Slashdot Mirror
Autodesk Acquires Alias
eggegg is one of many readers to write to tell us that "Autodesk, of AutoCAD and 3dsmax fame, is reporting that it has signed a definitive agreement to acquire Alias, makers of Maya and MotionBuilder. Will Autodesk use the inherited expertise and codebase to finally develop their product line for the platforms most of their customer base would prefer, or does this mean the end of development of Alias products on OSX and Linux?"
If they made 3DSMax, then more than likely what will happen if they gobble up Alias products instead of just letting alias run as whatever, then Maya will become degraded, slow, and horrible like 3DSMax is.
"And so the Trekkies were executed in the mannor most befitting virgins - thrown into volcanoes" - Futurama
More likely "the end of development of Alias products."
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
"Autodesk Acquires Alias"
You sure ABC was ok with this?
(waaaait for it....)
You need a FREE iPod Nano
Autodesk will kill other platforms and there'll be crazy anti-piracy attached to all the aquired products.
to get built for Linux. The whole product embeds every microsoft technology possible, including basing core functionality on IE6. The most likely outcome will be that Alias products will become Windows-only. I give Linux and MacOS Alias products one more rev before it goes strictly Windows.
autodesk is so 'un-alias' -- its the end of alias...
Background on Alias's history can be obtained here, and background on Autodesk, here.
/dev/null.
Hope for the future of Maya on Linux, can be found at
Alias sold for $182m in cash ! Wow that's cheap, given that Maya is THE software used to create all theses 3d animated motion picture that each gross several multiple of that.
Now if Autodesk is discontinue the Maya line, that is going to be a huge lost to the industry, I rather like Autodesk to use their newly acquire Premium product (Maya) to make a coherent product line, 3DStudio Max in the cheap low end, windows only and Maya for the expensive high end, with pricey Linux-clustering support.
So what is Autodesk's alias ? PS: http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?id=5970 886&siteID=123112
They are now doing business under an assumed name, selling software at low low prices out of the trunk of their car?
Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
The likely outcome is that the Alias products will get really expensive, become very widely used, and be pirated.
Maya Linux has been a long time coming. Alias has proof that not only do regular customers want Linux, high-end studios demand it. OSX is in an even better position. The architeture of Maya (a scripting language called MEL on top of a "kernel" of sorts) makes it quite portable I would think.
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
I know they've produced a few questionable products in the past, but is that really enough to require an alias?
And what is it for that matter?
ManualChair (R)?
BikeSofa (R)?
StickOttoman (R)?
AutoCrap (R)?
A bit more information, please....
-Chris
--an unbreakable toy is useful for breaking other toys--
Interestingly that Rhino 3D is picking up users.
Does anyone know how the big 3 modellers compare? (I know a lot of game dev studios use Max and Maya.) Also, what about Blender?
TIA.
Autodesk acquires Alias?
Imagine for a moment, what would happen if Adobe decided to take over Macromedia. It's a silly, far-fetched idea.
Wha? Oh, nevermind.
The product will be allowed to languish for years, squeezing every last drop of usefulness out of a once mighty product, compressor(ing) a once large user base on2 other software solutions.
;-)
dang if I can figure out how to work Divx into that sentence...
Autodesk now owns Alia and 3dsMax so is this going to bring up game prices etc other things that utilize these tools for their design??
Courage is fear holding on a minute longer. George Patton
given there is no such thing as windows clustering, and maya uses large rendering farms, i doubt they will kill it off. huge movie studio's will move to something else if they do and that's a big loss to them.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
when they came up with Final Cut Pro. The video monsters collected their strengths and are now slowly pulling the wings off of Apple. First Adobe cut Premiere off of Apple, and now their video suite is Windows only. Next thing, Autodesk buys Alias. Bye bye Maya. More will soon follow. The future of Apple? SGI. It doesn't have to be this way, but that's the way it's going. Bummer, 'cuz I love Apple machines. RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Come on, please someone tell me this was just a poorly timed April Fools' joke.
-Vendal Thornheart
Honestly I thought at this point Auto would have already burried its self so deep into adding more junk onto the same original program that they would just fade away into nothing while VectorWorks and other programs took center stage, I certainly didnt see them buying out THE best comercial 3D program out there let alone buying it out for really what amounts to chump change and is certainly 1/8th what I expected.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
On the topic of Blender, how is the documentation going? :)
"...or does this mean the end of development of Alias products on OSX and Linux?"
Autodesk has many products running on IRIX and Linux (Inferno, Flame, Flint, Smoke, Burn, etc...). The important aspect of this acquisition is the future of Maya and Autodesk's 3dsmax. What matters most is that a quality product continues to be developed, whether it's based on either application, not what OS it runs apon.
-D
...it would be a good opportunity for Blender to step in and fill the gap. I wonder if it's up to it?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
I have some artist friends in the entertainment industry. Every so often I hear about great Maya is from some, and how great Max is from others. So I know that both have their fans.
But my question is: How does the open source Blender modeling and animation package compare to Maya and Max for creating content for movies, animations and games. What is it missing, what does it not do as well, what would it need to be able to compete? Is Blender even a worthy substitute for Maya or Max?
I'm new to all of the above don't know what the strengths of all these different programs are - besides Blender being $0 and the others being $haha for someone on a budget.
OHH SUN OF A BEOTCH!
damnit damnit damnit damnit....
crap.
CRAP!
Screw you guys: i'm going home. And i had JUST gone totaly Microsoft free...
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
Like every other aquisition, Autodesk will do a terrible job of implimenting the better features of the product, and then shelve it until it dies. Meanwhile they will continue on the long standing tradition of Windows only, and worse performance. Autocad is the only program that has a reverse Moore's curve. They've already ruined autocad, lightscape and revit. They've done little to improve 3dStudio. Now that they have Alias they have even less incentive to improve their products and even more to make subscriptions mandatory, and they yearly update even more underwhelming. -can you tell I'm an irritated, but trapped user?
Before Maya is as of a high quality like several of Autodesk's other recent product releases, like Raster Design 2005 and Map 3D 2006. ::rollseyes::
.NET and VBA). I've seen an AutoCAD install running on Virtual PC on a Mac, but that was painful. I really wouldnt expect future versions of Maya on linux or mac unless the community revolts.
I'm so sorry for you Maya folk. I really am.
And yes, Autodesk is in deep with Microsoft. They got tons of cash 10 or so years ago to kill off their Unix variants of AutoCAD (not like there was a whole lot of demand anyways). But there is just about no way they could get AutoCAD or any other vertical to run on any non MS OS (tight integration, lots of hooks for
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
From: Alias
To: bryn
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 00:49:17 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Autodesk Signs Definitive Agreement to Acquire Alias
Dear Alias Customer,
Today Autodesk and Alias announced the signing of a definitive agreement for Autodesk to acquire Alias.
Alias is a leading developer of 3D graphics technology, headquartered in Toronto, Canada. Alias develops and delivers software and services for film and video, interactive games, media and the Web. It also develops software and services for consumer products, industrial design, automotive, architecture and visualization customers.
With more than six million users, Autodesk is the world's leading software and services company for the manufacturing, infrastructure, building, digital media and wireless data services fields. Autodesk's solutions help customers to create, manage and share their digital assets more effectively. The acquisition of Alias will continue to round out our product lines across industry segments.
As many of you are aware, in the media and entertainment industry, most leading film studios, game developers and high-end visual effects companies use Alias' Maya®, MotionBuilder® and FBX® software. Most also use Autodesk's complementary Inferno®, Flame®, Lustre® and 3ds Max® products. The most demanding industrial designers in the world use Alias' StudioTools(TM), primarily in the automotive and consumer products segments. Bringing this technology to Autodesk will strengthen the manufacturing business by integrating conceptual design as a front-end to Inventor Series and the PLM solution.
The acquisition also brings to Autodesk a highly talented group of individuals, a wealth of technologies and a great set of products. By combining the technology and talents of two successful, financially healthy companies, we will be better able to continue delivering solutions that address your ever-changing and increasingly complex needs. And yes, Autodesk plans to continue to support and develop Alias products as well as utilize the strength of the combined organization to provide customers with continued innovation and technology development.
The transaction is expected to close in the next four to six months. Until that time, Autodesk and Alias will continue operating as independent companies and will remain focused on our current customer needs. We do not anticipate any changes with respect to planned product releases for either company. Please continue using your existing contacts for sales, services and support. We will update you on the progress of this acquisition, both directly and online at http://www.autodesk.com/autodeskandalias.
On behalf of Autodesk and Alias, we would like to thank you for your business and reiterate our commitment to ensuring that this event which is exciting for both our companies will prove even more so for you.
Sincerely,
Carol Bartz
Chairman and CEO
Autodesk, Inc.
Doug Walker
President and CEO
Alias
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
"does this mean the end of development of Alias products on OSX and Linux?"
What about IRIX? Let's not forget about it. It was the first OS that any Alias software ever ran on. If memory serves, Alias was spun-off from Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Slashdot = -1 Redundant, Asperger, kdawson FUD, Libertarian, and Linux
From this info, it looks like they consider Maya and 3DS Max to be in separate market segments - which indeed they are. For cryin' out loud, Pixar uses parts of Maya in their workflow. Who would want to kill that? Maya's the crown jewel of Alias. You can't compare this to the Macromedia acquisition. This would be more akin to Macromedia buying out Adobe to get Photoshop.
But it may be about the death of innovation in the area of 3D animation.
Autodesk bought Discreet quite a while ago and is actively supporting and developing *nix and OSX versions of the Discreet products. Autodesk's AutoCAD may not be so friendly, but the Media and Entertainment division goes where the money is, and a lot of the creative types are on platforms other than Windows. Judging from history, I suspect that will continue to be the case.
The thing that frightens me is that the two most popular 3D applications will now be under one roof. This could mark the beginning of Autodesk staging a Microsoft-like dominance of the 3D market, and the marginalization of the remaining players.
As someone who owns seats of both 3ds Max and Maya, I should be happy, but instead I have a pit in my stomach. I'm not sure if this is a good thing at all for the 3D community.
Jennifer Garner's contract with her current production company (Disney) expires in November and she'll begin working at Autodesk after that. Her job duties will include product demonstrations and killing people.
Not much, granted, but if you drill into the product offerings you'll find a few things there already.
degraded, slow, and horrible like 3DSMax is
Degraded? in terms of what, exactly?
Slow? upgrade your piece of shit computer
Horrible? now you're just being whiny.
Some really great features that Blender has over the competition:
Heck there is even a ton of free documentation, ranging from a wikibook to other books and guides.
It was used for previz stuff on Spider-man 2, in case anyone asks if it has been used in the industry.Well hey, we can kiss Alias|WaveFront goodbye, but on the upshot, maybe Avid SoftImage|XSI will get back in to prominance. I always felt SoftImage was a better all around package anyway.
Speaking from someone in the industry, you're all over hyped/worried about nothing.
First of all, the suggestion that Autodesk pro MS is complete bullshit. More than half of Discreet's products only run on Unix.
Second, speaking as a user of both Max and Maya, the two could see a bright future in collaboration. The two interfaces are just about identical thanks to years of blatantly ripping one another's innovations off. The two have been fighting so long that many of the programmers that developed ground breaking features for one, are now working for the other. Case in point, the lead programmer responsible for Maya's IK and rigging system was hired by Discreet to then implement the exact same functionality in MAX.
The third point I would like to make is that Alias has been bought and sold by so many people over the last couple of years, that finally settling down in a company that at least appreciates the 3d and film industry should do nothing but good things for it.
The industry pipeline is so firmly developed around Maya, there is no way that autodesk could cancel development just to simply kill its competitor. What most likely will happen is Alias will continue to exist just as it does today, or else some sort of HyperMerging of some of the best packages available today into one psychic lens of perfection. I would bet on the latter.
What's the panic about? It's not like Alias' existing software is just going to stop working. What's wrong with just staying with whatever current version of it you're using? The same goes for office software. It's done the same shit for the past X years, why bother upgrading?
Obvously AutoDesk is trying to increase the depth of products and position themselves better in the CG industry, which compliments 3D Studio well. But, for the AutoCAD users out there, this has no benefit. I am a Civil Engineer and have been using autocad since its early days (1987, v 1.18) and I think what they really need is some dedication to avoid bloatware! It will be interesting however to see how products like Maya affect their Civil 3D program as they are starting to push rendering much more than past versions. It will be interesting to see the road I designed push through the peaks of Lord of the Rings, besides that, no value add :(
[QUOTE]..it would be a good opportunity for Blender to step in and fill the gap. I wonder if it's up to it? [/QUOTE]
Today it definitely isn't. In a year or so of time, it might well be.
LetterRip
Not yet, however, from my point of view, they are close. Actually what they need is extensive manual for Maya users to migrate on Blender. Blender is growing rapidly and get features/methods added in very fast pase. Check out Project Orange (link http://orange.blender.org/), which will be something like real life showcase of usability of Blender - in same time, big QA and bugfixing session too :)
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Compared with Maya, blender is a toy. That's the cold hard truth.
Maya for Linux has a slightly more messed up UI than the windows release though.
--
Use your bluetooth phone as a modem for Linux
The threads on this board are silly. Maya is not going to die on Linux or otherwise. There is too much money to be made. While Max and Maya have some overlap, Max cannot do what Maya does or serve all of Maya's customers. Autodesk doesn't have competition for our AutoStudio product so that is going to stay too. They will keep Alias products around if only because we have a *very* developed services business that is based around Maya and Studio with some *very* large companies.
It would be reckless of me to speculate further what is exactly going to happen, but Maya in particular is quite beautiful under the hood and has a bunch of life left in it. It is very platform independent. It is flexible enough to turn into almost anything that you need it to be. It's not going anywhere.
I'm happy about this. The near term impact is that we will have a more complete pipeline to sell in design, film and games. I bet some really nice Maya-Max translation tools pop up as well.
Indeed. People who have never used Maya probably can't appreciate what it can do, but Blender doesn't even come close.
Modelling and animation is only part of a visual effects or animation pipeline. Maya's strength is not the fabulous modelling tools (certainly Lightwave's modelling tools are better), but the way that it is customisable. Any part of Maya is customisable. Maya can be whatever you want it to be, and can integrate seamlessly with whatever you want it to integrate with.
This is a much harder problem than it sounds. Consider a simple Newtonian physics simulation engine. The location and orientation of some object might depend on the simulation (e.g. an object might be moving under gravity). On the other hand, the simulation depends on the location and orientation of objects (e.g. objects can collide). This is a circular dependency. Most animation systems handle this in one of two ways: couple the animation system and the physics simulator, or run the simulation as a post-pass between animation and rendering. Maya (even though it does have a simulator in the base product) can handle it as a plug-in, and the circular dependency is no problem at all. Moreover, you can have multiple special-purpose solvers (fluid solvers, cloth solvers etc), and they all work together automatically, with no coupling with the Maya core.
It goes deeper.
Maya has its own shader model. If you don't like it, such as if it's not the model that your renderer uses, you can implement your own as a plugin. No change to the core. It Just Works(tm).
Unlike 3DS, which requires plug-ins to conform to a fixed set of interfaces (subclass THIS C++ class if you want to implement a shader, subclass THIS if you want to implement a type of geometry, subclass THIS if you want to implement a renderer), in Maya, it's completely generic. You can even implement your own "things" which the Maya core has no concept of (e.g. it's not a shader, it's not geometry, it's not a user control), and everything will just work. Try doing that with Blender.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
And in the meantime, maybe the GIMP will replace Photoshop, is that your next line?
Yeeeeeeeahno.
Blender has its uses, but Super Mega High End ain't one of them. Ditto GIMP vs. Photoshop. The biggest single advantage of Blender is that it's FOSS and multiplatform - after that.... whoo. Studios shell out for Maya licenses for a reason, scooter.
then there will be no more pixar... (their render farm is mac and linux)
(yes i know i suck at spelling fell free to correct my grammar and/or spellin i dont care, im still not going to change
You saw how Apple bought eMagic and killed over 1/3 of their business by saying "no more Windows products, go buy a Mac, suckers," right? How about when they bought Shake? They tried the same deal, but then they got generous and turned it into a very affordable $5000 penalty for using a PC instead of a Mac.
And *you* have the nerve to feel picked on?
Reagan sez Yee Haw!
[QUOTE]Maya (even though it does have a simulator in the base product) can handle it as a plug-in, and the circular dependency is no problem at all. [...]This is a much harder problem than it sounds.[/QUOTE]
With Blender you have complete access to the source code so the problems you have with other software of being limited to how they expose things in their API is nonexistent. Or you could do it as a module and use the built in python scripting.
[QUOTE]You can even implement your own "things" which the Maya core has no concept of (e.g. it's not a shader, it's not geometry, it's not a user control), and everything will just work. Try doing that with Blender.[/QuOTE]
You can do that in Blender too - Blenders internal structure is extremely flexible, adding new types is very easy and everything 'just works'.
LetterRip
If video editing on the Mac is dead, and this is why Adobe pulled Premiere...
Why does Adobe continue to update AfterEffects on the Mac?
Probably, because AfterEffects is a viable product. Premiere died because it was too lame to compete with FCP. On Windows, the competition is lighter, so it survived there. But FinalCut-using editors still use AE for finishing, because it's a genuinely useful program.
Same thing with Maya. It's the best 3D package on the Mac. And the Mac accounts for about 25% of Alias' Maya sales. If Autodesk kills it, it'll be to their detriment.
Except that Pixar created and, like almost every other studio, uses the proprietary RenderMan package (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renderman)to do their rendering. Regardless of Maya's future (or otherwise), they will still use RenderMan for rendering on whatever platform they want.
No. Now, if you'll kindly step over here, this nice lady is going to give you a product demonstration.
but you got the relationship between AutoCAD and MS backwards.
or a pcmcia network adapter.
Lets you move the software at will and avoid a lot of hassles at upgrade machine time.
Blogging because I can...
And in the meantime, maybe the GIMP will replace Photoshop, is that your next line?
Why not? No matter what you think of the relative features of Gimp and Photoshop today, today's Gimp has many more features than Photoshop of a few years ago. Heck, a few years ago, Photoshop didn't have more than 8 bits per channel, and Photoshop zealots like you were foaming at the mouth telling everybody how that was all anybody ever needed.
In fact, the fancy features that Photoshop has are rarely important in day-to-day professional imaging use; professionals simply don't have the time to fiddle for hours with every image--most digital images should come out of the camera ready to use, and if they require editing, the less of it, the better.
There are some other applications of Photoshop besides its core image editing functionality, like web design, where the Gimp doesn't compete with Photoshop. But that's OK--that's not the Gimp's purpose. I think Photoshop took a wrong turn somewhere when it incorporated all that cruft.
Let's change perspective for a minute, and look at this financially. If you look at Autodesk's annual report(caution: pdf), there are some things I would like to bring to attention. First notice that Autodesk's profits are at a five year high (see page 3). Next Autodesk named Alias, directly, as a competitor (see page 21). Some people may be thinking that all that extra profit could make a great round of bonuses, but alas, Autodesk is a corperation and not a coop. There is really only one reason to buy out a competitor, and that is to capture market share. But here's the million dollar question: does Autodesk want to consolidate the market it is currently in, or, just maybe, do they see a trend late in the game and want to expand onto linux?
With the purchase of Alias, Autodesk has a set of engineers immediately able to develop on linux, and by that I mean the infrastructure is already set up. Also, they gain Alias's technology. Basically, Autodesk bought itself some options, and increased market share. Fiscally and competetively speaking, they made a good move.
The makers of 3DSCrap bought the makers of Maya. Wonderfull.
... But that could change fast.
Why can't it be the other way around? Alias/Wavefront are real innovators in the field of 3D. Discreet/Autodesk products are more often just rehashed crummy re-releases of older versions. This really sucks.
On the other hand, one can't really complain about the lack of competition in the 3D market.
I guess the 3D market is in for some serious consolidation.
Anyway, I'm sticking with Lightwave and Blender.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
No, this is no big entry for Blender. Yes, Blender is far away from competing with Maya. It's probably even far away from competing with 3DSCrap - allthough not so very far I'd say.
But there is one thing significant about Blender as an OSS Design Software:
While comparing Gimp to PS or Sketch to Illustrator is just plain silly, there is actually a point in comparing Blender to commercial 3D Software.
Let's not forget: Blender was a commercial package itself back then. I even bought a licence for ca. 400$.
So, yes, over time it is not unlikely that Blender will be a solid alternative to Maya, Softimage, Houdini, Lightwave and the rest. Blender 2.4 is coming (probably at the blender conference next week) with a complete redo of IK. There are less than 10 open ends that need programming/redoing (renderer, joints, proper NLA, more/better modelling to name a few) but even though this is lots of work, it's an overseable amount of work. Each of these open ends can be done by a good programmer with a few months time.
Blender *is* invading the 3D market. Especially in education. Softimage's 3Democracy campaign is one result of this.
If the Blender team could be the first to come clear with an XML based 3D format they could even call the shots and establish a new universal 3D standard.
Bottom line:
Over time Blender could very well become a big player in the 3D world. Just not tomorrow.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Not to be a tweak, but you misspelled "asinine."
Will Autodesk use the inherited expertise and codebase to finally develop their product line for the platforms most of their customer base would prefer
Yes! A little known fact is AutoCAD spent money with an e-mail advertising firm to post on a FreeBSD mailing list advertising how you could buy AutoCAD at a discount. Now, if the product wasn't on FreeBSD, why would they advertise it on a FreeBSD mailing list?
(you could just ignore AutoCAD who uses SPAM to market and try Synergy)
I feel sorry for all the Maya users out there. The Maya forums are full of messages like "I'm switching to XSI/Houdini", "they're going to ruin Maya". While the Max user base is over the moon. In reality, nothing much will change. Maya was starting a slow decline. It's infrastructure is at least two generations older than Houdini, and one older than XSI. It's turned into a collection of modules that really don't fit into each other. Max has been going that way for years. Sure, its great for games - but pretty clunky by todays standards.
No! No! PIXAR uses RENDERMAN!!! Hopefully this will save Pixar!
It's not, and won't be for a long time, sure it's getting features like fluid simulation and now hair in cvs, but it's flawed in it's design.
You can't just keep piling up features ontop of a poor design, like Newtek does with Lightwave.
If Blender is to replace Maya, then it needs to be rebuilt from scratch, and Ton needs to listen more to professionals and less to SpheresOnCheckerboardsWithLensFlares-making Elysiun users.
He keeps adding weird stuff like automatic coloring of bones wich owns IK and other constraints.
Why automatically color non-control objects? And make it non-reversible? That should be up to the user to customize his/her rig.
A TD would have a heartattack if he/she saw this.
Softimage XSI and Side Effects Houdini will immediatly fill the gap of Maya for character animation as far as the larger studios are concerned (Houdini was already dominating in the particle field, but now it's character animation tools are really catching up).
Someone steps right up on it after BrynM
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
So does this mean I can get modded up to +5 just for citing another pertinent Wikipedia link? :-)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
What the market needs is free software. There are NEVER enough packages to do the job from the user's perspective. CAD software is painfully easy manipulation of two and three dimensional objects. All the building blocks are in place for a free software. QCad and PythonCAD are good starts and there's plenty of good stuff that can move in from projects like Inkspace. CUPS has the printing back end taken care of. With a little bit of effort these things can all be rolled into FEM work to make something as good as Solid Works. The CAD community has the talent to do this and will. It's just a matter of time and not being worked to death by too few, too large employers who have too good a relation with government.
When a company goes under like this, everyone loses even the execs. The money made selling out is nice but it does not add up as well as a healthy company provides in a healthy market. Commercial software is obviously not a healthy market because something of value is about to be destroyed.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
While AutoDesk might be firmly up MS's asses, keep in mind that one of their child companies, Discreet (who makes 3DS, Fire, Combustion, etc) runs most, if not all, their upper level software on Unix boxes - in many cases exclusively. Due to this I can see AutoDesk leaving Alias alone in respect to platforms.
Man, I just finished writing a boat load of MAX Scripts. I guess I'll have a job in a few years converting them over to MELScript. :)
I'm guessing no, at the moment. More to the point, and more interesting - would it be worth it for the former customers of Maya on $PLATFORM to pool their resources and hire enough developers to make Blender into what it needs to be to be a Maya killer?
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
"Will Autodesk use the inherited expertise and codebase to finally develop their product line for the platforms most of their customer base would prefer"...oh come on. That's your personal view extrapolated to include the whole world. From my point of view, Windows is _the_ platform for 3D game development, and that's one of the largest uses of 3D modelling software. See? Your view is not everyone's.
(I'm already going to be flagged as a troll, so I might as well add that I sincerely wish Slashdot's editors would go for flat or enthusiastic teasers and not loaded, spin-full ones.)
First, Autodesk doesn't want to 'alienate' alias customers (a bad pun I know, but true). The majority of computer users, use windows, but a much higher proportion of video editors use Macs/Linux. Macs have long been touted as king of video editing by video editors, and who can beat a lightweight linux distro for rendering?
Nothing will change, Maya and whatnot will continue to be available on OSX and Linux. Go home sensationalists.
http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/fa
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Jennifer Garner was also aquired in the deal, she will be included as a company perk for upper level management and top performing employees.
I think the invisible hand of the market has its middle finger extended
--A wise old fart named SC0RN
You have no clue of what you're talking about...
a) Rendering farms have nothing to do w/ clustering. Individual frames of animation are handed out to rendering nodes by the application not the OS
and
b) Windows has had clustering in one form or another for almost a decade now....
IMHO this is good for max, bad for maya. Maya's solid in the interface as well as the API and scripting interfaces.
apparently autodesk wants alias' film rapid prototying technologys for their automotive industries.
music - http://www.subatomicglue.com
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
Here's hoping they continue development on Maya--unlike Adobe, who bought Syntrillium (developers of Cool Edit), released one bugfix/minor upgrade version, then promptly forgot about it.
*formating the previous post*
.3ds import script and it definetely didn't have a poser import script.
.obj and importing each .obj into blender",
I fire back at you :
last time I used blender 2.37 (july 2005), It had a basic 3dsmax
I'm not talking about importing wafefront obj meshes here, but FULLY RIGGED poser characters,
with bone system and vertices assigned to bones.
And if by importing poser animation, you mean "converting each frame to
I know that blender can do it but this feature isn't good enough, sorry.
What blender needs is POWERFULL plug ins (not basic/uncomplete ones) that simplifies hte artist's life, like these commercial ones :
gesturemax : converts fully rigged poser character into the physic/bones system of 3dsmax
phoenix : create DYNAMIC flames around something (with lights with shadows that moves accordingly to the object's movement)
Speedtree : create great looking trees/forest (low polygons, with light cpu use)
Ventiloquist : lipsync plugin
dreamscape : for clouds, sky etcs..(low cpu usage..and lights and shadows for the clouds layer..etc...)
I suggest you to make an internet search about these plug-ins, you'll see that those can make an artist's life much easier
and greatly enhance the MOVIES you create.
If you know plug ins for blender that have the same set of VERY convenient features, I would be delighted to know of them
(and I would beg you for forgiveness for my ignorance). If these plug ins of yours are free, I will even call you "god".
If you don't, well....you can't even back your words, so BE GONE fool !
Another great advantage of 3dsmax and maya on blender is : hardware renderer.
Have you heard of the coming Gelato/Sorbetto/Amaretto solution from nvidia for their quadro fx professional cards ?
Please wake me up when blender gets such support from nvidia/ati/3dlabs/matrox....
sorry for the previous (unreadable) post, I should know better and preview the post, sorry...
The ABC's have turned on us!
Wow, that's pretty impressive. How exactly does Maya manage to do all that?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Because its the application everyone else uses.
I guess IT managers love it because its part of the standards they owe and ahh about having to support.
http://saveie6.com/
FlexLM is very easy to break compared to the typical copy protection you will get on a game. It's purpose is to keep reasonably honest people in line and allow them to control shared licenses from a central server in such a way that the number can be easily increased or decreased.
I believe Maya relies on the fact that the license is easy to break. This gets a lot of home users to learn how to use Maya before they get a job in computer graphics, which greatly increases their market share.
Incidentally, the cracking program for Windows will produce a license that works for the Linux version on a machine with the same MAC address.
Simple. For the last three or so releases, "Maya" has essentially been (1) a Maya Embedded Language interpreter core plus (2) all the parts of it written in MEL. Result: total customization of everything.
This goes significantly beyond Blender's Python scripts... you can access the various modules pretty well, but you really can't modify or replace anything you want freely (like you can with Maya because it's just all MEL).
Somebody pointed out that Blender's source code is available for this level of customization. Was that a joke? That's a night and day difference from the convenience offered by MEL -- a difference that translates directly into resources (head scratching, time, money) needed.
...and the first thing they did was fire our excellent and experienced sales team. They turned sales over to their guys, who didn't do jack to move any of our products because the sales cycle for a enterprise solution was longer than 3 months and they had to meet their quarterly goals before all else. The mismanaged our product line into the dirt, I'm not even sure if that product line even exists still.
Our staff went from 250 to 45 in 3 rounds of layoffs (I went in the 3rd). At least they were quite generous with the severance package.
This should come as a surprise to nobody. 3d modeling programs are - surprise - PC applications. The market has demonstrated that over the course of time, there is only one PC software application that survives in the marketplace.
That is the nature of an industry where piracy helps the market leader and hurts those behind it. It has ever been thus. This is no different.
Softimage's days are numbered. They can't compete with a united 3dsmax/Maya. They were a third whell to begin with. It's not going to get better for them.
discreet will ultimately stream the united 3dsmax/Maya apps under the same user interface and will create packages and plug-in extentions for film and 3d gaming use. As the differences in modeling requirements narrow over time, the differences and different plug-ins will being to vanish and become consolidated under a generic program feature.
Students will learn one interface in school. Pirates will use one application before they go to 3d school and mpod games. Companies will reduce training costs and as for price? Well - that remains to be seen. I have not seen a Monopolist reduce prices yes, so I wouldn't hold my breath.
Honestly though - even a dead man could have seen this merger coming: "That is the sound of inevitibility."
.Robert
One wonders why Apple didn't buy it -- Apple has paid 30-50 M USD in cash for pro video and audio software companies in the past, so the price Autodesk paid is not wildly out of sync with that. As a wedge to move PC users to Apple hardware, it's well worth writing the check.
quote taken from an old software review by Tony Zilles
now... I happened to like that old program. Back, in college (early 90's), for 2D work that didn't require fancy rendering (e.g. floor-plans, &c.) anything that would take me a day to finish, using AutoCAD would take me around an hour to put together using DrafixCAD. Orange Software (aka Softdesk aka Autodesk) bought it, and killed it, and I haven't seen much of a significant improvement in AutoCAD as a result.
Will this be the same, or will AutoCAD actually get better rendering capability, while Maya dies quietly?
While I love and use Blender, please don't mention the access to source code as anything usable for a production house (perhaps accustomed to MaxScript or MEL). Even Ton himself admits that a lot of it is horrible accumulated spaghetti or just legacy from Blender's hectic commercial days. It's a lot of C and C++ with Python scripting here and there, and overarching consistency is still firmly on the To Do list...
Dunno. If I had a few competent coders to throw at a project like that, I'd have it rewritten it in Psyco'ed Python, with inlined C binary borrowed from the original for the clearly "atomic" base functions. The required customizability and hopefully sufficient speed...
Off to talk to VC guys! *dons jungle fatigues*
[QUOTE]Even Ton himself admits that a lot of it is horrible accumulated spaghetti or just legacy from Blender's hectic commercial days. It's a lot of C and C++ with Python scripting here and there, and overarching consistency is still firmly on the To Do list...[/QUOTE]
:) - you can get even better performance by using a new summer of code project that turns python into C++ code with 10-100 fold speedups, or wait a bit and pypy should be complete.
Depends on what area they need to look at - the Python API does have some inconsistencies still but is undergoing a major cleanup which is eliminating most of them. There are a few areas that are still pretty ugly, but the animation system, the object system, the transform system, and the simulation systems are all rewritten to nice new clean code and APIs - thus the code that an animation house would mostly need to touch is in good shape with some exceptions that are mostly targeted for rewrite over the next 6 months.
[QUOTE]Dunno. If I had a few competent coders to throw at a project like that, I'd have it rewritten it in Psyco'ed Python, with inlined C binary borrowed from the original for the clearly "atomic" base functions. The required customizability and hopefully sufficient speed...[/QUOTE]
Psyco isn't nearly fast enough
LetterRip
You probably missed the main point. In Maya you can do anything... without introducing any coupling in the Maya core.
You could introduce a physics simulator to any animation tool if you're prepared to propagate knowledge of it throughout the source code. But you require knowledge of the source code to do that, and you risk voiding your warranty (i.e. support contract). You also severely lose maintainability and robustness. The second thing that you introduce increases the coupling even more!
A well-designed API solves this problem by reducing what you have to know, reducing the effort that you have to expend and in order to get work done. As one other person pointed out, you could do anything in Blender by the simple expedient of completely rewriting it (or replacing it, perhaps) so that it was some other program. But then, you don't actually need Blender to do that.
BTW, I'm going to fall well short of saying that Blender is useless for animation/vfx work. Any tool is useful if used wisely. My point is that Maya fits better into just about any shaped hole that you can think of, unless that hole is almost precisely Blender-shaped.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Blender is obviously lacking specific controls for "features" that are embedded in mainstream, expensive 3D suites like Maya or 3DS Max, but that doesn't mean you cannot accomplish the same effects as many of these "features." (Fur simulation, fire and smoke simulation, etc). With painting, you use a paint brush and paint. You don't have specific brushes for painting different shapes (like a dog shape and a chair shape). You use the same tools. The "limited" features in Blender are similar to using a paint brush instead of more specific specialized brushes. Also, many of the trivial features that Blender does lack currently are being added very quickly. The Open Movie Project (http://orange.blender.org/) is making Ton and the other developers /very/ aware of the small specific problems that filmmakers face when using blender to make a film. If you check the Orange project site there is a blog showing all of the features they are adding specifically for the open film project. Just recently they coded in IPO drivers (sliders for controlling facial movement and such) and fur/hair (supposedly it only took them about 3 hours to organize what they already had in to a good particle fur /and/ hair system!!!).
Blender's interface is extremely smooth after some getting used to. You don't have to deal with millions of annoying windows and 3D and menu navigation are consistent with one another. Modeling is also wonderful in Blender, even though it lacks some welding and bridging type features. These will probably come soon with the advent of the finished half-edge modeling system (for those familiar with Wings 3D).
Here is my opinion: (This is leading up to the whole killing Maya on MAC and Linux thing, bear with me) 1. Microsoft will drop to selling one operating system for every 4 mac purchsed after the realeas of Windows Vista due to all of the DRM, only supporting Bluray or whatever one format they end up supporting, liscencing issues, etc. 2. Google and other companies will step in with enough web based aplications that it won't matter what OS we use. 3. People will switch more to Mac and Linux (esp. if it is preinstalled) 4. The above eventually kills Microsoft (within 5 years time). 5. If Autodesk still continues to produce software for Windows systems only for more than two years from now they will die with Microsoft and other players (esp. one that can use exiting AutoCAD Lisp routines without any reprogramming and save to an AutoCAD format perfectly, those are the two drawbacks to all other software rigt now that makes AutoCAD a nescesarry evil right now) to replace it without any real effort on thier part. Now will anyone at Autodesk or Microsoft take this post seriously? Of course not, but it's what will happen.
This deal is tantamount to Pepsi buying out Coke. On top of that, Autodesk can now offer a *complete* realistic production pipeline for studios. On top of that, not ALL of Autodesk's products are for Windows. Feel free to take a look at their post-production programs (all tend to have names related to fire and/or explosions). If they can patch Maya into a Linux pipeline, that would make studios VERY happy.
So that's great, right? Yeah, except now this deal turns Autodesk into a juggernaut that now has a balls-grip on both the film AND gaming industry. Now, as much as they like to boast 3dsmax being great for games, it's a total lie. Companies like EA use Maya and XSI. *AMATEUR GAME MODDERS* use 3dsmax and its watered down sister application, gmax. 3dsmax will have little to offer the 3d world.
Autodesk claims that they will continue to develop both packages at the present indefinite time, but don't take their words too lightly. Everything Autodesk is saying is presently geared to please the widest gamut of people. But they must be treated like a politician, so don't put any weight on what they have to say.
If I were to make a prediction, Autodesk will probably kill off one of the 3d packages, because it just doesn't make sense to have two concurrent packages. One of them ultimately will be killed off, or both of them axed to produce some sort of hybrid product under a new name. But, for the sake of not having to piss off several users of both pieces of software, I'll just assume that they'll kill off one package, and I think that will be 3dsmax. They will incorporate features of Max into Maya that will be improvements, but won't detract too much from the software. Because, if it were the other way around, people in the film industry would be far more upset about using Max than using Maya.
So, as that soggy mess is sorted out, the only major contenders will be: Softimage XSI and Lightwave; however, NewTek has been doing a good enough job killing itself off that competition will have little to worry about, so scratch Lightwave out of the picture. This leaves XSI... a lot of speculators are already moving to XSI and learning it now before it's too late.
But I really don't want to say that it'll come down to this. This is just a scenario for if things go badly within the next few years. No matter how big Autodesk is, they can't really battle both the film and game industries, so I'm hoping that users will still shape the future of Autodesk's programs.
History is little else but a picture of human crimes and misfortunes
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?id=5562 445&siteID=123112
/. editors don't seem to think it's news.
"As of October 6, 2005, Autodesk will no longer offer Gmax® software as a stand-alone product. If you are interested in other 3D animation, modeling, and rendering applications from Autodesk please check out Autodesk® 3ds Max® software."
I've been trying to post a story on this for 2 days but the
This is already affecting people. Knife Edge Software makers of Realflight G3 have been promising a new custom aircraft editor based on GMax for some months now. They've had to announce that they'll be releasing it for 3ds Max instead due to "licensing issues"...issue being GMax is dead.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer