To be fair, Maurice & Marc didn't exlusively pick the easiest questions.
including questions about selling our outsourcing,
or Keeping a Small team of developpers,
and can we have trust? :)
Yet for the "continuity" question (alone),
the proposed reasons for the *complete* all-stop, was to be more able to
better concentrate on better solutions,
(as previously stated)
.. while it can easily be argued (as previously stated)
that here would be (at least) several ways to let it remain available
for people that would *choose* to do so, while not requiring any further
time (or other resource) investments.
Just removing all the pointless usage restrictions, would have dealt
with what 90% of what people are asking.
But my guess is it mostly has to do with "inter-product competition", or
not wanting to release something
(bifrost, nothwithstaning it being in it's infancy)
as being a fraction of something else out there (in it's non Ice-centric
whole)
with that "something else" also being owned by the same company.
But considering the comparative size of SI user-base (while assuming
continued absence of marketing efforts)
letting people continue to use (many of whom actually depend on it's
"core efficiency" to stay competitive)
and (freely) expand on projects into the future,
.. it would have hardly put a dent on any future prospects of any shiny
new thing coming out.
that, without having to resort to such harsh measures,
(.. or without having to regret to informing anything.)
which leaves with alternatives, that apart from taking a fair amount of
time & considerable disruption to adopt, would arguably most-likely take
many-many years to come to more or less the same overall
"software production speed capablilities".
Enough to say that the reasons people would have *chosen* to stick with SI,
even in a stifled dev mode, would have been obvious for a very long wile.
For example, Indeed the new Maya modeling workflow (at least in the demo)
seems quite decent and encouraging to say the least.
And it's entirely possible that other such revamping occurs later
(having also mentionned passes)
But that's the thing.. there are so many "if's".. all to get to the same
level on so many levels,
including - ICE, which is one of those big "if's" (if not a /really/
big "if"),
- also, making more complicated things work without being wizards,
(definitely still not just a "stereotype")
- and the very fast pace of doing regular everyday tasks,
And that's all put-off to sometime in the probably quite distant future
now (if -ever- in many respects),
notwithstanding the many current Maya (or other solutions) "pros" and
advantages,
but again, that should absolutely be up to people to weigh those pros
and cons.
Nevertheless, all that has already been pointed-out and discussed at
length,
and to be honest, however valid (or even overwhelmingly obvious) some or
other arguments might be,
it probably has (or has had) very little bearing on outcomes or
conclusions, and have mostly gone in vain,
which sometimes can feel like trying to reason with a chair or a wall.
As most subsequent counter-responses made, have in all appearances,
mostly been to ultimately support decisions that have already been
canned long ago.
So for me it definitely passes off as being (but) one of those sad
stories, in which pretty-much everyone affected (1000s) considers the
loss to be considerable for themselves or otherwise, for reasons that
can arguably be rather superficial, whimsical & self(org)-oriented.
Thank you.
