If memory serves, the main reason for splitting DS and XSI was
architectural, not sales driven. XSI needed more than DS could provide, and
vice versa. Each application also needed to go in directions that didn't
make sense for the other. 'Twister' was split for the incompatibility
reasons as well.
Yes, very exciting but unfulfilled dream. What should've been.
Matt
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:40:20 +0200
From: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Friday Flashback #238
To: <[email protected]>
ah
DS discontinued by Avid and XSI discontinued by AD.
and what?s there to fill that particular void?
they shared architecture and interface to a degree, and both had some very
interesting forward thinking (visionary?) concepts at their origin.
I remember opening a softimage 3D asset in the DS timeline, and changing the
texture placement on it, and having it re-render, right there in the editing
timeline, with mental ray - 15 years ago. It wasn?t all that useful, but it
hinted of some very exciting future links between 3D and editing/comp.
But then Avid drove a wedge between DS and XSI, pushing DS into a very
awkward position in the Avid portfolio, and XSI into a kind of no mans land
? like an unwanted child they ended up with, not knowing what to do with.
Somehow, that child managed to survive Avid and even start to show promise,
then got sold off to AD, and even survived that and prospered. A while.
I guess the industry as a whole didn?t need that integrated Digital Studio,
and few really used DS and XSI in tandem - but I feel we are all the poorer
without it.
Sure, there?s some interesting convergence happening between 3D and comp
these days ? but how I miss that particular Softimage spin on it.
