Either I don't have any idea what AutoDesk is trying to do with thier products or (a more likely scenario) AutoDesk doesn't have any idea what they are trying to do with thier products. My case in point:
- AutoCad is the industry standard plain and simple. Sure there are others but at least here in the U.S., it's the Alpha and Omega of drafting.
- They are trying so hard to cram the idea of "Model Based Design" or "SBM" (see the news link to intelligent modeling posted today, Sept. 26) with Architectural Desktop, and they get pretty edgy if you tell them you're still using Viz (or Max) and not ADT to model with.
- So now we have Viz, a product that has undergone few, if any, enhancments to the modeling features since version 1. The upgrades in that time have mainly been to the interoperability between it and ADT and to the rendering system. So if you do things the way they intend you to do them, Viz is relegated to nothing more then a renderer. A 2500 dollar renderer. There are at least a dozen others that can do a much better job of rendering for a fraction of that cost.
I of course realize that it is all a part of a grand marketing scheme (which now includes Architectural Studio). It's just that if you think about it, one way or another you are buying a lot of software that overlap in thier technology.
It would make sense to me that they could continue to develope Viz (and PLEASE start adding some modeling enhancments like a decent NURBS modeler, etc.) with all the added rendering features for those of us who are vizualization artists, and then create another, less expensive version of Lightscape for those who do all thier rendering in Acad/ADT.
Having said all that I actually use Max because it is of great benefit to me and the company I work for to have all the animation features. But that is a discussion for another time.
[ September 27, 2002, 09:33 AM: Message edited by: Brian Cassil ]
__________________
"writing notes is quieter."
|