Maurice,
if you would kindly offer 2 minutes of your precious time, I'd like to
react to your statement, too:
Of course it makes perfect sense to invest in research for future
technology and innovations - we should expect that from a big company
like yours. Softimage wouldn't exist without it.
But you just killed the application in your portfolio that was best
suited for small studios/freelancers (or anybody who wants to keep his
sanity wielding complex 3d for that matter) - the reasons why Softimage
is just this have now been elaborated by many (see also the online
petition's comments). Put very briefly, it's a) a very ergonomic
software, and b) more is possible for less people.
Now it is still unclear after reading your post why maintaining
Softimage was conflicting your r&d endeavours in any way.
Although my own job experience with Maya is little (used 3ds max, got
more and more disappointed, didn't like Maya, switched to XSI shortly
before the acquisition), but from what I came to know, and what I
continuously hear from those who use both XSI and Maya - it is NOT and
'artist-friendly' tool - far from it, despite some progress.
That's redundant information, I know, and I'm aware of course that you
are already working on it.
It's just that I don't have the feeling up until now that you are
really, with FULL dedication and enthusiasm, are trying to make Maya a
more ergonomic, logic, and modern software.
Just picture what an ideal 3d application would look like these days,
after all we have seen and learned - being able to work on (more and
more) complex scenes with confidence and consistency, with an open and
modular approach, and maybe even with some ease and joy.
Maya is far from that ideal. Very far. It gives me this feeling like
working on a fragile glass scuplture with all the wrong tools.
If I (for my tiny part) are to be convinced that Maya is a good choice
for a freelancer, I would need to see a really dedicated initiative from
your side that you are willing to try to bring Maya MUCH closer to that
ideal.
Step up and show to us that you understand it's many issues (even feel a
little ashamed, considering of how many manyears of crapfixing you
burdened on your users) now that you hold all the XSI knowledge, and how
you are going to fix them. Workflow, consistency, user interface. Reduce
the clutter. Remove redundancies. Simplify the UI to be much less
distracting and intimidating. A good UI is the art of simplifying
complexity, so our limited brains can still take it in. Introduce all
the good stuff you now inherited from the death of aunt Softimage.
There is so much more pending work than for you adding even more
features, clever and important as they may be (Bifröst).
I don't know where the limits of the Maya architecture are. Codebase is
20 years old, give or take. After all, it's advantage (and reason for
survival) was it's openness.
Maybe you even don't yourself, and I suspect that you will have to dig
really deep - so deep you might scratch the very bottom frequently.
Obviously you are confident that all the problems can be solved, and
this is the better investment than taking Softimage and giving it the
(much needed) 'core' updates.
(otherwise, I would suspect you of willingly force your users into bad
compromises because of questionable business strategies. You don't want
that stigma.)
So, what's the plan with Maya? Ah, right, you cannot tell - you're a
stock corporation.
I also believe that the Softimage EOL might have come too early. You are
putting yourself under pressure that way, because as you hear,
practically everybody having to use Maya now takes it as a downgrade,
and where's the promised land?
But maybe I'm all wrong and you know exactly what you are doing, and
Maya is becoming the shining star in the next 2 years (I might even want
to use it, then).
If everything goes according to plan. It often doesn't, like you just
said.
Thanks for the attention!
Best regards,
Eugen
------ Originalnachricht ------
Von: "Maurice Patel" <[email protected]>
An: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Gesendet: 09.03.2014 05:51:45
Betreff: RE: Update to the Softtimage Transition Plan
Hi Sebastian,
I’ll try to answer your question as best I can. I have been reading the
threads and trying to figure out how best to answer questions like the
one you posed, or even if it was worth it. Especially, given the fact
that there is no real reason for anyone here to trust anything I say. I
would feel the same if I were standing in your shoes – and I have in
the past. Before I answer your question officially for Autodesk I would
like to share my own personal experience of situations like these.
Once, rather Ironically, when I was working for Softimage in 2000,
their leadership team asked me to communicate the decision to stop
development on Media Illusion (another acquisition) to our customers,
many of whom I had personally trained. These things do not get any
easier with time.
The decision to make Softimage 2015 the last release was not made
because of cost-issues – that is to say it was not done to reduce the
operating expenses of the M&E division – which is why there was no
reduction in work force. The decision was made so that we could focus
our efforts on fewer projects enabling us to better execute on them and
free resources to research new areas of innovation. Luc-Eric explained
this in a bit more detail earlier. The decision was made at the end of
last year after many months of deliberation and it was not something
that was undertaken lightly (Autodesk’s annual strategic planning
cycle, when decisions like these are typically made, kicks off in
earnest in September). There were many factors that led to that
decision and although hindsight is great these factors are not always
predictable. Several of the plans we had previously made did not work
out as expected and so evolved significantly over time. Anyone who has
ever had to manage a business or project will probably be familiar with
the fact that plans can change quite rapidly (and in unexpected
directions) as new events occur and you react to them. To quote someone
a whole lot smarter than I: “the best laid plans of mice and men often
go astray.” We were optimistic that some of the R&D methodologies and
innovations we were experimenting with would prove more fruitful than
they did (e.g. projects like skyline). Does that mean we should not
have attempted them? Personally, I think we need to try and do new
things even if we know that 99% of attempts at innovation will end in
failure - after all they sometimes end in success (e.g. Bifrost).
Ultimately when we say “focus” what we mean is better balancing our
finite resources so that we can still invest in new research projects –
even if these might fail – while continuing to evolve and improve
existing customer workflows. To enable us to continue the former we had
to focus on Maya and 3ds Max for the latter.
Regards
maurice
Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134
From:[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sebastien
Sterling
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2014 9:55 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: Update to the Softtimage Transition Plan
Maurice ? is softimage being discontinued because of cost issues ?
or because it is impeding other AD products ?
it may seem redundant, but this question has not been answered.
---
Diese E-Mail ist frei von Viren und Malware, denn der avast! Antivirus Schutz
ist aktiv.
http://www.avast.com
