How long will softimage be Competative...?

[nDman]

XSI 7.01

Code: Select all

   Total Files Listed:
            8244 File(s)    941,299,794 bytes
            1985 Dir(s)  

XSI 2013 SP1

Code: Select all

     Total Files Listed:
           13750 File(s)  1,802,555,080 bytes
            3296 Dir(s)  

XSI 2015

Code: Select all

  Total Files Listed:
           42900 File(s)  2,433,878,098 bytes
            4094 Dir(s)  

I like to know what things added to XSI after v2013!

[Mathaeus]

XSI 7.01

Code: Select all

   Total Files Listed:
            8244 File(s)    941,299,794 bytes
            1985 Dir(s)  

XSI 2013 SP1

Code: Select all

     Total Files Listed:
           13750 File(s)  1,802,555,080 bytes
            3296 Dir(s)  

XSI 2015

Code: Select all

  Total Files Listed:
           42900 File(s)  2,433,878,098 bytes
            4094 Dir(s)  

I like to know what things added to XSI after v2013!

Could be some library, full of small files. Python, perhaps.

[Xsinode]

I have clear Softimage 2013SP1 and Softimage 2015SP1 (both version without any plugins)

Code: Select all

SI2013 - 1,56Gb; folders 1080; files 13 564
SI2015 - 1,71Gb; folders 1176; files 15 597
+ offline help for SI2015 (User & SDK) - 515Mb; folders 189; files 27 284

SI2015 have around 1625 useless files in Setup folder (in SI2013 only 91 files !!!!)
Sorry for offtop

[markraz]

Wow thanks man great tip
I dont like concept of Ribbon Interface. I dont like have not useful garbage in any soft. More garbage and other rudiment - more size on HDD and less stable and overall performance. I dont like hotkey system in 3ds max (Hotkey Override Toggle is not good). Why I cant change hotkey on F1. This idiocy. In 3ds max user cannot totally change working environment without using ton of scripts or own programming skills. I like 3ds max but is true.

well you do have the SDK, you can rewrite the interface. I'm not a maxfanboy but IMO the interface is the best part of it.
it's limited in most other aspects.

The ribbon is just a .net thing , sure it's annoying and slow but you can disable it with custom UI setups.

[markraz]

I have clear Softimage 2013SP1 and Softimage 2015SP1 (both version without any plugins)

Code: Select all

SI2013 - 1,56Gb; folders 1080; files 13 564
SI2015 - 1,71Gb; folders 1176; files 15 597
+ offline help for SI2015 (User & SDK) - 515Mb; folders 189; files 27 284

SI2015 have around 1625 useless files in Setup folder (in SI2013 only 91 files !!!!)
Sorry for offtop

XSI 1.0.... under 100 meg

[Hirazi Blue]

The bloating of software code has always been noticable, not just in our beloved CG business. Look at the amount of space older versions of Microsoft Word used to need and the amount its current version requires, for instance. In this respect i will always (fondly) remember my old Sinclair ZX81, which had a "staggering" 1 kilobyte of internal RAM and still someone managed to write a more or less usable chess program for it. Try to find a programmer in this day and age, who can still pull this off.
[/memory_lane]

[markraz]

The bloating of software code has always been noticable, not just in our beloved CG business. Look at the amount of space older versions of Microsoft Word used to need and the amount its current version requires, for instance. In this respect i will always (fondly) remember my old Sinclair ZX81, which had a "staggering" 1 kilobyte of internal RAM and still someone managed to write a more or less usable chess program for it. Try to find a programmer in this day and age, who can still pull this off.
[/memory_lane]

Houdini is pretty "lean"

[Daniel Brassard]

To be fair, in those days we were programming in machine code (assembly language). We were the compiler.

To have access to higher level programming, I had to go to the University to use their DEC PDP 11/24.

Still, in those days programming a chess game on such a limited machine was quite a feat to pull off, which David is still recognized today fot it.

[Hirazi Blue]

Which obviously doesn't make it any less of a feat... The point was that "code economy" was something we spent a lot of time with in the "old days", out of necessity, while the more RAM and such becomes available, programmers stop caring about such constraints, resulting in the aforementioned bloating.

[Daniel Brassard]

Hi understood the feat, Hirazi.

What needed to be mentionned here is that, in those days, you had to limit the code because of the machine architecture limits. So code ecomomy was a necessity.

This world still exist today (robots, controllers, traffic lights, watches, security systems, cellphones, you name it). Even NASA still do it.

The more you can squeeze in those processors, the more you can do. So code economy and efficiency is the norms in those fields.

Code efficiency is a big thing in the Gaming industry.

But that is Off Topic. Nothing to see here, carry on.

[markraz]

To be fair, in those days we were programming in machine code (assembly language). We were the compiler.

To have access to higher level programming, I had to go to the University to use their DEC PDP 11/24.

Still, in those days programming a chess game on such a limited machine was quite a feat to pull off, which David is still recognized today fot it.

Machine code is not the same thing as assembler. Assembler is mnemonic, machine code is much lower level........ 0 or 1 in a binary system. Microcode is somewhere in between. It's pretty difficult to develop an application in assembler. I recall reading Wolfenstein was assembler but that was a game that had a limited command implementation. Lotus 1-2-3 for DOS was all assembler, but that was not on the level of complexity as Wavefront or SI creative Environment. In the old days the graphics engine was probably partially done in assembler but not the command structure.
Most of the assembler code was for i/o and graphics calls only. On SGI is was much simpler than on PC. MIPS assembly is very easy comparatively to x86.

[Daniel Brassard]

machine code is not the same thing as assembler. Assembler is mnemonic, machine code is much lower level 0 or 1 in a binary system. Microcode is somewhere in between

You are correct, the Machine Code is the binary code (Zero and One) understood by the machine ... I stand corrected!

Assembly language is converted into executable machine code by a utility program referred to as an assembler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_language

[markraz]

machine code is not the same thing as assembler. Assembler is mnemonic, machine code is much lower level 0 or 1 in a binary system. Microcode is somewhere in between

You are correct, the Machine Code is the binary code (Zero and One) understood by the machine ... I stand corrected!

Assembly language is converted into executable machine code by a utility program referred to as an assembler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_language

I wasn't correcting u, I was just adding to your remarks. Actually it's not uncommon for people to refer to them as the same thing. So you actually are correct depending on context

[luceric]

this is getting off topic, but most of these files in the install folder are not code. It's resources, preset, sample scenes and lots of HTML doc, which generates thousands of files.