output that manifest as a shaking, wobling, waving image on the wall. You'll see none of that with a Pangolin controller, and this side-by-side real-time test I'm referring to is probably responsible for quite a few people ditching Mamba (and the Easylase) for Pangolin.

In a related issue, I recently got a chance to do some tests using a Medialas USB controller. Evidently, this controller is slightly different than the EasyLase, though both will work with Mamba Black. I discovered that the Medialas controller does *not* open the shutter as required by the ILDA standard. Thus, it would not work with my projector at all. I don't know if the EasyLase controller suffers from this same problem or not, as I didn't have a shutter in my projector back then, but given how similar the two are, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it also does not support the shutter signal. So that's another thing to keep in mind when comparing these controllers to Pangolin...

I'd love to attend to a PL meeting, but they unfold always very far from me

We've had people fly half-way around the world to attend a Laser Enthusiast's Meeting... Surely a drive or train ride of 4 to 6 hours wouldn't be out of the question for you? The recent meeting in Amsterdam right after the ILDA conference would have been fairly close. (Most of the attendees at SELEM last year had to drive 10 hours or more to attend.) Trust me when I tell you that the trip will be worth it.

And I can't wait to try Quickshow

I agree! Quickshow sounds very cool. More to the point, it's an entirely new set of software tools that Pangolin is giving to the users for free. Mamba is charging people over $200 just to upgrade to version 2.0. So that's another point that was missed in the comparison between the two.

My intentions was to point out that other softwares aren't just unusable and inefficient compared to Pangolin (while staying in the same class), as we can believe when reading some comments here. I was capable to create great shows with both softwares, so that's the most important point, not?

I've seen some good shows that were made with Mamba Black. And I agree that Mamba Black is very easy to use, although the fact that it crashes every now and then is maddeningly frustrating. But even though some of the Mamba Black shows are good, the shows that I've seen running on my Pangolin LD-2000 system are *world class*. I'm talking about the kind of shows you see at Disneyland. And I've *never* had my Pangolin system crash. Not once in over 2 years.

Sure, the Pangolin software takes longer to learn. Any complex software takes longer to learn. But surely you would agree that you can accomplish more with Adobe Photoshop than you can with MS Paint, no?

Once you get to the point where you're only really using "direct mode" on the FB3 (ie., LivePro, LiveQ or ShowRider), the EasyLase is really quite similar in operation to the FB3.

I agree that for non-live users, the two controllers are similar, but even so, the FB3 seriously outperforms the EasyLase even when used as a simple frame buffer. Put them side-by-side and see for yourself. (Or ask anyone who was in attendance at the first FLEM.) And when you add in the ability for stand-alone operation (not to mention DMX-in control on the controller itself) plus the fact that it comes with an entire software suite (which would cost you $400 extra if you wanted Mamba Black to go with your Easylase), well, I don't really think there's any doubt that the FB3 offers a much better value...

I believe Mamba can even be made to work on LD2K using this linkable library

You are correct. The LD-2000 system has a software development kit that can be used to write new software to run on the board. This is where the Winamp Laser Visualizer Plug-in came from. It's also where Asteroids and Lazy-Mame came from. Furthermore, Mamba-Black comes with a driver that allows Mamba to output shows to the QM-2000 board. (This is how I'm able to run Mamba shows even though I no longer have an EasyLase USB controller.)

But WHERE IS Buffo when you need him ?

Playing catch-up!

Adam

[toast]

We hate dongles for a large number of reasons (easy for hackers to crack -- easy for customers to lose being two of them). So the hardware-centric model allows us to get away from dongles.

Aaaah, I see. Pesky hackers! Thank you for the reply.

I guess hackers would also be a concern if you decided to let your software work with other people’s hardware. It’s a pity because if QuickShow is as game-changing as it sounds, you might penetrate much more of the non-Pangolin market if people didn’t have to write off their old hardware.

If I ever own a dongle, I'd want it to be a big one (to make it hard to lose.... no other reason).

Another one of our old ideas is that demo software does not encourage sales, but certainly encourages competition.

Interesting idea. I'd always thought the puppy dog sales technique was universal. Might have been wrong though. Have been trying to think of another piece of (single-machine) software that doesn't have a demo. So far nothing’s come to mind. Even Microsoft produces demos. Maybe the dynamics of the laser show industry are different.

We also have a fail-safe design methodology, and, from looking at "the other guys" stuff, I am not even sure if they can spell the word "safety"...

Hehe. There did seem to be quite a few spelling mistakes in the software I tried. No idea about the relative safety levels though.

If you have already purchased another software, I hope we can earn your business in the future.

Haven't bought any software yet and only one miniLumax. Am definitely still convertible if Quickshow is worth the expense. Can’t wait for the features list.


Thanks again,

Richard

[toast]

You are correct. The LD-2000 system has a software development kit that can be used to write new software to run on the board.

Am I correct in guessing there's still no Software Development Kit or API for the FB3? Does this mean there are no Asteroids-type games or other mini-apps for the FB3 either?

[buffo]

You are correct; at present there is no SDK for the FB3. One is in the works, but Bill has mentioned several times that there are more pressing matters (including the new Quickshow) that continue to push the FB3 SDK project back.

Adam

[Things]

Ah so they are going to do it, just after some more important stuff, nice

[norty303]

If you need any reason to buy Pango, this is it....

http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...ead.php?t=8244

Even company's with good support reputations struggle to compete with that!

[Pangolin]

Can’t wait for the features list.

Hehe. Back in the old days, our product literature was full of this. I can remember the entire back page of our LD/QM16 and LD/QM32 brochures were nothing but features.

For our current products, if you poke around on our web site, you will find some features and specifications with respect to the QM2000, and in terms of exactly what software pieces come with LD2000 itself. And you'll probably find a bit of this for the FB3 too.

But as time runs, honestly, we are strongly considering not even producing a feature list at all, of any kind, for Lasershow Designer QuickShow. The reason is -- while I was recently reading the lies in a competitor's brochure (basically they chose to interpret certain words in certain ways to make it seem like they had features they really didn't), it occured to me that these features and specifications are just words on a page. Manufacturers can choose to interpret certain features in a way that makes them sound like they have it -- or even that their implementation is superior. Bottom line -- on paper, certain pieces of software look really impressive, until you get them into your hands. Then, after you see them in real life -- especially the projected image quality -- is when you learn that they are pieces alright, pieces of... well... something that doesn't smell very good.

And lastly, I was talking to a few laserists recently about this. I don't mean any laserists -- I mean people who do really large shows for a living. I asked them when's the last time they were on a show site, and they looked at a spec sheet or product brochure for answers to particular problems, or guidance on how to do shows. It just doesn't happen...

So I don't think you'll see features and specs from us any more because -- they're just words on a page, and other companies can choose to interpret the words in ways that make their own products seem superior, or at least adequet. Instead, we'll be doing someting else. Something far more valuable than words on a page.

Stay tuned...

Bill