Yeah, but answering directily to "why Softimage is out the rental plan"
it's not that difficult to answer, I guess.

And I don't think there is coherency in "...just for suites....testing the
waters with Max and Maya..." it doesn't make sense. It's obvious Softimage
is ignored.

So.. WHY?...


2013/9/10 Marc-Andre Carbonneau <[email protected]>

> Well because then it would become competition again…****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Mirko Jankovic
> *Sent:* 10 septembre 2013 10:09
>
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: Softimage Rental?****
>
> ** **
>
> If they hate SI that much why they don't just give it to someone else that
> will actually develop it...****
>
> ** **
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Tim Crowson <
> [email protected]> wrote:****
>
> If that report is true, it's a good thing that Soft is as mature as it is.
> I mean frankly, apart from ICE improvements, how is 'not developing for
> film/advert' any different than in the last few years?
>
> -Tim C.****
>
> ** **
>
> On 9/10/2013 8:10 AM, Mirko Jankovic wrote:****
>
> Well as I posted on another thread and will do it again no matter that
> there some that will say for crying out loud or similar... ****
>
> ** **
>
> *autodesk had a meeting with all the studios in london who use xsi and
> said they arent really going to develop it for the film/advert side of
> things, now all development is from a small team in asia and they will
> develop mainly for games*****
>
> ** **
>
> From a source... well someone here probably was on that meeting I guess...
> and nothing new really but...****
>
> In any case there is pretty good reason why there is no SI rental option
> and honestly it is lying to peoples face. simple as that.****
>
> ** **
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Angus Davidson <[email protected]>
> wrote:****
>
> Hi Maurice
>
> Firstly thanks for stepping up to the plate ;) While I can understand your
> logic, surely there should have been some explanation of this up front.
>  Whether its in the FAQ, or on the rental page. Part of the problem as you
> lay out in your last sentence is that you cant talk about future
> developments. However You guys seem to be the Masters of not explaining
> what you are currently doing either.
>
> Very simple example of this is the exclusion of Softimage from the rental
> options(It could very well be a technical reason). However no body out side
> of Autodesk knows why and the only thing they can do is speculate and none
> of that will ever be good. You know its a sad day when SI users are getting
> sympathy on the Max underground forums. I mean when it gets to the point
> that people are now actively asking for ways to move their current active
> subscriptions from Max or Si to Maya you have to admit that there is a
> pretty serious problem.
>
> We have more folks who are briefly in charge of Softimage and then
> disappear  then Mae West had gentleman callers,. Right now all we have are
> our observations and perceptions and currently theres very little to
> differentiate whats happening to Softimage to what happened to combustion.
> The steps so far are virtually the same, and we all know how that ended.
>
> I really do appreciate you taking to to come and explain things to us on
> the mailing list, however the bottom line is you shouldn't have to. In a
> company the size of Autodesk that should be handled correctly in the first
> place by your marketing and awareness people. There is a very big PR gap
> that needs to be filled and expectations that need to be managed.
>
> Anyway thanks again
>
> Angus
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Maurice Patel [[email protected]]
> Sent: 10 September 2013 12:42 PM****
>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Softimage Rental?
>
> Hi Angus,
> You are right about people wanting to maintain working pipelines based on
> older versions. This is our expectation and this has been taken into
> account. Still we have to start somewhere. Rental is the way many people
> want to go for flexibility. Today only e-flex gives that kind of capability
> (to a certain extent) but you have tp be a very large enterprise account to
> qualify. We continue to offer perpetual plus subscription which gives you
> prior version usage. Since we cannot talk aboutfuture releases and
> capability our hans are somewhat tied when it comes to talking abouthow we
> expect this to all evolve. Suffice it to say that we have to start
> somewhere and this is just the start. We expect that the model will be
> gradually integrated over time and inderstand that lack of forwards
> compatability for previous versions is 'currently' an adoption blocker.
> However there are usecases where rental purchase of the latest version is a
> benefit even without prior version support. Note the license model as
> designed does not entail forced upgrade each time a new release is issued
> but is designed to allow usage of the installed version until the user
> choses to upgrade
>
> (usual legal safe harbour applies in that none of this is meant to be read
> as a guarantee and Autodesk reserves the right to change its plans at any
> time)
>
> On 2013-09-10, at 8:33 AM, "Angus Davidson" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Luc-eric
> >
> > I kinda suspected that was the case. It might be worth updating the FAQ
> just to state that. However it shows just how far out of touch the people
> making the decisions are. Even if your in the very lucky position that you
> are not forced by some or other constraint to use a specific version, very
> few folks will run the latest and greatest on a commercial project because
> it just hasn't been proven. The risk of running into a project halting bug
> is just too great.
> >
> > And with the greatest respect to Chris and the rest of the team the
> turnaround on fixing those kinds of bugs just isnt fast enough to warrant
> the additional risk.
> >
> > On the positive side South Africa is now included in the ARC program.
> This means we can apply for up to 125 seats for free. Educational seems to
> be the only AD$K division that has an actual policy and a plan. However
> thats only going to last so long before the competition does likewise.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Angus
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Luc-Eric Rousseau [[email protected]]
> > Sent: 09 September 2013 08:28 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: Softimage Rental?
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Angus Davidson
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Apart from the glaring omission of SI from that list the things that
> worries me in the FAQ is that rental options dont have previous version
> rights. Unless I have read that incorrectly your SOL if your client needs
> you to work on a older version.
> >>
> >> One wonders how much if any thought has gone into this at all.
> >
> > Presently, that's not technical possible anyway, as the older builds
> > cannot deal with the new kind of licensing implementation.  Only 2014
> > SP1 and up can.
> > =
> > <table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"
> style="width:100%;">
> > <tr>
> > <td align="left" style="text-align:justify;"><font
> face="arial,sans-serif" size="1" color="#999999"><span
> style="font-size:11px;">This communication is intended for the addressee
> only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error,
> please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not
> copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the
> University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into
> agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that
> the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University
> and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are
> not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the
> Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and
> outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in
> writing to the contrary. </span></font></td>
> > </tr>
> > </table>
> >
> >
> =
> <table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"
> style="width:100%;">
> <tr>
> <td align="left" style="text-align:justify;"><font face="arial,sans-serif"
> size="1" color="#999999"><span style="font-size:11px;">This communication
> is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and
> destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this
> communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised
> signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the
> University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message
> may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal
> views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and
> opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All
> agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South
> African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary.
> </span></font></td>
> </tr>
> </table>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> -- ****
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>



-- 
...superpositiviii...qualunque cosa accada!...

Reply via email to