But isnt that just perpetuating the problem with circular logic? Maya is bad > have to use maya because of existing user base, no one else uses anything else > use maya, contribute to low user base of alternative softwares > maya breaks > maya is bad... I do understand that maya is probably the best option out of the bunch, its just that i dont think complaining about its bugs on a softimage mailing list will get you anywhere, especially with how things turned out in the last year when it comes to feedback from AD.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:56 PM, adrian wyer < [email protected]> wrote: > as a company, our decision to move to Maya was made for us > > > > 1. production proven > > 2. available freelance pool > > 3. community of users when things go wrong > > 4. existing freelancers who have knowledge of both systems (Soft & Maya > aiding in transition) > > 5.third party plugins > > 6.it's not 3DsMax! > > > > no brainer i'm afraid.... > > > > a > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ognjen Vukovic > *Sent:* 10 September 2014 11:44 > *To:* softimage > > *Subject:* Re: SoftImage Artists take on Maya @ Escape Studios > > > > I am quite curious as to why there are so many people > transitioning to maya if you all find it such a pain... Weren't there > discussions of numerous alternatives being available, i know each software > has its pitfalls, and probably the main argument to this is, most jobs are > done in maya. But do you want to end up at a job where all you can expect > is overtime and headaches due to your tool falling apart when it matters > the most? > > > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:18 PM, adrian wyer < > [email protected]> wrote: > > didn't want to chime in on this thread, but ....can't....resist....... > > > > Graham, we know that as an autodesk representative, you have to, at least > to some extent, tow the party line.... > > but you have to face facts, we as Softimage users have had this situation > forced upon us by a seemingly uncaring software behemoth > > > > it will take YEARS for the resentment to fizzle out > > > > just because the list has settled down of late (it's disappointingly like > a ghost town in here most days) it doesn't mean the embers of our > collective anger aren't still glowing away > > > > occasionally, for many months to come, they will flare up > > > > I welcome the initiative to help artists move across to maya, even seen as > a purely financial one from the point of the company that makes the 'other' > software > > And i'll be honest, for every 10 things that i find, while stumbling > blindly through the maya minefield, that are infuriating, there are usually > a couple that are pleasantly surprising.... it's not 'all' bad! > > > > i guess what i'm saying is keep up the initiatives, hold people's hands > through this unwelcome transition, and in the long term, they'll appreciate > it > > > > but don't expect users not to throw abuse occasionally when you stick your > head above the parapet! > > > > cheers > > > > a > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Mario Reitbauer > *Sent:* 10 September 2014 11:02 > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: SoftImage Artists take on Maya @ Escape Studios > > > > Graham dont take it personal. > > > > It's maya... > > We don't like it, we probably will need a lot of time to start accepting > it and maybe at some point some here gonna agree that what maya offers is > good. > > > > But right now, the cons of maya are just hitting artists day in day out ;) > > > > 2014-09-10 2:35 GMT+02:00 Jason S <[email protected]>: > > On 09/09/14 17:29, Graham Bell wrote: > > Personally, I thought I did a great job, but if you guys want to spin it > into something it wasn’t, I guess that’s your prerogative. > > G > > > Oh didn't know you had a take on that event. > > But no doubt yourself and everyone (many well known names) did a great job, > and nothing suggests it was a bad event in any way, well to the contrary! > > It actually looked very informative and like a great opportunity to > objectively assess how thing were with lots of perspective with many users > very well versed with their tools. > > Which seems to have been a success at doing just that, in a candid and > positive setting, > > > But if the resulting seemingly very fair, accurate and impartial report > also confirms a number of things > (almost everything) we all knew already (both pros & cons), > I wouln't associate the highlighting of these things to 'spinning'. > > I don't think anything suggested here has been unfair, out of place, or > not the case. > > .. except maybe the 'killing the wrong product' bit.. cause in NO > circumstance could there ever be any justification to *forcibly* prevent > ANY fairly widely used product from being used, regardless if (but > -especially- if) that product was unique. (pretty darn unique in this case) > > > > >
