Discreet misses the boat once again

[Dave Black]

The term "truley superior OS" is a highly subjective statement. Discreet is trying to keep it's head above water right now. The competition is tough, and stakes are high. The amount of time and money it would take to port Max over to the mac is bordering on the rediculous. Mac users are a very small minority, especially in current production enviroments. You can't expect discreet to cater to that minority, especially when times are so tough. Not to mention Max is a different beast than other apps. It's open plugin archetecture would not translate easily over to the mac.

While I agree mac is a fine product, one that is increasingly it's quality over time, I do not believe that mac users could ever convice discreet to convert unless there was a substantial market.

-3DZ

:D

[ToddD]

Agreed Zealot, and while 1 in every 4 Maya sales is to an OSX customer, you also have lightwave for the mac. So, at this point I would think that those mac users that crave 3D apps, might have opted for one of the 2 earlier mentioned, and by the time Max is/was translated they would miss the market rich environment. Missing the boat? Nah, just going after the bigger fish!:wavey: :)

[IMarshal]

"Superior OS is a highly subjective statement"

Superior OS can mean a number of things. Technically superior (which in and of itself could mean a number of things), superior user interface, superior in device compatibility, superior in stability, etc.

I've been a software developer ever since MS-DOS 1.0 came out on the very first IBM PC back in 1981 (omg I never thought it that way...ugh). I've programmed in Windows for years and continue to do such. Currently, 80% of my development is on Windows .Net. The proprietary applications are used in a Fortune 100 company. I play games on Windows boxes (very important for my sanity), develop and do 3d Graphics on Windows.

I own an Apple 17" powerbook and to say it is the best notebook I've ever owned is an understatement. Mac OS X is phenomenal to say the least. That statement is based on a user AND developers perspective.

Apple's OS X takes advantage of the long development history of UNIX as that's what it is based on. The UNIX operating system is *EXTREMELY* stable, and powerful as any UNIX developer will confirm. Yet, Apple has managed to put a very user-friendly interface on top of it.

I have 9 computers at home, of which three are dedicated windows servers, 1 is the powerbook and a Apple XServe. Windows 2003 Server is being used as well as Windows XP and 2000. The Apple products have undeniably proven to be the most stable. The Apple products are also fun as hell to work on :)

Just today we had a Windows server crash at the office and last week one of my servers crashed. Just now, my Microsoft, ultra-stable/high-tech box decided out of the blue it doesn't want to recognize my Microsoft bluetooth mouse. Typical.

I've not once had a problem with my powerbook or the XServe. Many of the developers are moving to Apple as well - including development of new apps in Java to run on the server.

I'm sorry for the rant, but I'm not a Mac zealot as you may think. I use both systems; if anything, my loyalty should be to Microsoft as I deal with them on a weekly basis (directly). But I have to agree, in my technical opinion as a systems designer, application developer and project lead - Mac OS X is superior in these respects (stability without a doubt from my experience, underlying power [UNIX], and device compatibility - simply amazing :)

"It's open plugin archetecture would not translate easily over to the mac."
The Mac OS inherently supports a plug-in architecture. This was not an add-on, as was COM with Windows (it is COM that provides much of the plug-in architecture you see in present applications). The Mac plug-in architecture is slick, employs a full messaging mechanism that makes it VERY easy to to write dynamically loadable (read - you can change program functionality while it's running) plugins.

My last point is that most programs are written in two basic modules (I'm oversimplifying this). C/C++ code to contain the program-specific functionality, then a separate code block that takes care of communicating with the OS. It is this second module that is changed for each OS to allow apps to be ported. C/C++ is the most portable language out there - every platform supports it. Granted it will take time to write the OS specific routines but if the application is designed well then the time is drastically reduced.

Just my 2 cents.

[Frank TD]

I like my ibook more than my Desktop. I run Animation Master on it and it runs very well but the right clicking is really needed especially when trying to rotate the view other than that it works great :) :thumbsup:

[Joel Hooks]

Troll more?

[EricChadwick]

IMarshall, that was great, a good read. Thanks for the dev insight. I would prefer a much more stable OS than Win32, but probably won't see 3ds max elsewhere. People have been asking for a Linux port too, pie-in-the-sky so far.

One thing I think 3DZealot might have been referring to is the fact that 3ds max depends quite a bit on their large number of independent third-party developers. Getting all of them to port all their plugins & scripts to OSX seems like it would be a time-consuming and uphill battle...

What's your take on this?

[googlo]

I don't care really about the OS wars. Just from personal experience I hate using the Mac operating system.

I feel like I don't have any control when I'm using a Mac.

It's like this to me. Using a Mac is like using a Texas Instrument calculator. Using a windows based pc is like using a hp48gx calculator.

[IMarshal]

Thank you for the compliment posm, I appreciate that. :) I don't post much and was hesitant to do so as I had been worried people might misinterpret what I said as an OS war. Those are not my intentions. But rather, to clarify some things people may not know about Mac OS X.

Unfortunately many people continue to have a misconception of the Powermac systems. These "facts" were true in the past but no more; not since OS X was introduced.

If you remember one thing I've said, please remember this; Mac OS X shares nothing in common with OS 9, 8, etc except for a name (kinda). Apple did a COMPLETE REWRITE of the OS on creating OS X.

I can't convince someone to like something they simply don't wish to - no point. No one is wrong, that's just opinion. However, it's unfortunate googlo said "I feel like I don't have any control when I'm using a Mac."

You can control more of Mac OS X, at low levels, than you can Windows 2k/XP. Take for instance the command line interface, in Mac OS X it's a 100% complete UNIX shell running TCSH. I've downloaded console programs for Linux and they run fine on OS X. You can daisy chain commands, etc. The MS Windows shell offers about as much control as a Fisher Price toy :). Granted, not many people work in the command line but a lot of developers still do.

I could be speaking out of school here but I don't believe it should be terribly difficult for an independent developer of Max plugins to port to another OS (whether it be Linux or OS X). The 3d application provides a hosting environment in which the plugins execute. The plugins don't worry about drawing windows on the screen, etc. But rather, ask the 3d host application to take care of it. Therefore, no real OS specific code here. Granted, there's nothing to stop a developer from doing some type of OS specific methods but I imagine it would be rare as the 3d app provides everything you really need. The biggest thing you have to worry about is complying with the plug-in architecture.

There's no denying that Wintel boxes are a much larger market.

As a side note I did find this interesting. Steve Jobs is pushing Apple towards production of more portable systems than desktop. Today's IBD has an article on how desktop sales are decreasing where notebooks are taking up the slack.

Apple commits more to R&D as a percentage of revenue than any other computer company. They are innovative as hell; no denying that. I love their products. Everything about them wreaks of quality. That's not to say they are perfect - no 3d application is "perfect" either. But, they sure as hell are better than any Wintel box I own (obviuosly that's an opinion).

Thanks for letting me on the soap box again - my wife hates it when I do that. :rolleyes:

-IMarshal

[floca]

I agree with what IMarshal has said. I built my own pc, I have a been guy for years (granted I'm only 19). But now my university said I get a 12" powerbook (graphic communcations management major so we get macs and not pcs). I have had virtually no problems with it. And as far as laptops go it's awesome. That and it recognizes my bluetooth mouse better than my pc. As of right now my bluetooth mouse doesnt even work on my pc, I used it on my powerbook and now my pc doesnt recognize it...no suprise there of course (FYI I have gone back and forth with my mouse plenty of times.....just decided to give me problems now). I'm more of a pc guy but have found myself supporting apple more and more with the continued use of my 12" powerbook.....

[LFShade]

I've never worked with OSX, so I can't comment on that. However, as a developer himself IMarshal should be well aware that there are different ways to go about developing an application. One route would be to write to a fairly generic spec, in OS terms, that leaves the GUI, for the most part, the only OS-dependent code. Another way would be to base large portions of your codebase on platform-specific libraries, tying the application almost inextricably to one OS. Though perhaps a bit shortsighted, the original developers of Max seem to have gone the latter route, basing their development on Microsoft technologies like COM and GDI, and relying quite heavily on the VC++ standard libraries. I don't have firsthand knowledge of this, but it's what I've been told a number of times (usually in response to the "why no such-and-such OS version?" queries").

My personal distaste for the Apple products I've worked with notwithstanding, I think it would be a positive direction for Discreet to branch out into other operating systems. I would most likely stick with Windows, but diversity is almost never a bad idea:thumbsup:


RH

[John-Stetzer]

Originally posted by LFShade
Though perhaps a bit shortsighted...
RH
Remembering things as they stood at the time decisions were being made (early 90's), OS wise, I think they showed very good foresight in their choice.

[thomaspecht]

isnt max already considered a dead end development-wise? there are enough rumours out there that discreet have been busy for the last years in secretly developing a new breed of their software and that they will only continue to update max until they are ready for a release of their new baby.

that said, at least a linux version still would be fine, but i don't expect that this is gonna happen... :)

[ThirdEye]

A very high percentage of C4D users uses a Macintosh.

[thorn3d]

Originally posted by GIJoe
isnt max already considered a dead end development-wise?

Errrr - yeah... that's why it continues to be #1 in the industry. :rolleyes:

OSX users have plenty of choices when it comes to 3D software. People should pick their app FIRST, and the operating system SECOND... not spend their time bemoaning the fact the software they really wish they could use was available for platform X.

Get platform X, buy the software, and get on with work.

thorn

[L0sTPr0fEt]

to be quite honest, i like both OS's the same. i like windows because a shatload of programs work only for windows, and i like mac because of its power. linux is good as well, i dual boot with redhat 9 and win2k. (cant wait to get my hands on winxp64) Im still workin on getting a mac, ill most likely grab a powerbook.

in my opinion, if discreet wanted to be more popular and get a whole lot more money, they'd make it on all operating systems. it might be a long development process, but in the end i think they would prosper from having a program that can be used on multiple platforms. pleasing everyone = good.

just thought id chip in


LP

[thorn3d]

One could say the same for FinalCutPro - Apple could be even more successful with that product if it were made for windows.

Of course, the mac faithful would scream "heresy" if such a thing were ever to happen.

I've no cares either way what OS people use. I'm hoping to get FCP in the next few months, because it's one of the best IMHO. But I'll buy a mac to run it on, not lobby Apple to release it for Windows.

thorn

[opus13]

People should pick their app FIRST, and the operating system SECOND...

so if i first pick 3ds max... that doesnt exactly leave a lot of room for decision #2.

[SuperMax]

wasnt there talk earlier about Apple wanting to take over discreet or discreets softwars such as max???

Well this should kill those dying rumours.

[Soulhuntre]

While getting involved in what is bordering on a religeous OS war might not be a good idea, I'll drop in 2 cents.

As a developer for Windows and Linux/BSD/Unix/OSX I simply must say that there are no longer any major technical advantages to the Unix derived systems.

XP has all the user level security Unix like systems do along with great capability like add ons. Active directory is a huge bonus for large organizations and with the Xp/2004 code base stability is every bit as good as anything else out there.

On both the desktop and in the server farm, a properly set up WinXP/2004 system can be every bit as solid as any Unix derived system (and yes, things liek Linux and OSX need competent admins as well).

As for the shell, don't confuse a shell with an OS. Windows doesn't SHIP with a ksh/sh/bash like shell, but nothing prevents you from running one. In fact a number of extremely complete shell and utility systems exist - including one great one that is open source (Cygwin).

OSX is a good OS, it saved the Mac from becoming completely irrelevant... but it doesn't represent a leapfrog over modern Windows systems. There WAS a window of opportunity during the Win98/ME days - but it slammed shut when Windows2000 shipped.

In this environment, there isn't any compelling reason for discreet to port Max. The amount of development effort would be huge and the benefit in market terms would be tiny.

What WOULD be a good idea would be a way to render directly from Max to a mental ray and scanline compatable demon engine that could run on Linux systems. No need to port the UI, and most of the benefits for larger production environments.

[maxFX]

3dstudio....well...i remember it since DOS version. Do you actually believe that discreet developers can translate this COMPLEX hi-end app to OSX in....let say 8-9 months? Dont fool yourselves!.

Has anyone use COMBUSTION 3.0 on mac? OpenGL in Windows is far more superior, and particle systems even on a dual 2.8 mac are Waaayyy slow.

Think of the huge alliance list of discreet certified and devoted developers...lets say digimation for example....they must code their license servers again from scratch for OSX bringing confusion to the community.

As for the goodies of OSX, i agree that it is a stable and respectable OS, and that its enviroment is outstanding.
I am also aware that 3dsmax 7.0 will definitely support dual 32-bit floating ops and 64-bit capabilities. How can you make a 100% compatible system running on those different platforms?

Good news is that indeed discreet remains the #1 VFX company ( Thanks to 3dsmax and Inferno-flame-flint systems ) and are bringing 3dsmax to a new era of film-oriented goodies.

Oh...and bringing 3dsmax to linux..is a good idea, that way you get the extended scripted capabilities of the *nux shell.

GIJoe >> Do you have any more information concerning this "new baby" or you are just speculating like the rest of us?

[peekoot]

Originally posted by SuperMax
wasnt there talk earlier about Apple wanting to take over discreet or discreets softwars such as max???

Well this should kill those dying rumours.

yeah... there was.... personally... i think that rumor is FAR from truth... that is.... they maybe want to do that... but there are probably lots of things you want that are hardly going to happen... :)

and that rumor that discreet is developing new breed of sw... hmm... as i always say... hope dies last.... :)

[thomaspecht]

of course i'm speculating just like you :)
if discreet want's to challenge other apps in the high end film sector, they probably have to retire their current product because it's limited in a number of ways and they can't change the fundamentals of it any more. of course max will then live on for a few years as a "ghost" just like soft3d or power animator did and even get updates now and then.

btw. number 1 might be true - depending on what industry we are talking about.

[maxFX]

Hmmm....after a deep though i figured out that its all about the money...i mean...

If for e.g CS4.2 came intergrated with 3dsmax ( and FREE!!!) it would beat IK systems in Maya. If some digimation's plugins like phoenix, seascape particle studio,simcloth and such came also intergrated it would beat off XSI.

They prefer keeping the stuff apart for obvious reasons. this is the main cause why many people are thinking that 3dsmax is not very talented with heavy work.I believe they should focus on some intergrated plugin upgrades and not on the core itself.A good idea is to actually fund some Community projects like excellent SME and such.

P.S Its too early for 3dsmax 7.0 wishlist , but ..what the heck :p

[ThirdEye]

"Hmmm....after a deep though i figured out that its all about the money...i mean..."

It depends. Maya is cheaper than Max for example, and i wouldn't say it's less powerful.

"If for e.g CS4.2 came intergrated with 3dsmax ( and FREE!!!) it would beat IK systems in Maya."

Not at all. A procedural walk system will never be the holy grail.

"If some digimation's plugins like phoenix, seascape particle studio,simcloth and such came also intergrated it would beat off XSI."

Sure, where are the fx tree, the render tree, the synoptic view, the full integration of Mental Ray, the...?

"They prefer keeping the stuff apart for obvious reasons."

Stability? The fact Max can't take a hour just to be fired up? Price?

"this is the main cause why many people are thinking that 3dsmax is not very talented with heavy work."

Not at all. The problems of Max are related to scalability (try feeding a high number of objects to Max), viewport performance, lack of a node based material editor, flexibility, stability with any kind of hardware (take 2 different pc's with Max and you'll have 2 completely different behaviours) etc..

"I believe they should focus on some intergrated plugin upgrades and not on the core itself."

And what did they exactly do so far with Max 5 and 6? They added some plugins. Has it solved Max main problems? hmmm

[Joel.Hooks]

"I believe they should focus on some intergrated plugin upgrades and not on the core itself."

That's a great idea, if they wanted to completely tear apart their business model and probably kill the entire product. I assume you would expect all that at the same price point? Maybe they can send you some dancing girls with every order too, eh ;)

[joconnell]

I reckon it's probably slightly easier for apple to write a stable OS as they have much more control over the variety of hardware that gets made for the machine itself - You only have so many graphics cards / sound cards etc available for it that it's far easier to control quality wise whereas with the pc there's a ****load of combinations in hardware and no chance of checking how well they react to each other. Personally I'd love a good unix based os for its stability, flexibility and lack of viruses but alas all my fave software runs on windows. I'd love to see 3ds max, photoshop and after effects run on linux but I'm not sure whether the last two will because of their consumer background. Gimp is ugly as hell and I don't like shake as much for motion graphics work.

I'm hoping that suns looking glass project will make linux a really viable option for discreet and adobe and maybe we'll see a move.

[SuperMax]

3dsmax 7.0


*sigh*

First time i see the number 7 next to the name 3dsmax.

Lets start the rumours aye?? :p

hehehe

[OzzyCat]

Would I be right in saying it wouldn't have been a massive problem to port Maya to the Mac because OSX is a unix system? And considering Maya began life as a Unix app, this makes it easier and quicker to port.

???

[thomaspecht]

maya obviously isn't very platform specific. being a native unix or windows app probably doesn't make that much of a difference.

max on the other hand uses a lot of windows-specific code and is probably a nightmare to port to anything. even in the unlikely case that they'd do it, one could expect a very buggy conversion that would take a very long time to mature.

[JamesKo]

Originally posted by neverwake
Errrr - yeah... that's why it continues to be #1 in the industry. :rolleyes:

OSX users have plenty of choices when it comes to 3D software. People should pick their app FIRST, and the operating system SECOND... not spend their time bemoaning the fact the software they really wish they could use was available for platform X.

Get platform X, buy the software, and get on with work.

thorn

I agree fully. When the software costs more than the computer, you pick the app first, not the platform.

[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.