Autodesk acquires ECOTECT

[depleteD]

I think we should start taking bets of the next software company assimilated into the cube that is Autodesk.

[Pyke]

Or worse...ALIAS!






Oh...wait... ;/

[cresshead]

actually autodesk='the dominion'
(deep space nine fan!):thumbsup:

http://www.startrek.com/imageuploads/200303/ds9-537--ixtana-rax--a---gamma/240X320.jpg

[wigal]

Maybe they should start developing instead of buying.... XSI is tough competition these days!

[cresshead]

xsi maybe 'tough' but they have only around 1% of the market....95% is probably autodesk by now!

[mustique]

AD has silently aquired a couple of other CAD software recently too.
I guess with this aquisition AD will have about 100 products to sell.

ABout %90 percent of all products are CAD related.
And with the exception of the AutoCad portfolio, all of them are aquired.

With Flame-Inferno etc. getting outdated pretty fast, the whole media&entertainment division of AD looks like a small sandbox in disneyland.

[cresshead]

small sandbox?

3D Content Creation
maya
3dsmax
viz
motion builder
mudbox
sketchbook pro

Digital Color Grading
lustre

Effects & Finishing
fire
smoke
inferno
flame
flint
toxik
combustion

Media Mastering & Encoding
cleaner xl
cleaner for apple mac

Middleware
human ik
kynapse

Workflow & Media Management
fbx
backdraft
burn
stone
wire
wiretap

[cresshead]

With Flame-Inferno etc. getting outdated pretty fast, the whole media&entertainment division of AD looks like a small sandbox in disneyland.

actually there's new versions of flame, inferno, flint, smoke >

[mustique]

http://www.autodesk.com/products-all

this list doesn't contain recently aquired CAD products/product families.

[mustique]

actually there's new versions of flame, inferno, flint, smoke >

With outdated I mean the heydays of these apps are over.
I've seen lots of Flame/Inferno houses to switch to Shake or Fusion.

[cresshead]

ahh i see what you mean now, though shake is a dead end as apple have already said no more updates for it..though it is VERY cheap if your using it on apple mac.

Toxic seems to be the newest developed app in thiat area and combustion looks like it's just getting hand me down features in combustion 4.

in the 3d area autodesk have averything covered from CAD to games to TV to films.

[Lone Deranger]

I always think of it like this...

Softimage = Apple
Both companies seem to have the same approach to software development in terms of innovation and design.

AutoDesk = MicroSoft
Both companies seem to have the same approach to software "development" in terms of acquisitions of rivals and lacklustre, expensive annual upgrades.

;)


xsi maybe 'tough' but they have only around 1% of the market....95% is probably autodesk by now!

[feureau]

You know what would be great?
Autodesk getting bought by Adobe…

[inguatu]

gratz to Autodesk! It's great when people are complaining about Autodesk buying a small company when it doesn't even affect them or have never even heard of the small company.

complain for the sake of complaining?

[inguatu]

I always think of it like this...

Softimage = Apple
Both companies seem to have the same approach to software development in terms of innovation and design.

AutoDesk = MicroSoft
Both companies seem to have the same approach to software "development" in terms of acquisitions of rivals and lacklustre, expensive annual upgrades.

;)


heh Softimage = Apple

Damn funny.. thanks for the chuckle! Considering Softimage was coasting on fumes for years, you may want to reconsider. Oh, I get it.. because of marketing of ICE in XSI 7, all of a sudden everyone's a long time fan of XSI?

[Lone Deranger]

Glad to put a smile on your ever miserable persona inguatu.

Damn funny.. thanks for the chuckle!

[cresshead]

softimage is currently owned by avid....softimage are just a small arm of avid...much like discreet were an arm of autodesk.

and softimage WAS owned by microsoft so you can THANK microsoft for bringing softimage
to the windows platform and not being stuck out on a limb with irix o/s

i simply love how people re-imagine history!

[ThirdEye]

Glad to put a smile on your ever miserable persona inguatu.

Another insult and you get a warning.

[Baltasound]

Really obvious, one, but still here it is:

http://www.allyourbasearebelongtous.com/allyourbase.jpg

[ivanisavich]

Was watching the news and saw a headline that said Autodesk is about to aquire Google.

Be afraid.

[Kai01W]

I always think of it like this...
Softimage = Apple
Both companies seem to have the same approach to software development in terms of innovation and design.

Yeah, look at how innovative apple has been with Shake and i.e. Logic. lol!

And btw.: flame or smoke are not going to die anytime soon. Their market share has decreased a lot but I think the big change has already happened and my feeling is that its now pretty stable.

-k

[ThomasMahler]

So what did Ecotect do? Never heard of that company before.

I think people complain cause the Autodesk pattern is pretty clear: Once they acquire a studio, their development stagnates. The last Max and Maya updates were pretty lacklustre - Fixes and some new tools that are nice to have, but no innovation since quite a few years.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with Mudbox. I think version 2 could be pretty cool, but from then on, it'll probably also fall into that pattern again.

But you see that with every big company. Photoshop didn't have any innovative updates since quite some time either.

[csven]

Looks like Autodesk is continuing their strategy of covering all the simulation bases. What's interesting to me is how they're being challenged by Siemens at the most core of their business. And while Dassault and Siemens are also pushing into virtual worlds (as PLM, not as advertising or gaming vehicles) both Autodesk and PTC seem to be hesitating.

Nice big multiplayer chess match.

[Lone Deranger]

You kinda missed my point, but never mind. It was a bit tongue in cheek anyway (hence the ;) )

Yeah, look at how innovative apple has been with Shake and i.e. Logic. lol!

[Steve Green]

I think that is exactly why people have a negative reaction to news like this.

All I seem to hear these days is Autodesk acquires X, rather than Autodesk releases a new product that is exciting, or innovative.

It feels like they don't make products any more, they just make press releases.

- Steve

[Rod Seffen]

So what did Ecotect do? Never heard of that company before.

I think people complain cause the Autodesk pattern is pretty clear: Once they acquire a studio, their development stagnates. The last Max and Maya updates were pretty lacklustre - Fixes and some new tools that are nice to have, but no innovation since quite a few years.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with Mudbox. I think version 2 could be pretty cool, but from then on, it'll probably also fall into that pattern again.

.

Yes, but that's not a fair comparison anyway, since Mud2 was already being developed by Skymatter. You'll never know what Mudbox2 would have been like had autodesk never got involved, it may have been better or taken a completely different direction.
This is the problem with this sort of mass corporate acquisition policies that AD carries out, they rightly get all the blame if the software isn't liked, but even if it all goes well after they take over, AD can't really take any credit, because as in this case, it's still being worked on by more or less the same team that developed it in the first place, so they should get the credit.
I think massive companies like AD can generally only be a negative influence. I'm sure most of these small software developers would continue be much more innovative without them.

I can see how the small developers benefit of course, they get a nice fat check from AD, but I can't see how we, the consumer, get any benefit from autodesk eventually owning every piece of software that gets developed.

[ThomasMahler]

That's why I said that Mudbox 2.0 could be really cool, but from that point on, it'll be a complete Autodesk release, so we'll see if the Autodesk influence helped them or not. I remember Dave saying that it's great to see the software being pushed that way and to have the kinda power that Autodesk provides, the question is just if this way of creating software really generates innovation. Even if the same team is still working on it, they have to play the Autodesk game now. But you can't expect software developers in this industry to not take this chance when it comes along. The industry is really small and selling software like this is a really tough business, especially if the competition is pretty strong. And honestly, who'd say no to being a millionaire over night?

I think there are many problems that come with writing software in a 'factory' environment - Software that's written because it's your baby and because you believe in it will probably end up being better than software that was done for some other large company for a paycheck every month. Even if they're continuing with the same sorta naivety after the acquisition... after a few disappointments and a couple of corporate decisions, you'll most likely accept the new direction and just do your job. Let's face it, money and the illusion of security makes us fat and lazy and if you can't stay as foolish as you'd have been if you'd have kept developing like in the beginning, things are going haywire after a while.

We've seen the exact same thing happen to a lot of software packages that had a crazy amount of potential. Adobe played the buy-out game and stopped innovating right after and Autodesk has been playing the same game - with the same results. This way of software development always leads to stagnation, but what should the studios do? They're certainly not going to change their pipeline just like that, cause that'd cost too much and you'd have to retrain all your people, which takes a looot of time = more costs.

It's really the same situation with Microsoft and Windows. They only add marginal amounts of effort into their updates, just so that there's some reason to buy it, but as a software company, you'd probably want things to stay the same in the long run. Otherwise you'd have to invest heavily and do a lot of R&D or, more likely, you'd just stop development of the app and fire a few people to save money.

So with 3d programs and operating systems, both of which aren't easy to replace - not even in the long run - we're kinda stuck between a rock and a hard place. The companies can 'afford' creating shit release without losing their user base, cause they have to rely on the developers. It's only after they've tanked for years, which in this case means at least 5 years, that serious problems will emerge. Or - and that's the harder thing to accomplish - the competitions software is so revolutionary and uses some new technology that helps accomplishing things that used to take a week in a day or is just way beyond what's been doable with the large factory package.

Softimage and XSI is really no competition for what Autodesk has going in the entertainment market since their software is being used all over the place. XSI only now starts to slowly be adopted - and it'll still take easily another 4-5 years of this growth rate until Autodesk has to even start worrying. It's a shitty situation, but they're a company, it's their goal to make money, that goal is being achieved by essentially selling the studios the same thing over and over again with some new stuff in it - and that strategy works.

Oh, btw, this strategy is happening everywhere, actually, not just in the software industry. There are tons of students that basically prostitute themselves by putting all their time and effort into creating some cool new company - all of which is being sponsored by some venture capital company - that has some cool, new service that's actually kinda neat or could be kinda neat with the sole purpose of getting acquired by a big corporation for millions of dollars. After the check arrived, the students - if they were lucky - never have to work again and the service is being used by millions of people all of a sudden. Not because the corporation innovated, but just because they are what they are. It's probably easier and cheaper to hope for some students that prostitute themselves to come up with your innovation than to put up your own cash for R&D and come up with your own unique ideas. That's a security risk and is not predictable, so the circle is closing. The sad fact is that Autodesk probably has more people that are just cruising the web and keeping their ears open for software that could potentially be acquired than they have Research and Development guys. That's just some made-up Thomas Mahler data, but I'm pretty sure it's true.

[csmallfield]

Was watching the news and saw a headline that said Autodesk is about to aquire Google.

Be afraid.

Can't see this happening since Google's revenue is around $16 billion while Autodesk is at 1.7 billion. Adobe could buy Autodesk, but Google could buy Adobe and Autodesk together.

All hail the Google, future world ruler!

-Space

[ThomasMahler]

This thread made me thinking. What the world really needs is a new currency, a social currency that's not 'valuable' per se (in the sense that I can't buy anything with it), but is still a strong indicator of value. I can't buy it, but if I don't have it, I suck. I can still earn it, though. And I earn it by doing something good or being good.

And this idea isn't even new, but in todays world, with the internet and all the greedy students and idiots that know no limits and would sell dead baby porno puppets if they could, it'd really be vital. And this currency should have a strong effect on everyone. Or at least on every company. Right now, the only real benchmark that the world has is how much money a company has or makes. It's all just about their financial status. Which is just not enough anymore.

So we're basically talking about Brownie Points. If you're not familiar with the term, here you go:

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

So there should be a site or a service or whatever that should be so popular across the world and should be just as respected as money. We actually have such a currency already - reputation. But nobody gives a shit about reputation, cause it's not clear. It's not concise. It's just blah. It's what the average idiot says about x or y on day x or y out of reason x or y. No reasonable person would listen to reputation.

If Brownie Points would be a service like digg, but even more prevalent, it'd actually force companies to do good stuff. To risk it. To innovate. In the end, taking the long route and really fight for our successes is one way to become happy - faking it is not.

So every time a company or a large corporation is doing something really good, they'd get brownie points from everyone who thinks it's a good thing. Everytime the company does something 'evil', stupid or just selfish, they'd get negative brownie points, means their brownie points count would be reduced. So large corporations like Microsoft, Autodesk, etc. would actually be damaged by doing what they're doing - they'd still make money and could lead their business, but people would know that something's fishy with them - and that not just based on reputation. Which in turn would probably mean we'd take another route when deciding if we should go with them or not.

If I'd be one selfish, lazy, fat bastard, I'd probably try to come up with such a service on my own, but I'm not, so I share this great idea with everyone, so some idiot can use it and make millions out of it. I truly think some internet currency that'd be based on reputation could be a great thing, so where are you now Chad Hurley and Steve Chen? You just got a new mission!

[ThE_JacO]

Softimage and XSI is really no competition for what Autodesk has going in the entertainment market since their software is being used all over the place. XSI only now starts to slowly be adopted - and it'll still take easily another 4-5 years of this growth rate until Autodesk has to even start worrying.

They used to say the same about SOFTIMAGE|3D. It owned the market, had MS' deep pockets behind it and was spearheading trends into an emerging market by being the first in the top end to make PPRO + NT a target platform.

It took two and half (1, 2, and the SGI only 1.5) releases of Maya basically introducing a game change (scripting and open backend, pretty much creating the previously non existant figure of the modern TD) to obsolete |3D out of studios pretty quick. Sure, it survived itself unmaintained in countless film shops for years, but only because it needed to be phased out of pipelines.

The same can be said for Operating Systems, although the illiteracy of the customer base and the scale of the thing make it a much slower game.

I wouldn't be making 5 years forecasts on stuff like this.
It can take less than another 2 years for Maya to not sell seats anymore while shops wait to phase it out during a 1-3 years transition, or for XSI to completely disappear if investments don't pay back.
Much bigger stuff than what you describe happenes in less than half the time. I believe (and this is of course an opinion) you are painting the creative 3D market as having much more inertia than it really does.

P.S.
The part about market share and speed of diffusion I'm not addressing because it's a bitchfight waiting to happen.
I'm talking of Maya and XSI just because they were already mentioned and are related to the topic at hand. Would love it if people could not jump to my throat and start a flamewar :)

[csmallfield]

I like your intention, but the problem is it's still a number system. If it became important the first thing someone would do would be find a way to exploit it in the same way money is currently. Your idea is basically just starting capitalism over at the beginning. Initially the point of money was the same, giving an intangiable number value to something tangible. You mention it would be decided on popularity, well, that's already what happens. If something is popular it makes money. People do decide what has value by the way they vote and spend money. Unfortunately people are also easily influenced sheep, so just repeated suggestion will make something popular, regardless of quality. There are always exceptions. IN the case of Google, I was semi-serious about hailing them. They make brilliant free products and have found a way to make an insane amount of money on it. It's the first megacorporation that I really don't think is evil. Maybe I'm naive.

Also, I think it's funny that you suggest that "some idiot" take your idea and "make millions". Honestly, good ideas are easy to come by. I have a hundred good ideas a week. It's noble to spread good ideas and give them away, but that's really the easiest part. Effectively making that idea a reality is what takes real brilliance and inspiration, hence, despite the fact that I have a hundred good ideas a week, I'm still not a millionaire :)

When I was working on graphics for old mac shareware games people would e-mail me things like, "I have this really great idea for a game that will make a lot of money. I don't program or do graphics, but I can oversee the project. If you do graphics and I find a coder to do the programming, I'll give you a percentage of the profit." I thought that was hilarious, that the only thing holding me back was that I didn't have a skill-less person to tell me what to do! Of course! haha

Keep coming up with the ideas man, we need a replacement for capitalism, but I'll be real impressed when you find a way to start it off.

-Space

This thread made me thinking. What the world really needs is a new currency, a social currency that's not 'valuable' per se (in the sense that I can't buy anything with it), but is still a strong indicator of value. I can't buy it, but if I don't have it, I suck. I can still earn it, though. And I earn it by doing something good or being good.

And this idea isn't even new, but in todays world, with the internet and all the greedy students and idiots that know no limits and would sell dead baby porno puppets if they could, it'd really be vital. And this currency should have a strong effect on everyone. Or at least on every company. Right now, the only real benchmark that the world has is how much money a company has or makes. It's all just about their financial status. Which is just not enough anymore.

So we're basically talking about Brownie Points. If you're not familiar with the term, here you go:

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

So there should be a site or a service or whatever that should be so popular across the world and should be just as respected as money. We actually have such a currency already - reputation. But nobody gives a shit about reputation, cause it's not clear. It's not concise. It's just blah. It's what the average idiot says about x or y on day x or y out of reason x or y. No reasonable person would listen to reputation.

If Brownie Points would be a service like digg, but even more prevalent, it'd actually force companies to do good stuff. To risk it. To innovate. In the end, taking the long route and really fight for our successes is one way to become happy - faking it is not.

So every time a company or a large corporation is doing something really good, they'd get brownie points from everyone who thinks it's a good thing. Everytime the company does something 'evil', stupid or just selfish, they'd get negative brownie points, means their brownie points count would be reduced. So large corporations like Microsoft, Autodesk, etc. would actually be damaged by doing what they're doing - they'd still make money and could lead their business, but people would know that something's fishy with them - and that not just based on reputation. Which in turn would probably mean we'd take another route when deciding if we should go with them or not.

If I'd be one selfish, lazy, fat bastard, I'd probably try to come up with such a service on my own, but I'm not, so I share this great idea with everyone, so some idiot can use it and make millions out of it. I truly think some internet currency that'd be based on reputation could be a great thing, so where are you now Chad Hurley and Steve Chen? You just got a new mission!

[DuttyFoot]

for the person who wanted to know what ecotect does..

ECOTECT is a complete building design and environmental analysis tool that covers the full range of simulation and analysis functions required to truly understand how a building design will operate and perform. It finally allows designers to work easily in 3D and apply all the tools necessary for an energy efficient and sustainable future.

here is the link http://www.squ1.com/products/ecotect

[cresshead]

You'll never know what Mudbox2 would have been like had autodesk never got involved, it may have been better or taken a completely different direction.
.

of course if could also be EXACTLY the same...except with 'better' connections for autodesk apps and a much larger funding base for development and feedback from large studios using maya and max..

same goes for this latest app too.

alot of people always see the glass half empty!....

[Kabab]

One thing you all need to be clear of is Autodesk strategy is growth via acquisition don't expect this to change anytime soon, i don't see why people get so upset they are just a business doing what their stakeholders demand.

What i think is going to happen is in the future there are going to be 2 really big players left Dassault and Autodesk of course smaller players will be around but these 2 will for the most part dominate the 3D and related industries in time..

I guess most people here are not familiar with Dassualt because traditionaly they have been more focused on high end CAD but it appears they are looking to spread their wings a little.

Dassaults stratergy is different from Autodesk while they still do acquisitions they don't do nearly as many as Autodesk and they are done with a view of integrating the technology seamlessly in their core applications. So whilst they move a little slower they usually have much better technology.

My personal view is Dassualt will make a grab for Soft/XSI at some point its the only thing they are missing from their portfolio which stops them competitng against Autodesk in most major 3D markets and i think they are still shitty about leting Autodesk get Alias and now having Autodesk walking around in their Automotive accounts, so some pay back is due.

[Ruramuq]

Autodes is something pretty transparent, I mean AD is not a brilliant company, not at all. they are business. But some people seems to have hope, which is valid, but that also requires a lot of imagination after so many years of stagnation

AD devs are very brilliant, they can create new useful tools, the problem here is the direction/design, AD people who is in charge and obviously is NOT really involved in the creation of CG stuff.

for me it doesn't matter, everything that AD buys seems really weak in a sense of development, the same happens to Adobe, Microsoft, Macromedia, and it is really simple why they are very similar, they are exploiting their customers like oil(petroleum). but they are not trying to create something good with it.

anyhow, what are they going to do with so many things they buy?, they need to buy some kind of glue to integrate them together.
Another day I tried to download Autocad trial, it was about 1GB of crap.. and adobe is the same, they don't care about resources, they are not trying to create efficient and fast innovative, or creative software, because that would require too much effort.

XSI has a great change to expand itself, because AD attitude is not going to change, and thats an BIG advantage for them. Xsi team probably counts on that.

·

[ThomasMahler]

If something is popular it makes money. People do decide what has value by the way they vote and spend money.

Don't have a lot of time to answer, currently wrapping up a project, but here goes:

The idea of Brownie Points is that they're not 'valuable' by itself. They're just an indicator. Of course people would immediately try to exploit them, but the nice thing would be that everyone could add his or her brownie points and I do think systems like that could work, thanks to the mass. I think that IMDB isn't doing a bad job in telling me what a good movie is and what movie is a stinker. It's not totally true and it's really a matter of taste in this case, but it's at least some sort of indication.

Unfortunately people are also easily influenced sheep, so just repeated suggestion will make something popular, regardless of quality. There are always exceptions. IN the case of Google, I was semi-serious about hailing them. They make brilliant free products and have found a way to make an insane amount of money on it. It's the first megacorporation that I really don't think is evil. Maybe I'm naive.

I like Google as well. They've pretty much changed the way we're all working, in a good way - and so far, I didn't even have to pay for that yet. I would, but they don't even want my money. The thing is that you gotta be really smart to make this happen and really have to have the cajones to go with that direction, even after your company got really successful.

Also, I think it's funny that you suggest that "some idiot" take your idea and "make millions". Honestly, good ideas are easy to come by. I have a hundred good ideas a week. It's noble to spread good ideas and give them away, but that's really the easiest part. Effectively making that idea a reality is what takes real brilliance and inspiration, hence, despite the fact that I have a hundred good ideas a week, I'm still not a millionaire :)

When I was working on graphics for old mac shareware games people would e-mail me things like, "I have this really great idea for a game that will make a lot of money. I don't program or do graphics, but I can oversee the project. If you do graphics and I find a coder to do the programming, I'll give you a percentage of the profit." I thought that was hilarious, that the only thing holding me back was that I didn't have a skill-less person to tell me what to do! Of course! haha

Keep coming up with the ideas man, we need a replacement for capitalism, but I'll be real impressed when you find a way to start it off.

I wasn't really serious about 'some idiot' pulling it off, I was just implying that I'd love to see this being shaped out by someone. This would be an enormously HUGE project that could really only be popularized by a company like Google - But I think it could be the next big thing. Google's Brownie Points could help us decide where we want to work, which products we want to buy and generally give an indication about what's the best for all of us. In this case, a huge studio buying out small studios while basically stopping innovating is a very bad thing for the industry. It's a good thing for the people that work there, cause it's really nice to get a steady paycheck every month, but in the long run, keeping working for a company that obviously heads into the wrong direction just - and really _just_ for the money is a bad thing.

[jasonio]

Ideas: hmm, they are a double edged sword! It feels good to have lots of interesting ideas but without being able to - or reluctant to settle on any particular one - they actually become a burden and a distraction. You just need one good idea and run with it. I've come up with some good ways (5-10) to make a few million but so far, I've yet to find a single one I feel I could spend the rest of my life chasing...
---
Ecotect is a building analysis tool for assisting in making buildings more efficient from very early on in the design process, its pretty easy to use and well featured. It complements Autocad quite well.
---
Autodesk is simply buying into new niches in the 3d/multimedia/design market and its cheaper (in the long term) to do that instead of developing a new product and then competing with the existing one they should have bought.

Also I don't expect them to assimilate the features in their newly aquired properties into existing ones. The best business decision is to keep it going, change as little as possible, maybe scale back progress with the software and raise the prices slowly.

[mustique]

Realy interesting opinions shared here:thumbsup:

Autodesk/Dassault/SGI...
AD's aquisition strategy IMO works well (for shareholders). AD would buy out companies not just for profit, but to prevent others (dassault) frrom doing it. If Dasault bought Alias, they'd have really profited as mentioned, but AD made sure it doesn't happen.

Unfortunately I feel like there will never be a DCC company like SGI that buys out software companies to unite them into a new brilliant product like Maya. Doing this only to sell a software for 1000-5000 dollars per licence, just makes no sense anymore. Businesswise of course.

Browny points / stockmatket...
Browny points are an interesting sugestion. If I understood right, it intents to measure the emotional value of a company or product. And it does so in letting people connected to the internet vote for it. Advertisers would love to have a tool like that. But human nature is too complicated to make it a trustworthy benchmark IMO.

The stockmarket is trusted because people are placing money on their value perceiption of companies. So while not impossible, it will be hard to make this idea translate into reality even for someone like google.

jm2c

[cresshead]

i think autodesk are going for the 'amazon of 3d' a 1 stop shop for all your 3d needs...in which all the apps can talk to one another to transfer data...a bit like adobe also, who are in the print/web niche area with pshop, indesign, flash, nightmare weaver [me not a fan of dreamweaver ..can you tell!]

re google...they have sketch-up currently...will they enter the 3d areana and swallow up a major 3d app?

re apple...they have no 3d app's as yet but their app base in print/film and sound is good..all they are missing is a top 3d app for their lineup...i thought they woudl have gone with maya ages back but they didn't....maybe modo once it get animation/bones and particles?

pixologic look like a VERY tastey company to pick up at some point...autodesk already have mudbox...maybe apple will buy zbrush and make it mac only?

[mustique]

mudbox, IMO is destined to be integrated into maya.

Zbrush is much more versatile and hard to beat at moment.
It won't be easy to close the gap for mudbox as a standalone application under AD's
slow innovation progress.

I think that is what most Maya users would see to happen anyways.

[ThomasMahler]

I seriously hope that Ofer has too big of an ego to just sell Pixologic and a product that he put years of hard work into already. Pixologic has been the small ****er that redefined a lot of things in the industry in the past couple of years and that's obviously being appreciated.

Studios use ZBrush cause it's on the top-end of technology. It's redefining what's possible with every new release, so if you apply an Autodesk principle to that, so that it'd fall into the less-than-stellar update and bugfix principle, you'd kill the app over time. If you take away the cutting edge from ZBrush, the whole sculpting-on-a-computer-that-works bajingle is going down the shitter. They should focus on what they're good at and just keep pushing what can be done with polygons and digital sculpting.

Also, I don't think that it would be a no-brainer buyout, cause it works _very_ different than any other 3d application out there. It's not using OpenGL for drawing its polys, the interface is completely different and the whole way of working is as well. If you'd acquire ZBrush to get the tech, you could just as well research yourself, cause it'd probably be a HUGE pain in the arse job to get all this stuff into a next gen 3d app. That's probably why Autodesk bought Mudbox, not ZBrush. But then along came ZBrush 3.0...

[cresshead]

yeah i remember mudbox was the app on the move when zbrush was still at 2.0 [and zbrush on mac is still at 2.0!!!]...everyone thought mudbox would be the killer app for sculpting...then zbrush 3.0 came out and well that was that so to speak...

siggraph...hope to see mudbox 2.0 also maybe the update to zrbush and a mac updaste for zbrush as well.

then we'll get more of a feel to how autodesk lets developers 'develop' apps like mudbox which are now under their wing...

maya has of late gotten some neat stuff> muscles and ncloth

i'd say autodesk CAN do development of their apps but with each development they also have the extra baggage of developing to also connect to their other apps which smaller companies not not have to cater for..so autodesk apps have a harder time and maybe not so inward looking as other companies apps like xsi, houdini and lightwave...autodesk apps also need to be useful to other apps...which in the long run is how many productions work..so it's a GOOD thing and not a bad thing for everyone.

[ThomasMahler]

then we'll get more of a feel to how autodesk lets developers 'develop' apps like mudbox which are now under their wing...

We won't. Cause Mudbox 2.0 would probably already be out if there wouldn't have been an acquisition. So a lot of the tech and the new tools they're gonna provide, they probably already developed before the Autodesk acquisition. In 3 years we'll know how well they've done after Autodesk acquired them. I'm a huge fan of Dave, Tibor and Co, they really tried to do the right thing - and Mudbox kicks a lot of ass for digital sculpting. Especially for the kinda people that just don't get along with ZBrush, so kudos to them. But it'll just be interesting what they're gonna do with the tech and if Mudbox will sooner or later be killed off, cause they're putting the tech into a new 3d package.

maya has of late gotten some neat stuff> muscles and ncloth

nCloth is really the only new thing that came after the Alias Acquisition - And I wonder how much of Jos Stam's craziness had to do with the company.

The muscle plugin that came with 2008 was formerly developed by Michael Comet and, guess what, was acquired by Autodesk.

i'd say autodesk CAN do development of their apps but with each development they also have the extra baggage of developing to also connect to their other apps which smaller companies not not have to cater for..so autodesk apps have a harder time and maybe not so inward looking as other companies apps like xsi, houdini and lightwave...autodesk apps also need to be useful to other apps...which in the long run is how many productions work..so it's a GOOD thing and not a bad thing for everyone.

Well, the question is how well that works for them. I see the kinda bullshit approaches of making the apps work closer together - like putting the insanely ****ed up view cube into ALL 3d apps now, which is just messed up. It's not like I can press a button and get the loRes Mudbox Model imported into my 3d app of choice, press a button and the modified geo is back, with all the import stuff done, etc. - that'd be useful. No, for geometry, most of the time you just use .obj's still. And Autodesk has nothing to do with that. I don't see them really doing a lot of work in this field, it's not like it's any easier today to bring data from one app to the other. Maybe animation is more easily transferable thanks to .fbx now, but in general, it's still a pain in the ass.

So in general, there's not a lot of good that comes out of those acqusitions. Especially if you think about where the apps would've gone if they wouldn't have been bought out.

[Rod Seffen]

of course if could also be EXACTLY the same...except with 'better' connections for autodesk apps and a much larger funding base for development and feedback from large studios using maya and max..

same goes for this latest app too.

alot of people always see the glass half empty!....

I always associate optimism with naivety.
I've no doubt that autodesk what a direct competitor for zbrush, that was the very reason for the acquisition, which means they'll be pushing mudbox down the multitasking zbrush route, rather than keeping it what it is, which is a much better core sculpting app than zbrush.
I don't want to see 2 zbrushes on the market, the real zbrush, and mudbrush trying to keep up with it. I'd rather have seen mudbox keep the focus on sculpting innovation, rather than wasting time and resources with a lot of other zbrush type nonsense.
Ok, integrated poly painting would be useful, but going any further down the all-in-one app route starts to really drain the focus of what the app was created for.

[cresshead]

we'll see soon no doubt.

i look for the positive...you look for the negative...so be it!

i hope you'll be disapointed and mudbox gets a real boost from autodesk's development
of mudbox 2.0..otherwise i'd imagine you'll jump ship to another sculpting app maybe modo
or 3dcoat..your work in zbrush and mudbox is extreemly good form what i saw last year.

[PetrZ]

I don't ever heard about eco, just I'm still waiting what new (if something) AD brings to their's products. Chameleon in mudbox was announced for 2007 (I think), but from AD aquisition it seem's that MB is dropped product or just transfered to car design environment, what seems to me like painting with shovel.

I'm watching developing of all 3d software max/maya/xsi/blender/modo etc, ant it's obious that it creates great boom when it's new and then it start to stagnate. Just few companies goes invent something new after the app is quite tuned up (like node base workflow in xsi/ nucleus in maya, blender update during film production etc). But these giant corporation like AD don't lopok et customers, they just makes a money. And they do it well, in long term they will have 95, or 99 % on creative software market and wil there be any development of application if there will not be any competition. I think NOT. So this is what frightening me.

Same in Windows os from Microsoft, it's big corp. what makes money, they have big share on os market (and mainly on supported software) so they don't have to make inventions and give them to peaple (they made some really cool features, but I'm currious why they don't add them to their os).

Just to compare to Mac OS, I saw it, it's cool, a plenty of cool workflow enhancement and features, so working in this OS is more than two times faster then in windows, but I can't becouse lack of software support. So I would like to have them, but becouse MS doesn't make only os software for happy users, but mainly for making money.

So blame for them, but it's today's world, you have cool functions, invent ideas, but then some big fish comes, eat you and you are done. Big fish is happy, and goes bigger, fatter and indolent. Small have to move faster to live. Same could be applied to soft. development.

[Kabab]

Why are people blaming Autodesk here i don't quiet understand?

These companies are selling themselves willfully majority of these companies are not publicly traded companies where someone can just buyout the controlling shares..

For the most part these are smaller privately owned operations who decide to sell.

And can you blame them? Someone comes along as says hey how would you like financial security for the rest of your life? How many people here would turn that down?

[ctrl.studio]

kabab got a point.

it's not only autodesk buying.. but it's also that all the others are ready to sell.
I'm more worried about this latter tendency than the former one.

max

[Rod Seffen]

You have to know if autodesk went to the small developer and asked to buy, or if the small developer went to autodesk and asked to sell.
Whoever did the asking is mainly the culprit.
In either case, I wouldn't expect someone who creates a nice piece of software to turn down a multi-million offer from autodesk.
There's no one in this ultra-capitalist world with that sort of integrity. Money and possessions are everything, and it's going to take centuries of effort to change that to a brownie point system.

[ThE_JacO]

These companies are selling themselves willfully majority of these companies are not publicly traded companies where someone can just buyout the controlling shares..

For the most part these are smaller privately owned operations who decide to sell.

Don't try to inject some common sense into a perfectly fine bitch-fest please. You're spoiling the fun.
We all know EcoTect isn't two guys (well, one guy and one girl) in a basement somewhere being offered a bundle of money and a bigger usebase for their work, it must surely be AD's men in black pointing a gun at their child's head unless they concede all assets for free and have their labrador puppy turning tricks on a highway :)

Max: The trend might be worrying, but I'd be curious to see it in percentage terms rather than in number terms.
IE: if 5 people sold to a corporation this year, and only one 5 years ago, it doesn't tell much if that's 5 people out of 500 this year and it was one out of 2 five years ago.

That would probably be a market analisys I'd like to read, but I doubt it's likely to happen or to be exhaustive.

[mdee]

It can take less than another 2 years for Maya to not sell seats anymore while shops wait to phase it out during a 1-3 years transition, or for XSI to completely disappear if investments don't pay back.

True, considering that large clients very often do not upgrade, because their pipelines are built around older versions and/or move to in-house solutions, so all they buy is possibly maintenance. That goes both ways, of course (investing into in-house solution instead of adapting a new off the shelf software or not adapting new software, because cost of pipeline changes would eat all benefits, in case of XSI)

p.s. Personally I'd not rather see anything disappear, especially XSI.

[brkn]

Why are people blaming Autodesk here i don't quiet understand?

These companies are selling themselves willfully majority of these companies are not publicly traded companies where someone can just buyout the controlling shares..

I think people are complaining because from their experience, it seems that these sorts of deals rarely benefit the consumers/users. Of course it makes financial sense for the companies involved, but that doesn't necessarily make it good for anyone else.

[j83]

<Peter Lynch>You better not be diworseifying Autodesk!</Peter Lynch> :D

We're one step closer to Mayax!
:D

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.