I don't have to read it, I was there.Bullit wrote: Maybe you should read this about 3Ds Max state in 2013: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=1118357
The problem isn't Eddie he at least tried to right the boat and stopped it from sinking that fast. It was before him.
I see your point, but I thought all this info from the wall street side was interesting on a news of the CEO stepping down. Also, I was really amused by the CNBC video, like anytime you hear a non technical person talk about 3D.owei wrote:Wow, that´s so funny. AD is great, yes, we got that, luceric. The problem is though, stock market´s and bankster´s crap does not make software any better. As we are a bunch of ignorant, truth denying idiots, I wonder why you don´t lean back with a smile and just let us starve in our dumb stupidity. Thanks ;)
Touche. But do you think a bunch of old Max veterans having to pen declaration about Max status is indicative Max doing well?Bellsey wrote:I don't have to read it, I was there.Bullit wrote: Maybe you should read this about 3Ds Max state in 2013: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=1118357
The problem isn't Eddie he at least tried to right the boat and stopped it from sinking that fast. It was before him.
he's wasn't a "presenter", he's the co-founder of Luxology and there would probably be no Modo without him. It's the CG word's equivalent of having Steve Jobs leaving Apple.Mathaeus wrote:People on Modo forum know, there are posts about. Here... yeah I think nobody mentioned, while there is no that much of words about Modo at all. Personally never ever been a fan of those 'presenters' or whatever they are, including 'ours' in past.wesserbro wrote:Wow... He seamed so passionate about the product///luceric wrote: Brad Peebler also left Luxology with other people. Didn't hear anything about that here.
Yeah I know that, but, as everyone probably know, Modo is still coming with real permanent licence. Exactly, once I got Modo 801 few years ago, I was able to install it on new machine, without any assistance of Foundry, and I'll be able to do that as long as there is appropriate OS.luceric wrote: he's wasn't a "presenter", he's the co-founder of Luxology and there would probably be no Modo without him. It's the CG word's equivalent of having Steve Jobs leaving Apple.
) . In other word, just allow *real* permanent license again, and people will not even know for that Bass guy, just as many cellphone owners don't know who is founder of Apple, and what is Apple.and i want per-second licenseMathaeus wrote: In other word, just allow *real* permanent license again, and people will not even know for that Bass guy, just as many cellphone owners don't know who is founder of Apple, and what is Apple.
'now' of Maya is probably best described here, around seven months after initial release. From one post: "Sorry for being direct here but the fact that you ask for specifics is an indication that you don't have people doing any actual day to day production testing at Autodesk".mc_axe wrote:So the future is bright?
Code: Select all
So the future is bright?Bit harsh I thin considering that Carl very probably had little or nothing to do with the retirement of Softimage.xsi_fanatic wrote:Good riddance. Maybe someone might clean up his mess after him and consider reviving Softimage. It's a long shot but hoping never killed anyone.
Perhaps some vaild points and bugs there, but there's always two sides. Giving some benefit of doubt as I don't know the situation, did the studio do enough internal testing before deploying Maya 2017 into production? If they didn't then they've made an error. It's easy to wave the finger, but if you jump in with both feet without proper testing then to some extent, you have yourself to blame.Mathaeus wrote:'now' of Maya is probably best described here, around seven months after initial release. From one post: "Sorry for being direct here but the fact that you ask for specifics is an indication that you don't have people doing any actual day to day production testing at Autodesk".mc_axe wrote:So the future is bright?
come on Bellsey, what you're doing is counterproductive for your stance (unless you're secret agent, working for AD competitionBellsey wrote:Perhaps some vaild points and bugs there, but there's always two sides. Giving some benefit of doubt as I don't know the situation, did the studio do enough internal testing before deploying Maya 2017 into production? If they didn't then they've made an error. It's easy to wave the finger, but if you jump in with both feet without proper testing then to some extent, you have yourself to blame.Mathaeus wrote:'now' of Maya is probably best described here, around seven months after initial release. From one post: "Sorry for being direct here but the fact that you ask for specifics is an indication that you don't have people doing any actual day to day production testing at Autodesk".mc_axe wrote:So the future is bright?
). No need to try to defend everything. After all, why people do not complaining not even close to such extent, on other forums.I'm not defending anything just being more reasonable. Nor am I confirming anything, I don't know how Autodesk do their testing now. When I was there, myself and others would be doing production workflows on new builds etc. If I encountered issues, I would log bugs, However, it's hard (perhaps impossible) for any software vendor mirror the direct conditions of all of their customers and users.Mathaeus wrote:
come on Bellsey, what you're doing is counterproductive for your stance (unless you're secret agent, working for AD competition
To be fair, Maya LT, here, seems to be less affected by 2017/QT 5 thing, while is still close to unbearable, compared to last 2016 ext.
Anyway I'll take your answer as confirmation of 'you don't have people doing any actual day to day production testing at Autodesk".