XSI : does softimage have plans to port their soft to mac?

[BabeBro]

hundreds of threads on it but Nothing yet, there is an online petition for it here http://www.petitiononline.com/xsi2646/petition.html and a few people have it running under XP via bootcamp.

Your best bet woule be to contact Softimage directly.

[Sbowling]

From what I've heard, your best bet would be to buy an intel mac and load windows onto it. Other than that, you probably won't see it any time soon.

[helluvapixel]

Market demand would dictate, so if Mac people went to Softimage in droves they might do something about it.

[nessus]

beside intel mac with winxp, would it also be possible to install a linux distro which can be installed on a mac, and intall xsi in it?

i am only asking if it is a possibility.

[mocaw]

beside intel mac with winxp, would it also be possible to install a linux distro which can be installed on a mac, and intall xsi in it?

i am only asking if it is a possibility.

I can't see a reason why this wouldn't work...but will boot camp allow for a third boot option? Is there a "hack" of linux that will allow you to do it on a Mac? I know several people who "teste" versions of OS X running on a regular windows box and it booted OS X and XP from a Linux partition (if I remember right).

[T4D]

the XSI programers have a blog (http://www.xsi-blog.com/)
they talk about a XSI Mac version here (http://www.xsi-blog.com/?p=80)

They thinking about it,.. and maybe working on it ,..But one of the things i like about Avid is you won't really hear anything untill it's about to, or is released :)

[JDex]

If you'd like to see XSI on OSX, make sure to sign the petition... also if you have collegues that would be interested that don't frequent the XSI web communities, make sure to email them the petition link. There is power in numbers people.

http://www.petitiononline.com/xsi2646/petition.html

[Vaejh]

Thanks for those usefull replies!

I wish they will port XSI to mac ;)

[Lone Deranger]

1441 * Foundation is nearly 3/4 of a million $$... Might be a nice incentive for SoftImage... :)

Keep signing this people.

If you'd like to see XSI on OSX, make sure to sign the petition... also if you have collegues that would be interested that don't frequent the XSI web communities, make sure to email them the petition link. There is power in numbers people.

http://www.petitiononline.com/xsi2646/petition.html

[gent_k]

Divide that number by about 20 to get an approximate genuine number of people among them that would really buy it if it was made available. :P

[Vaejh]

I'd really purchase it...

[JDex]

Divide that number by about 20 to get an approximate genuine number of people among them that would really buy it if it was made available. :P

True... but I'd guess that 20% of that remainder would be ESS purchasers, and probably another 7-10% would be ADV, both with maintenance. There's a number of recognizable the names on that list, and know that many of them are succesful freelancers that wouldn't be FND purchasers. There's also many current users on that list who would gladly migrate their current licenses.

Hopefully we'll find that the new release scrubs the old Mainwin dependancies, and the platform independence that we crave is less of an issue than it has been in the past.

[martinw]

There's also many current users on that list who would gladly migrate their current licenses.

So scratch them too. Migraters are not useful in evaluating the benefit of a port, since those people are already paying customers and do not bring in the new $$$ that justify a port.

What you need is a sufficiently large pool of completely new customers who will only part with cash for an OSX version, and/or do it as a defensive move to retain customers so attracted to OSX that they would switch to a different software package just to get onto a Mac.

[JDex]

Valid... to a point. Pleasing current customers, staying current and capitalizing on moving markets are crucial to long-term success. Not providing current customers with what they require when dealing with an upgrade or maintenance based client base can be devastating.

It's hard to ask for any resources to be diverted from the current development path, but XSI is on a major upswing at a time when they're competition is consolidating and aggravating their existing clientele on a regular basis... other current small time players are quickly advancing and making "choice" a given. Looking at where XSI can be in 5 years, I think a move like this at this time (if certain issues from the past have been worked out) is a solid decision.

[luceric]

the value of online petitions is pure fantasy.. I'm surprised to see people still filling up those.

[Lone Deranger]

Must make entertaining reading then for SoftImage employees. :D

Out of genuine interest, how does a company like SoftImage gauge demand for an endeavour such as this?

the value of online petitions is pure fantasy.. I'm surprised to see people still filling up those.

[el_diablo]

Currently Mac high end systems are alot less expensive than comparable name PC systems (or even homebuilt). I am in a process of planing the new hardware for 2007 and i thought of going all Mac. The only thing stoping me is the unavailability of XSI for the OSX platform. Second choice would be Mac hardware with Linux on top, but i haven't researched this thourughly sofar. Last choice would be homebuilt pc's with linux - the most expensive choice...

I think the move to osx would be gaining even more popularity for the Softimage. Same as a better VFX toolset. but that is another story.

[Wicked]

Currently Mac high end systems are alot less expensive than comparable name PC systems (or even homebuilt). I am in a process of planing the new hardware for 2007 and i thought of going all Mac. The only thing stoping me is the unavailability of XSI for the OSX platform. Second choice would be Mac hardware with Linux on top, but i haven't researched this thourughly sofar. Last choice would be homebuilt pc's with linux - the most expensive choice...

I think the move to osx would be gaining even more popularity for the Softimage. Same as a better VFX toolset. but that is another story.
I am in exactly situation as you are right now. Most of the programs we use do run under OSX, but since XSI is windows-only, we are being "forced" to install bootcamp and windows.

Anyway, we have signed the petition to: 1445 Signatures Total :thumbsup:

Keep signing people!

[luceric]

I can tell you that no work is currently being done on a Mac port... and if it were started today your Mac might be obsolete by the time that product would become available.. it takes a quite a while to get these things up and running.. and XSI is a huge application..

[Lone Deranger]

I'm very dissapointed to hear that. :( I had hoped atleast some work was underway. Having said that, I do appreciate your candor. :thumbsup:

hmmm....now who could we bribe to change these tides...... ponder..ponder..... (/strokes chin)

I can tell you that no work is currently being done on a Mac port... and if it were started today your Mac might be obsolete by the time that product would become available.. it takes a quite a while to get these things up and running.. and XSI is a huge application..

[Vaejh]

Call apple and complain about the fact that they should support softimage ;p

[Sbowling]

Currently Mac high end systems are alot less expensive than comparable name PC systems (or even homebuilt).

That's absolutley untrue when you add in the price of upgrading. My last upgrade cost about $400. I pulled out my old CPU and plugged in my new one. Our last upgrade on the macs at work cost about 3k each. These were comparable systems performance wise.

[Sbowling]

I am in exactly situation as you are right now. Most of the programs we use do run under OSX, but since XSI is windows-only, we are being "forced" to install bootcamp and windows.



You are not being "forced" to do anything. You could always use a different 3d program.

[ThE_JacO]

please don't turn this into a macVSpc war.
the initial post forwarding those comparisons was already slightly off-topic and probably a bit too "comparative", but it was still related as it tried to examplify why somebody would -personally- like to see the port.

I know a lot of people have strong feelings in these regards, but adressing those comments outside of the context, even with the best intentions, might be flamable material :)

I'm also personally tired of mac ports threads, but they are legit and some people have an interest into them, so live and let live please :)

[Wicked]

You are not being "forced" to do anything. You could always use a different 3d program.
That's the problem, we have no other options than using XSI. Maybe in the future, but for now (for a newly started business) we just don't have the money to purchase (for example) 3ds Max.

[Felipe]

AFAIK, MAX run only on windows plataforms, it doesn't have even a Linux version. If you want to stick with OSX you probably have to build a pipeline based on Cinema4D, Maya or Lightwave.

[Hivoltage]

I recently purchased XSI 6.5 ESS.
I talked to one of the guys there and they said that there are people running XSI on a mac using a tool Called Bootcamp with a version of Windows installed there.
They are considering the idea of a port so anyone wanting this to happen needs to put in a feature request where the more they get the more likely it will happen.

Just a thought...

[Sbowling]

I recently purchased XSI 6.5 ESS.
I talked to one of the guys there and they said that there are people running XSI on a mac using a tool Called Bootcamp with a version of Windows installed there.
They are considering the idea of a port so anyone wanting this to happen needs to put in a feature request where the more they get the more likely it will happen.

Just a thought...

A softimage employee (I forget exactly who) has said it's very unlikely that there will be a mac version of XSI any time soon. They also said that letter the writing campaigns are pretty much pointless. All you are doing is wasting your time and the time of who ever has to read these emails.

With bootcamp, I feel it's even more unlikely that there will be a mac version of XSI.

EDIT: oh, it was posted in this thread. :eek: I guess I should reread the entire thread, before posting a response.

[Sbowling]

Is there a "hack" of linux that will allow you to do it on a Mac?

OSX _is_ a hack of *nix. :) I was playing around with shake at work yesterday, and it seems to ignore all the OSX eye candy in the directory trees and it it looks pretty much the same as using linux. I've also heard that you can open a command prompt (if you can find it) and run several *nix commands in OSX, but I have never tried it myself.

[ThomasLC]

I've also heard that you can open a command prompt (if you can find it) and run several *nix commands in OSX, but I have never tried it myself.

it's the terminal.app

[SFDD]

I think, instead of petitioning Softimage to port XSI to the Mac, people should be petitioning Apple to make their OS compatible with the world's dominant falvor of Unix: Linux. Why on Earth, in this day and age, does Apple feel compelled to maintain a Unix OS engine that's basically become propritery to them? Is anyone else using the Mach kernel in any high numbers? Didn't they learn their lesson with the microprocessor?

If Apple would migrate OS X to a more Linux compatible kernel--or even Linux itself--Mac users would see a whole world of apps open up to them--including XSI. And, yes, you could keep the Aqua interface in doing so.

But the bigger question really comes from cost vs. benefit. How many Mac users will really buy XSI? And, is the Mac platform really suitable for 3D? Consider this:

Pixar, with Apple's CEO basically at the helm, uses Maya for the majority of their pipeline--a program that *is* available for Macs. It's not uncommon for Pixar artists also have Macs on their desks from which they run Photoshop. So why don't they also run Maya on the Macs? Instead, they run it on Linux boxes. And this from a company that could certainly get a "good deal" on the hardware.

So why would Softimage think the Mac platform was a wise investment for 3D when even Pixar--Apple's sibling--doesn't use it for 3D?

Even Autodesk doesn't take the Mac seriously as a 3D platform. When was the last time they actually developed for the Mac? I believe all the Mac software they sell sort of "came with the deal" when they bought out other companies. But where's the Mac version of 3DS Max? Or Flint? Or Flame?

There is every business case in the world for a Mac developer to port to Windows. But when your software already runs on 97%+ of the world's computers--as Softimage does now--what business sense does it make to spend equal development time porting to that last 3%?

As a Softimage license holder, I'd much rather see the company's development focused on moving forward than sideways. If Apple chooses to increase the value of the products it sells to its users by opening of the world of Linux software to them, that's their decision. I would applaud them for doing so.

This is a classic example of Apple's proprietary business practices benefitting them, but doing little to benefit their own customers.

As a former Apple employee, I can tell you that many times in the past, Apple has either funded directly, or funded by way of offering resources, the port of applications to the Mac. The earliest example I can recall was Quicken. More recently was Maya. Don't fool yourselves into thinking that port was the idea of Alias--it was done at Apple's request, with significant development resources "on loan" from Apple. Apple hoped in doing do, it would spur Autodesk (and perhaps Softimage) to follow suit.

So, while we're asking Softimage--Why not Apple?--let's also ask Pixar and Autodesk. And, at the same time, let's throw a comma in there and ask Apple directly: "Why not, Apple?"

They could make it happen if they wanted it to happen.

[attanze]

And please make a better interface, beacouse the interface of XSI is just so....... UGLY and outdated.

[3dtutorial]

And please make a better interface, beacouse the interface of XSI is just so....... UGLY and outdated.


ROFL - That's funny. Best post I've read all day!

[CiaranM]

And please make a better interface, beacouse the interface of XSI is just so....... UGLY and outdated.

Sure, it's not perfect, but in comparison to which software of a similar complexity does it appear outdated? Or do you just dislike the shape of the buttons?

[attanze]

Sure, it's not perfect, but in comparison to which software of a similar complexity does it appear outdated? Or do you just dislike the shape of the buttons?

In XSI, I dislike the whole interface. XSI have a lot of cool features, but the interface.... is the worse that I ever seen in a 3D program. I like XSI to have an interface like Modo, C4D or ZBrush. Cool colors, cool ICONS, cool shapes, cool interface. Sory, but Im the kind of guy for who is IMPORTANT the interface of the programs I want to use.

[visualboo]

Pixar, with Apple's CEO basically at the helm, uses Maya for the majority of their pipeline--a program that *is* available for Macs. It's not uncommon for Pixar artists also have Macs on their desks from which they run Photoshop. So why don't they also run Maya on the Macs? Instead, they run it on Linux boxes. And this from a company that could certainly get a "good deal" on the hardware.

Update your info man :) That's circa 1992 action right there.

That analogy only applied to when Apples had PPC processors in them. Yes, back then PC's were way faster for 3d, and of course the artists wanted faster machines. Now since Apple moved to Intel processors, Apple's boxes ARE PC's. There are 0 differences.

And you can take that to the bank lol

[SFDD]

Update your info man :) That's circa 1992 action right there.

That analogy only applied to when Apples had PPC processors in them. Yes, back then PC's were way faster for 3d, and of course the artists wanted faster machines. Now since Apple moved to Intel processors, Apple's boxes ARE PC's. There are 0 differences.

And you can take that to the bank lol

Hey Visual Boo:

I'm not making any claims regarding performance--I'm stating a fact: Pixar continues to use Linux boxes for 3D, even though Macs are often sitting right next to them. Why they do so is certainly a decision someone there must have made. (For the record, having a very close friend that works at Pixar, my observation of this is first hand--I'm there frequently.)

[Ethangar]

In XSI, I dislike the whole interface. XSI have a lot of cool features, but the interface.... is the worse that I ever seen in a 3D program. I like XSI to have an interface like Modo, C4D or ZBrush. Cool colors, cool ICONS, cool shapes, cool interface. Sory, but Im the kind of guy for who is IMPORTANT the interface of the programs I want to use.

Oh please god don't ever let this happen!?
Pretty and (gasp) icons are the last thing that I look for in a program. I do not want to spend any time trying to decode what the 20x20 pretty picture icon is for. If it makes a box then give me a button that says BOX. Could it be more configurable. Sure. But I can't remember the last time I looked at a hammer and thought... you know... if it was just better looking then I would like using it more. Its a tool, As long as it works and works well... Then I don't care about pretty in the slightest.

[DizzyJ]

Hey Visual Boo:

I'm not making any claims regarding performance--I'm stating a fact: Pixar continues to use Linux boxes for 3D, even though Macs are often sitting right next to them. Why they do so is certainly a decision someone there must have made. (For the record, having a very close friend that works at Pixar, my observation of this is first hand--I'm there frequently.)

That strikes me as spurious. How much of Pixar's pipeline is custom-coded and is legacy to when PPCs were significnatly lagging Intel chips in performance? Changing platforms for a studio as large as Pixar is far from trivial and requires a very compelling reason to do so.

Based on what I've seen, Mac users make up somewhere around 10-20% of Maya's user base. I'd guess that Macs make up a larger share of C4D's user base. Foundation is targeting a similar market as C4D. While I don't have market research to back my assumption, what I know suggests that the Mac market for XSI is non-trivial and could, over time, become a growth market for Softimage. I imagine that periodically, people at Softimage actually think about these things and run some numbers about the cost of porting (in $ and in lost development resources for XSI/Windows) and try to decide if the port makes sense. Right now, it doesn't (to them, at least). But with Apple's successes continuing to pile on, I won't be surprise to hear that they want a share of the Mac annimation market.

[SheepFactory]

XSI 4 OSX PLZ!


sorry jaco :)

[Per-Anders]

I think, instead of petitioning Softimage to port XSI to the Mac, people should be petitioning Apple to make their OS compatible with the world's dominant falvor of Unix: Linux. Why on Earth, in this day and age, does Apple feel compelled to maintain a Unix OS engine that's basically become propritery to them? Is anyone else using the Mach kernel in any high numbers? Didn't they learn their lesson with the microprocessor?

And loose support for many other standard applications? Photoshop etc, in exchange for what wonderful Linux native apps that can't be recompiled in GCC in OSX (don't even think about saying XSI unless you enjoy a good joke)?

Two things you should be aware of, firstly in a recent article Apple stated that the majority of their updates and bug-fixes were for faults in the open-source components of OSX, secondly while you might worry who else is using the Mach kernel, well there doesn't really need to be a who else at this point Apple users are enough, recent estimates put OSX at 3.53% of the OS market with Linux and it's variants at 0.71% (June 2007 estimates).

Apple are in the business of being in business, I'm sure they will back whatever suits them the best (whether that means switching to a Linux base or staying put), it strikes me time and time again though that the OSS user community (not the developers) for their part seem only interested in whatever suits them best so long as someone else is footing the bill, i.e. OSS is a godsend for spongers everywhere.

On the thread question, run XP on your Mac, end of problem :P

[ThE_JacO]

This thread was pretty borderline originally, and being revived after nearly a year, now that xsi can run by bootcamp, and then being turned into the usual OS war BS, doesn't make it any better.
It gets a healthy archiving.