Re: OT Maya: push deformer

[Jason S]

Hi sorry, reposting with formatting intact to differentiate quotes. _____________________________________ Bifrost isn't a new version of Naiad. yes I'm positive the -simulation engine- is to be far more than just a new version of Naiad, while I suspect, (yes I suspect, but I believe that I do so objectively and not based on nothing) that in it's mostly final state (aside from (hyper)technical differences) will probably be something with substantially different capabilities and purpose than ICE. Btw, if I read correctly you got your timeline wrong on ICE. We worked on it for between 2 and 3 year okay... lets say 2 (+3) .. but I think the point very much *remains* (to say the least). In my opinion it's a huge waste of time to go on analytical speculations based strictly based on wishful failure fantasies when all of these speculations will be disproven anyway in the medium future. As mentionned, I may totally be disproven, (especially with the all the expectation for it to be at least ICE (or more) ) And to be honest, while being fully aware that many dedicated people including yourself are working hard to make Bifrost something great, (which is the main thing that I'm sure will make it at least very good) I must admit that despite that, I -do- wish it would somewhat more or less 'fail' just enough for the floor to be, lets say "freed-up" (in a non-aggressive/non-invasive way) for other players also making great things to have a shot, but while not being completely bent on having the entire floor for themselves. Cause as it stands now, it could very well be the case that good or less good, there would just not be any comparison base, or any (remaining) choices to choose from, like it can arguably be (already) the case today. (being -clearly- not out of mere circumstance or (at-all) achieved with means that anyone (except AD) would identify as being -fair- or 'non-destructive') And if hoping for an outcome (with diversity) is being delusional, (which I hardly think it is)  then may that be as it may. On 08/19/14 19:08, Luc-Eric Rousseau wrote: Bifrost isn't a new version of Naiad.  It's a combination of a new evaluation engine and the next iteration of the Naiad solvers expressed into this new architecture. The evaluation engine is based on a compiler technology, and the solvers are expressed as a collection of low-level nodes (like "add", "if" and "get data") assembled together in compounds the way that Lagoa was made with the built-in ICE node.  That means you have both high level nodes and a low level visual languages to make your own stuff or modify what you get.  But the data that can flow in the graph is opened, it isn't just a fix set of types and arrays like ICE, and the data changes during evaluation, and not just at "execute" points. In my opinion it's a huge waste of time to go on analytical speculations based strictly based on wishful failure fantasies when all of these speculations will be disproven anyway in the medium future. Btw, if I read correctly you got your timeline wrong on ICE. We worked on it for between 2 and 3 years before its release XSI 7.0, not necessarily full time.  Then we did a bit more work, like adding ICE modeling, with a few months of work here and there in the year that followed, with a skeleton team.  We didn't work 6 years on it. On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Jason S <jasonsta...@gmail.com> wrote: And I think it's more than enough to extrapolate that, unless things change, 'Bifrost' is, and will quite likely remain like an elaborate Naiad simulation engine.