I just hope someday AD stop lying to great people who earned the money to continue buying the product in all these years. The future is coming, better solutions will arrive. Karma :) They keep refusing to give a nice solution. The stain can't be erase. They will learn the hard way. Let's continue with our lives finding those solutions.
Perry, about the apologies, i thought the same. It's not something they need to do here(that will be vague); AD, as a corporation or maybe the CEO, need at least put a big statement about the worst decision they made, how bad they handled this, what were the mistakes in the "marketing" department, and what they can do to help from now on. After that, maybe they could begin with a new image in the industry and the Softimage community, after That, maybe they can come here and Ask for Help for Maya improvements, etc. Right now AD it's like the EA from the videogames industry.(well..since forever) Hope AD realize this sooner than later, and stop finding excuses everytime they need to answer something about Softimage. On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:44 PM, Perry Harovas <perryharo...@gmail.com>wrote: > I guess what the issue (at least for me) is, is that while you are > correct that Autodesk did talk about moving development to Singapore, > Autodesk did NOT say that the product was > in a state of minimal development. This, along with Chris V.'s > statement led everyone (and how could it not) to think things were > business as usual. Different team, but everything would be fine, > things would be the same, just with new people. This should not > denigrate the Singapore team, who did great work, especially towards > the end right before EOL announcement. > > You all may have intended to keep Softimage alive, but had we known > that the status had changed to one of very little, or minimal > development, we would have known that the status had changed > with regards to what we would be getting in the future and how > Autodesk saw the product in the future. > > Look, I fluctuate back and forth as to if Softimage was on the > chopping block when purchased, or not. I feel that the people > involved, especially Marc Petit, really thought it would survive. > And really, it doesn't matter to me as much as the fact that it was > not clear (it was basically hidden) that the status of Softimage > within the company > had changed to one where it would be maintained, or minimally developed. > > I will gladly change my mind if you, Maurice, or anyone else can point > me to the statement where it was EXPLICITLY stated to us, the users, > that the status had changed. > I don't mean that we should have KNOWN it had changed, I mean a > statement where someone came right out and SAID it would be minimally > developed and/or maintained. > That may seem like splitting hairs, but I think it makes all the > difference in the world as to establishing the credibility of > Autodesk. One is just a general statement that > lets US decide what we think it all means, the other one (that I don't > remember ever reading) is a statement of FACT. > > One final thought: Isn't it obvious that apologies (good, heartfelt, > honest apologies) about the mistakes that were made, would go a long > way here? > Part of the reason that people are so suspicious, frankly, is because > many of you don't exude much remorse, if any. That may be a corporate > culture thing, it may be the lack of > intonation that happens with email, but regardless, you need to know > that many of you are coming across as pretty casual > and unfazed (except with the amount of emails and questions you have > to answer multiple times). > > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Maurice Patel > <maurice.pa...@autodesk.com> wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > We moved people off of other teams to work on Skyline too. And we did > not say anything to those users either - resources get moved around > regularly in organizations from project to project This is one of the > reasons why we try to avoid getting into discussions about how many > engineers are working on X, Y or Z - especially as that can always be > subjective in terms of output sometimes a small team can be more productive > than a big team and vice versa. When we moved all the Montreal engineers > off of Softimage and moved development to Singapore we did talk about it. > > maurice > > > > > > Maurice Patel > > Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: > softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Rob Chapman > > Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 5:51 PM > > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com > > Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass > > > > Hi Maurice > > > > yes sorry, my previous mail the 'you' was much more directed at Autodesk > the entity than you personally, I hope you understand. and yes it was > mashed, but I hope to elaborate. > > > > Now that 'you' (Autodesk) are making it is very clear that those great > engineers that were moved onto other projects were one part of the reason > for purchase, the other was Softimage the product. but at the time , whilst > assuring us the existing customers of Softimage the product was going to be > ok eg 'the future is bright' etc I do feel that the Softimage user base at > that time were never informed properly of the true extent of the engineer > stripping until long afterwards . > > > > this is perhaps one of those lingering disagreeable tastes as is feels > like your obligation was fulfilled with minimum effort whereas back then > there was not a sense of EOL as we were assured the product was going to be > ok. as long as it was sold as a plugin. or a suite. or not all... > > > > so to clarify. with some actual history because yes I am not entirely > sure of the facts here and others may be more clued :) but at what point > were the Softimage customers informed that the entire engineering team had > been moved to a new application? was this only, as you say in Autodesk's > statement of intent? as this, in my opinion, was never truly communicated > and somewhat hidden to the user base until much later on. > > > > -- > > > > > > Perry Harovas > Animation and Visual Effects > > http://www.TheAfterImage.com > > -25 Years Experience > -Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES) > >
