Ok.. so what was my message? Suggesting publicly making some kind of "show of commitment" that may address some of the lingering uncertainty.. (which is currently essentially acting like a "cancer")
Highlighting each packages strengths & weaknesses to see how each package can be complimentary, and how they can be best suited for different contexts... ** or how each can have a reson of being ** (considering SI's continuing decline) So those strengths(many or most of which are non-ice centric) may be recognized and possibly leveraged upon .. to the advantage of the parent company itself.. and to reiterate.. << I would find it rather silly and *quite unnecessary* if it somewhat got (further) compromised due to fear (or childishness) or from Autodesk never getting-over seeing it as competition that it now owns, .. as opposed to actually seeing it as **one of it's own**. >> ____________________ Now what do you find depressing in the preceding.. I do put some efforts at making it "realistic" (which often goes along with "depressing" doesn't it?) But If you are referring to my highlighting of the current Softimage path trajectory to oblivion.. (and what seems to be the reasons for that direction) ** I totally agree that it can be quite depressing!!** (While believing doing so for a reason) I know this is all for just "silly software". But like some music, some software do seem to have quite a bit of soul, and SI definately strikes me as having lots of just that. Reffering to ;; tons of subtleties that can't easily be bullet-pointed as "features" such as ;; complexity/simplicity proportions, and complexity representation itself, essentially simplifying most of the complexity.. .. easily going back and forth for viewing/tweaking ... generally workflow fluidity, .. .. everything (abstract artist friendly tools) working with everything, essentially (quite visually/intuitively) making your own "features" as needed as you go along.. .. .. .. but who on this list do I have to convince about that lol :) But things of which you only notice when switching back from anything else (to date) (including for people that were originally use to other packages) (and this, despite SI also having it's own sets of issues/drawbacks.. and that other solutions may be better suited for different tasks) For me personally, It's not about not wanting to re readapt, (not that I would particularly like that either but..) Moving from Shake to Nuke was 0 problem, (notwithstanding how 2D can be simpler than 3D) and I constantly learn new tools everyday. But if SI's (continuing) decline was due to something drastically more efficient coming along, I would understand, and identify the change as "evolution" (and would even be welcome) (as opposed to the current situation which strikes me as rather unfair and quite unnecessary gradual "smother-ation" by mere lack of attention .. and perhaps some self-absorption) Otherwise, I admit that I may sometimes be somewhat a "complicated" person. and sorry if I put some gloom in your holidays, it was not the intention. But anyways, Back to Work for me! :) thanks F ________________________________ From: Chris Chia <chris.c...@autodesk.com> Hi Fx Person, I still believe that you should at least be yourself when voicing out these concern and not use such an alias. Your posts are really quite depressing especially the ones you posted just before the holidays. Do let us know what you wish everyone here to do for you... Chris
