Anybody remember when autodesk ruled the world?

Well hell, they still do.
They recently acquired Softimage xsi modeling. Since they already own 3dmax
and maya they now control every single piece of the software that makes the
animation we see on tv and in video games.
I tried to use 3dmax way back, it's autodesks homegrown modeler and real
popular. It sucked so bad I changed to xsi. I'd rather model with a 2d
version of bobcam than use 3dmax. Looks like soon I won't have a choice.
Things sure are changing.

Reply to
vinny
Loading thread data ...
there's a big difference in animation software and mechanical/design software. i'd rather fly on a plane that was designed, tested and machined in catia or unigraphics etc than in maya
Reply to
raamman
APT and COMPACT
Reply to
Scott
I started using 3D Studio back when it was still run by Gary Yost (Yost Group) I stayed with it through MAX 2.5. The pricing for me got out of hand being I used it for a small hobby/business video animation gig. I still have the disks but have not tried to see if it even runs on XP. I thought it was great for a modeler for the price. In the day, MAX was under $2,500, SI and Maya were MUCH MUCH more expensive.
There was a huge corporate presence that came with the Autodesk buyout from Gary and company. I used to be able to ask him questions directly as he was really into support. We used the old Compuserve forum for support. We'd even meet at the hotel bar during Siggraph as a fun users group. When Autodesk bought him out, that culture went away.
-- Bill
Reply to
Bill
there's still a lot, perhaps most of the construction, city planning market using autodesk software- the nice thing is educational/ trial software and textbooks are easy to get as opposed to most of the competing cadcam stuff; solidworks is probabally the 2nd most accessible software for people to learn to use at home.
Reply to
raamman
there's a big difference in animation software and mechanical/design software. i'd rather fly on a plane that was designed, tested and machined in catia or unigraphics etc than in maya
**** Of course. It's two totally different applications. If I had to design parts in an airplane, I'd pick mechanical modelers. But if I had to make a plane for a game, or for a tv commercial, I would want to use animation software. The two are very similar but different. But my point was Autocad at one point ruled the cad market. Now they rule the animation market. the animation market is prolly 1000 times the size of the cad market or more. This is total domination worldwide of the animation modeling market. Weird part is I heard they laid off 2000 workers last month. maybe to make room for the xsi people?

Reply to
vinny
Dang, you are really insightful. That's like saying you'd rather fly in a plane that was designed on catia rather than one that was designed in Microsoft Word.
Reply to
K. Gringioni
If Autodesk drops the ball, something will take its place. A large portion of innovation in the rendering market comes from third party plug-ins. All that needs to happen is someone writes a rendering engine and make it open source. The plug-in developers would supply the rest.
It's happened in electronic music with VSTs (Virtual Studio Technology). It has to be licensed from the creator, but even with that barrier, software synths and effects (the VST plugins) have nearly taken over the entire synthesizer market. It's only a matter of time before the hardware synth is dead.
Autodesk better be careful with how they manage their suite of products or something could rise up and overwhelm them.
Reply to
K. Gringioni
Dang, you are really insightful. That's like saying you'd rather fly in a plane that was designed on catia rather than one that was designed in Microsoft Word.
***** That's not entirely fair. The latest versions of xsi can do the math as good as anything else, it's just not designed to do it so it's like driving a nail with a ball pean hammer. It uses nurbs curve math, has lots of surfacing capabilities, and can actually be set up to scale.But it's designed to model triangles, purely for visual purposes. It's different, but no less complex or powerful. Likewise, solidworks has been able to do what xsi could do, it was just real hard to do it. Same engines underneath, different dashboards.
Reply to
vinny
more than just a desire, you seem to be consumed by a need to stick your dick in your mouth given the slightest opportunity. keep going
Reply to
raamman
OK.
Microsoft Excel then.
Reply to
K. Gringioni
I made an NC file out of "C" once.
Wanted to engrave a fractal. Set the G drilling code (is it 81?), then an there was a loop that calculated the (fractal) cloud point data and wrote it to the NC file.
It worked, but it didn't look that great. The points need to be vectorized.
It was sorta like designing a car in Excel. :)
Reply to
K. Gringioni
OK.
Microsoft Excel then.
You better be careful, there's a guy in this group that lives excel. Spread sheet programmer!
Excel...kinda like hulk hogan in a dress. Could still snap you like a twig, but you'll die laughing.
Reply to
vinny
Survey says: top ten answers on the board: Autodesk sucks I used ver9 on a 286pc back in 88? with a freekin suma scetch pad specificly autolisp programmed for mold design- duel screeens - the works!. Fu......k gimme Cadkey any day back then.
****
I stopped reading after the word cadkey. Yep, cadkey SmOkeD autocad 2-1. No contest. Thanks for reminding me of that.
I am forced to concur...autocad did suck. But I will defend lisp. I liked it.
Reply to
vinny

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.