The thing is, its only going to take a couple of years for autodesk to be driven out of business by the competition. Maya is a lifeline for them, but people will switch slowly to knew things. The foundry is already doing a good job of it and has already taken a serious bite out of their market share. And maybe if voodoo comes out this year it could speed things up seriously. So i hope you enjoy hamfisting ice into maya and all the other shit you want into it, but its also a dead product that brings nothing seriously new to the table.
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:22 PM, Sebastien Sterling < [email protected]> wrote: > > *"It is incorrect to think that Autodesk is only interested in acquiring > technology":* > > > Did you consider the viability of selling Softimage? > > > *"There's too much tied into the software for us to do that safely. We've > looked at open-sourcing, not just Softimage but other applications, but > it's not trivial to do these things. There's code bases, third party IP, we > have to go through all of it to understand where all the IP came from.""We > wouldn't sell the software. We paid to acquire the IP"* > > > *" Taking proven technology and productizing it, whether as individual > products, (like the Foundry) or as features (like Autodesk) is not really a > bad thing a-priori..."* > > Yadadad... This is basically you going back on your previous statement, > after realising the obvious fallacy, i get it. > > > > Hard In house developing VS levering capital to buy Third party/free party > tech, and display them as new features is one thing > But you will have a hard time selling the latter as innovation when your > line up for 2015 is comprised of pre existing solutions dating back to 2008. > > Personally i think it is a good thing that ingenious third party plugs > find their way into an app, but only when they are well integrated. and i > don't particularly like seeing something as trivial as a chamfer modifier > elevated and flaunted as a flagship feature, i completely understand the > reactions of the Max community. > > > > *" Yes, I guess I can start look for an alternative (even though that > won't be easy) and that's not because with Max 2013 I'm not productive > (even if I've to do several back and forth with C4D), but because at this > point I don't believe AD will ever add any substantial new features to Max.* > > * Considering recent Softimage users experience, I just wanna stay away > from a company like this."* > > This is you, this is how you are seen, by a comunity of people who's DCC > you are still supporting. if this account is anything less then soul > crushing to you as a provider, then you have a serious problem. indeed you > may well have lost 2 applications this day > > I'm pretty sure that somewhere down the road in a few years time, somebody > is going to posit: Of course ! let's retire max, we can't support another > DCC and numbers are flagging... > > > "We also acquire tech, redesign and re-engineer it, even rewrite it > entirely, to fit into our products and workflows and yes, if it is more > efficient to do so, we just integrate it." > > Would you care to balance the value of your in-house content versus the > tools you've acquired ? > > NEX > NAIAD > OPEN SUBDIV > XGEN > Cat > Quad Chamfer > grease pensil > Zookeaper > ICE...on and on and on... > > Should we broaden the definition of tool ?: > > 3D studio max > Alias MAYA > Softimage. > Mudbox.... > > The list is endless, and illustrates a point. > > > > *"It is incorrect to think that Autodesk is only interested in acquiring > technology" * > > *That is all you have ever done in this industry.* > > So far as M&E is concerned you have never created anything. you have > acquired and maintained, and when it becomes self evident that you have > bitten off so much more then you can chew to develop, you have bought and > feverishly integrated other peoples solutions, and when that hasen't been > enough, you have as is presently painfully obvious, discontinued. > > > This is the main difference between you and Side FX, or you and Pixology, > they can tailor their users experience, and when asked they can change > things and improve things at a core level. > > I'm sure you would like to be as responsive, but you find yourselves as > custodians of 30 years worth of legacy code, and still attempting to build > of this outdated and rotting foundation. > > The most interesting thing you could do is create from the ground up a new > DCC able to compete and lead the next gen, using all the acquired knowledge > and IP gleamed from your previous acquisitions the first real true AD M&E > solution, something to be rightfully proud of, something so good even in > time maya studios would transition to, true it might cost a lot of money, > but at least you'd be alive !. > > but... you will not do this, this will not happen because, you are not > developers. > > > > On 20 March 2014 17:53, Maurice Patel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The interesting thing is that the M&E industry is full of custom and >> specialized tech created to solve specific production problems. That is not >> going to change any time soon because people are always trying to do push >> boundaries (whether in games or VFX) and so build interesting solutions to >> their problems. Taking proven technology and productizing it, whether as >> individual products, (like the Foundry) or as features (like Autodesk) is >> not really a bad thing a-priori - you could argue it is actually a very >> good thing as it benefits a lot more people if you do (assuming you do it >> well). >> >> Now you may question our execution, but it is incorrect to think that (1) >> this is not an effective thing to do to ensure the best production >> technology can be accessed by more people or (2) to think that only >> Autodesk is interested in acquiring and productizing proven production >> solutions and (3) to think that Autodesk is only interested in acquiring >> technology. We develop a lot of features in-house including major >> architectural work which is complex, difficult to do and doesn't always >> reward you with a new 'shiny feature' that is easy to demo. We also acquire >> tech, redesign and re-engineer it, even rewrite it entirely, to fit into >> our products and workflows and yes, if it is more efficient to do so, we >> just integrate it. >> >> But that is not all we do and there seem to be some popular >> misconceptions - such as the fact that the 'plug-ins' that referred to in >> the links are nothing to do with the features that were being described in >> 3ds Max 2015. Not that 3ds Max is Softimage - but it is not just a bunch of >> plug-ins either. >> >> maurice >> >> >> Maurice Patel >> Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134 >> >> From: [email protected] [mailto: >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling >> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 8:40 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Why MAX is not option for me. >> >> "That's why I call 3DMax a "Plugin Container"" >> That not really the issue, maya is pretty much wall to wall third party >> as well by nature. >> This is AD not being arsed with developing content, so it looks around >> for pre existing solutions, snaps them up, adds them in, Then they market >> them as "New" features... >> It's not so much that they buy pre-made solutions, there are some really >> smart third party people out there, its the fact they through them in with >> minimal integration and little regard for workflow, that and having a 30 >> euros operator, being your highlight... >> In all fairness the max people walked right into that one, they presented >> AD with the easy option. >> , minimal effort required. >> I mean what the hell can the AD dev's do, do they just re-purpose and >> integrate all day ? >> >> On 20 March 2014 10:33, Daniel Kim <[email protected]<mailto: >> [email protected]>> wrote: >> That's why I call 3DMax as a "Plugin Container", not a 3D package. ;) >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Daniel Kim >> Animation Director & Professional 3D Generalist >> http://www.danielkim3d.com >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >
