i would be VERY surprised to learn that more than 10% of your subscription payment was actually spent on softimage....
i would imagine 50% on new tech (revit, bifrost etc) and the rest in the shareholders pockets every time it's dividend o'clock! a -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 18 March 2014 17:10 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar How much of the subscription money is going into those 99% failures? I know it's nasty to put it like that - but people paying subscription are doing so believing (hoping) they are funding the very future and survival of the software they are paying for. Right now, it's: continue to pay subscription, in order to get upgraded, eh no, downgraded, eh no retro-graded to another DCC app. It's a losing proposition, any which way you look at it. A few years (2, 3?) of subscription is enough to buy that other app - so anyone who wanted to have it, could and would have done so already. So what happened to the subscription money of the past few years - seeing it wasnt used to keep Softimage from the slaughtering block? Was it not enough for the survival of the software? Was it used to help fund the future of another software? Or was it to fund research? At a 99% failure rate? Does the competition have that same 99% failure rate? Or do I misunderstand it again? -----Original Message----- From: Maurice Patel Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4:54 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Autodesk webinar Hi Peter, That is not what I am saying. We will continue to build new technologies and we will continue to do research into new areas. And new projects have and will continue to be kicked off. Innovation is 99% failure 1% success. Does not mean we will not keep trying to do new and different things but our approaches will change and adapt. Bifrost and Recap are two examples or recent projects time will tell how successful they are but we have not stopped trying. maurice Maurice Patel Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134 From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 11:40 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar ...We had plans to build a next generation technology, starting with games - we called it project skyline. The industry was in a growth period. Everyone was optimistic. And if we had succeeded we probably would not be having this conversation. so no next generation 3D authoring from Autodesk then thats official and final ? As thats all the info needed to move forward really. Sad how the death of one exciting technology (Naiad) leads to the death of another (SI / ICE ) and it all ends up zombified in Maya. Assimilate or die. From: Perry Harovas<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:55 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar I would imagine he means Project Skyline. On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Chris Marshall <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Which bit failed? On 18 March 2014 14:51, Maurice Patel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: "sometimes we have to fall back on our positions when our attempts fail" Maurice -- Perry Harovas Animation and Visual Effects http://www.TheAfterImage.com<http://www.theafterimage.com/>
