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?"
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.
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.
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...)
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.
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...
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.
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."
...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.
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.
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.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.
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 :(
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});
Since the page you linked to claims that the manual is based on version 2.32, and, according to yourself, big improvements (meaning big changes) happened on version 2.34 and 2.35, and the current version is 2.37a, how can the manual be "pretty fucking good" ? It should be hopelessly out of date by now.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
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.
No. Now, if you'll kindly step over here, this nice lady is going to give you a product demonstration.
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.
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
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.
It's not.
l
With version 2.37 the book designed for 2.32 is still completely relevent.
There are improvements in stability and features, but everything in the book is still accurate. Very little of the UI has changed between the versions, of that was changed is minor improvements in visability/useability that won't confuse you, the keycombos are the same, the major features such as the modeler, animation and UV mapper are the same (just less quite a few bugs and improved stability). It's evolutionary improvements, not revolutionary ones.
Major differences between versions are outlined on their websites. Things that generally don't get covered in 'learn howto use' manuals such as the excelent blender manual. And you know that irregardless of the application, Maya, Photoshop, 3dsmax, etc etc the manual can't be 100% accurate with the latest and greatest versions of any applications.
Beleive me, a few years of taking graphic art classes has taught me that you actually have to use this thing called a 'brain' that when it comes to learning to use new applications, even with good books. It takes some interpretation.
New features for 2.37a include things like a optimized and subsurf division features, New support for 'softbodies' and some force feild and deflection tools for those softbodies. Some new features added to the Python blender API. SMP support for the blender application renderer for faster rendering, added support for transparent filtering in the renderer.
Everything in the book is still valid. You can go thru the step-by-step instructions for modelling, animating, rendering and not get lost. Most new features and changes won't matter too much except to more advanced users.
Changelog can be found at http://www.blender3d.org/cms/Releaselogs.34.0.htm
It's all very easy to understand.
Major incremental upgrades in features are in 2.32, 2.34, 2.36, 2.37a versions. The rest are mostly bugfix releases.
Remember this is Free/OSS software. You get the improvements as the developers work on them.. it's not like Maya or Softimage were it's price tag forces developers to do huge changes between versions to generate sales.
If your worried about versioning scew just use the version supplied with the book. It has binaries and source code for Windows, OS X, and Linux. No need to download anything at all if you don't feel like it.
I feel that's its worth it to upgrade to the newest version, even when following out of the book.
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.
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.