Smoke for Mac OS X


#1

Autodesk will be previewing Smoke for Mac OS X at Inter BEE 2009:

http://me.autodesk.jp/event/interbee2009/event.html
http://www.broadcastnewsroom.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=902440


#2

I guess Autodesk’s Marc Petit wasn’t kidding when he blogged that they were investing heavily in OSX. Pray they’re working their way down the list alphabetically. Smoke is just before SoftImage after all. :wink:


#3

autodesk osx apps are certainly on the move!


#4

excelent!

next: 3DS Max :buttrock:


#5

Probably flare/flint/flame/inferno are next since they’re all built on the same core as smoke. It’ll probably just come down to availability of the higher end video cards with lots of memory and AD ability to get RED code raw running in real-time or some in between solution that compromise output quality. It’s pretty amazing to see RED positioning itself to become the eventual standard among literally skids of better financed companies.


#6

Why the conspicuous absence of Softimage at Autodesk’s booth at the BEE show?


#7

Your words just froze my old bones…is there any hint that they are “leaving behind” XSI? :curious:


#8

I think we are seeing a smart move but ultimately a desperate grab. I think it is quite interesting that they decided to port smoke first. Obviously they are capitalising on Apple’s inability to make FCS a proper finishing tool.

It’s pretty amazing to see RED positioning itself to become the eventual standard among literally skids of better financed companies.

Certainly hope not. I am hoping that the thrill will wear off soon and people can go back to shooting with things that actually look good. RED is becoming popular in the commercials market where people want to cut costs and the odd film guy gives it a whirl but at present its ugly with poor colour latitude and has too many issues (rolling shutter, bad noise patterns, weird artifacts at high exposures etc.)


#9

i was recently present at a really crappy autodesk roadshow event…
where they presented every app except…tadaaa…xsi.
mind u this was an official event.
asking afterwards why that was…the rep simply replied that it wasnt
in the scope of that event…
i was like…uhmm…okay.
have to give them credit though…they did mention it i think 3 times, in
contexts like: and u can of course use the same shorcuts as max,maya or even xsi.

ideas that max and xsi could be ported to osx are pretty scifi.
they are both products which are so deeply hooked in the windows architecture,
that it would cost autodesk way too much money to invest in porting them.
and if for max, that has a huge userbase, they partnered with parallels, u can imagine they wouldnt really care about a tool with such a small user base as xsi. its all business.
this is pure speculation, but i wouldnt be surprised even one bit if in the years to come
they would port some of xsi’s tech into the other packages and discontinue it altogether.


#10

ideas that max and xsi could be ported to osx are pretty scifi.
they are both products which are so deeply hooked in the windows architecture,

nonsense XSI runs on Linux. Max is the one which is hooked into windows. there is no reason that XSI couldn’t run on any *nix variant.


#11

I don’t think they’re going to port 3DS Max to OS X since they now officially support 3DS Max on Bootcamp:

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/ps/dl/item?siteID=123112&id=13578525&linkID=9241177


#12

xsi runs under linux with a ton of hacks.
its one of the reasons it only runs on fedora based distros.
its main graphical hook is based on mainwin libraries, which are windows based.
sumatra/xsi’s main code began being written while soft was still under microsoft,
and alot of it, was created around the windows architecture.
i remember the question was posed times and times again to the old
softimage crew about the though of them porting it to osx, and the answer
was always a clear no.
i doubt autodesk is more interested now, than avid/softimage was then, even though
the thought is nice.


#13

I’ve always felt like AD’s main objective was to basically use Maya as a skeleton key of sorts - Rewrite and clean it up as a Universal OS app, build some kind of translators for Maxscript and then put three separate interface veneers representing Maya/Max/XSI on top cuz it just didn’t make sense for them to buy up all of the competition and just maintain all the code bases entirely just to have them. The main problem with XSI is that some of the critical components of code are licensed from other companies so the development path forward isn’t totally their own until or unless that changes.


#14

i dont think they are ‘leaving’ it behind, i just think they haven’t quite integrated it into their routines for tradeshows.


#15

deleted… sorry was off topic


#16

XSI is almost as windows heavy as 3DSMAX. The linux version depends on Mainwin (a propietary API replacement of Win32 a bit like Wine). Mainwin does not have an OSX runtime client.

I have contacted Mainwin before they would be interested in making an OSX client if a big enough customer with an equally large client base could get behind it. I.e. Autodesk.

A better idea would be for Autodesk to Softimage move to a platform-less api/wrapper/api like what Maya has been using for years.

[/offtopic]

WOO! Smoke for Mac. Would be interesting to see if this as sold as a license on the same consumer level as Adobe AE/Premiere and Final Cut Studio. Rather than via a VAR.


#17

too bad osx is not on the move :slight_smile: I don’t know if it’s the application engineers or me… but every application I have runs faster on linux than on osx (the ones that does exist for both). And this is on my MacPro. So I’m using linux mostly (and also a bit reason for that is that XSI doesn’t run under osx).

I like osx though, bits of it… but it really needs to be a ‘tad’ faster.

regards
stefan


#18

I found that with Win too on a MacPro at work and on my MacbookPro at home. I still try to use OSX to freshen my FCP skills on the lappie from time to time which is pretty zippy.

I’m curious to see the contraints of Smoke in OSX for a 1.0 version. I know Maya on the Mac has been a painful journey until recently.


#19

Actually I thought XSI ran on Linux via a compatibility layer called win4lin or something like. Despite its unorthodox look, XSI is very much so a Windows application.


#20

I recall SoftImage’s Luc-Eric Rousseau speaking quite fervently about the extensiveness of SoftImage’s windows foundations and how much work it would take if ever they did consider porting the code. The dev-team there seems very content with Windows, so unfortunately the chances are remote to say the least.
And to be honest, if an SI for OSX port would turn out as shabby as the Maya equivalent, I’m not sure I’d be too thrilled.