In the end it doesn't make sense for AD to own all 3 products. It makes
hard for the marketing and sales people to promote and sell 3 somewhat
competing products
The suite idea only make sense with something like the Adobe's suites
when they are all different products.
There are too much overlapped in the AD suite to justify the cost for
small studio like ours.
We have been strictly using Softimage/XSI over all these years, we just
hope it doesn't go away. like TDI and Wavefront
My cents,
L.
On 9/12/2012 12:09 PM, Paul Griswold wrote:
The gut feeling I get from this thread is, AD views Softimage as a
product that cannot stand on its own outside of perhaps Japan.
I have no idea why it's a better idea to spend marketing money trying
to up-sell Max and Maya users on Suites than it is to take that
marketing budget and try to build a larger customer base: whether they
buy Max, Maya, Softimage or one of the Suites. Wouldn't it be a much
wiser use of marketing dollars to highlight the value in each of the 3
and cast a wide net?
The only conclusion I can come to is, other than Mark Schoennagel,
there really is no evangelist for Softimage left. When the majority
of people making the decisions apparently don't see the value in
Softimage, why would anyone expect it to receive more than what it's
gotten so far?
ICE, Face Robot, the animation mixer, the FX Tree, and so on. You'd
think this is the perfect mix to market to small studios, freelancers,
etc. And, I'm fairly certain a lot more licenses can be sold to those
markets than you'll sell to Dreamworks. I realize it's a lot more
sexy to show Shrek on a demo at SIGGRAPH than a commercial
for vacuum cleaners, but seriously I am pretty sure commercial work
makes up a much larger volume of animation compared to feature work
overall.
I seriously hope the new dev team isn't disheartened by all this talk.
I continue to have high hopes that in spite of AD's continued
attempts to treat Softimage as the red-headed step-child of the
family, it will live on and thrive.
-PG
