Let me get this right... I want to learn 3D, and you are telling me I need to learn 3 packages instead of Maya?
Gollum was made with Maya right? On Saturday, 8 March 2014, Angus Davidson <[email protected]> wrote: > I disagree > > 5 Years from now, Modo / Houdini / Fabric Engine will be the standard. I > say this because they are agile, they listen to what their users want and > they actively develop and have a coherent roadmap. > > With the rate that the industry is developing Maya will not be able to > keep up. > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Cristobal Infante > [[email protected]<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> > ] > *Sent:* 08 March 2014 02:05 PM > *To:* > [email protected]<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> > *Subject:* Re: Good point well put > > They have messed up really badly with us by the way the've handled > this. But I don't really consider this a storm, a few guys ranting on a > mailing list. CGsociety haven't even bothered to make this news. > > Why did they keep softimage for all this years? well simple, they were > investing in a relationship with costumers. Now that the Foundry had > started to gain ground it was time to act and think about this > bright future. > > We are just too involved in the mess to see the whole picture. Think 5 > years from now, all I can see is Maya. > > > > On Saturday, 8 March 2014, Daniel Kim <[email protected]> wrote: > > I hope there is a company or someone else who can hire all SI developers > and make another next generation 3D software. I remember when Lightwave > shut down years ago, and they are back in industry and shows great stuff, > and even Modo. I really hope there is a company or someone hires SI dev > members... > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Daniel Kim > Animation Director & Professional 3D Generalist > http://www.danielkim3d.com > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> wrote: > > Softimage, like SideEffect, 3DSMax and the rest are small teams of very > clever developers, 8-12 is the normal number of developers for any app... > that is a very small cost compared with the cost of advertising and PR, > believe me. > > Regarding this implied direct relationship between pace of development > and resources, it is so so obscene it is insulting to say that. By that > rule all the software portfolio Autodesk manages hinders everything they > do, let's face it, they have lots of products. > > If the case is pace of development just hire a few more good guys and > make sure the effort does not go to waste by not promoting it well. > > The issue I have is that something does not add up... I still don't > understand the decision and the more I think about it, the more suspicious > it becomes.. .does not even seem a coordinated well put plan that is > causing all this storm (all the handling has been awful and big companies > tend to handle these things with utmost care as it casts a horrible light > to the brand itself) > > Just look at how Apple handled Shake, they discontinued it but offer the > possibility of buying the source code and carry on using it, it was bad but > at least was a clean exit. Also helps that nuke was ready for prime time so > felt like moving forward instead of moving back to the 80s with Maya. > > Jordi Bares > [email protected] > > On 8 Mar 2014, at 11:05, Cristobal Infante <[email protected]> wrote: > > it's a bad decision in the eyes of who? > > They didn't really buy softimage because they thought is a software > they could improve any further, they were actually really buying US the > users. Some people call it killing the competition, a chess move. > > If xsi only had 8-10 developers, than It doesn't take a math genius to > figure out that they were obviously making money with it. Maybe not as much > as a lot of us would like to believe, but still surely enough to keep it > going. > > From a business point of view, they are thinking "How can we make MORE > money for less cost". How do we make our business more efficient on a long > term plan? The answer is quite simple, you unify all your efforts into one > money making machine that will eventually be Maya 2.0. It will look very > similar to Maya if not identical otherwise they wouldn't have bothered > "transitioning us" now. > > Some people say "bad costumer service" but I guess the mayority of their > costumers are Maya so we were a small price to pay... > > They knew there was going to be a loss of costume, but in 5 years > > 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. > >
