Wishlist SU 8... Let's not !
-
For me, Google simply needs to focus more on 'core' features. Fast, accurate modelling which will work smoothly with large and complex (or even tiny and complex) models, with a wide enough range of modelling tools to suit all but the most demanding users. Silver shadow, solo and others have shown us that you can model more or less anything with SU with the right plugins, determination and skill.
The only ways the core can really be improved are (IMO) :-
- Better manipulation of complex geometry
- Fix Shadows
- More options for working with curved surfaces - Loft tool please!
- More options for texture mapping
- More options for tighter integration with 3rd party plugins - Python support sounds cool, and not too difficult
- More import/export formats - the real key to broader acceptance and use
Things like Style Builder I think are a distraction. Not many people really wanted this. Yes it might be nice for some, but I never use them at all. They are the sort of things that really ought to be worked on when the core is really well-tuned.
I would quite like to see some extensions to DC as well, and for them to be coded in C not Ruby. I'm having difficulty using multiple nested arrays inside components, and would like the option to substitute components based on formula values.
With a lot of the recent criticism, it is easy to forget how good SU still is. Because it is so easy, many of us are pushing it beyond its current capabilities in terms of 3d manipulation. This is a good thing and an opportunity and I'm sure Google realises this - in its own way.
I do want this stuff to happen in the next 6 months though, or I'm going to start looking at MoI. That doesn't mean I'll necessarily switch, but that my requirements and abilities have progressed a little and that SU isn't perhaps the ideal tool for most of my 3d work any more.
-
I think we all secretly know that it is getting to the end of the line.
It is obvious that they just can't get SU to handle the mount of poly's that the future will demand.
Z-Brush can handle billions of poly's while SU can't handle 100,000. And that is now! What about 1 or 2 years from now.
With the absolutely disappointing release of ver7 (I have never had this many program crashes in any software ever!) it put the writing on the wall for me.
Handling poly's is what makes a 3d software. Period. That's what these softwares do. Handle poly's. SU can't and that will be the death knell.
I am forcing myself to use other softwares where I used to use SU. If it wasn't for the fantastic Ruby scripts that have come down the pipe, I think I would be done with SU for everything but rudimentary architectural work, which stinks, because, as we all know, there is no more intuitive and fun to use box modeler.
But, if they can't improve the core code, which seems apparent that they can't, then SU will be relegated to nothing more than a toy.
-
@unknownuser said:
But, if they can't improve the core code, which seems apparent that they can't, then SU will be relegated to nothing more than a toy.
I have the same feeling.
It seems Google took over the software from @Last, but not the knowledge.
Maybe they indeed should look at a 3td party and outsource development.First they need to get their act straight. We certainly have good ideas about the future of Sketchup.
But what about Google themselves? Do they know where they are going with Sketchup?
Is there a short term and long term road map?Instead of really enhance and improve what they have , Google is desperately searching to incorporate Sketchup in a web oriented given. There is G earth and oh yeah , the virtual world 'Lively'.
Dead before it was born, but I think Google wanted to use Sketchup as the prop modeler for that concept.
It is time that Google starts to go in depth with what they have, instead of scratching the surface of every little idea that comes up.But as Bigstick said, the positive thing is that Sketchup is still a wonderful piece of software and we would hate to see it going down.
-
It is my sneaking suspicion that @last knew years ago that they had run into the limits of what the code base of SU could handle.
Boy, did they sell at the right time. Saddle Google with a dead end software and now Google is the bad guy.
I have been using SU since 2005 and I have seen NO appreciable improvement in handling polygons. That can not be by accident.
And that is the one thing that will kill SU as a pro software.
And it is ridiculous that you can't import obj's; SU must be the only 3D software on the planet that can't.
I hate to be a negative Nancy, but SU will soon be relegated to sporadic use in my workflow, even though I love the interface, inference engine, and speed of modeling.
Perhaps the only hope is if Google lets it go Open Source. Judging by the fantastic scripters in our community, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if someone (team?) who approached improving SU with the same passion that we approach it while modeling could produce some amazing results.
Of course, maybe the way SU actually works is outdated and just can't be improved. Based on previous updates, I have to think that this is the case.
-
I have only one wish right now and that is for a Google spokesperson to address our concerns in an open forum and tell us if it can or cannot be done.
C'mon Google, step up to the plate and speak to us, we have been loyal, heck this entire forum is in your honor, so please level with us, talk to us, we know you are watching.
-
I appreciate your optimism, but we all know that ain't gonna happen.
-
Good luck. More chance to win the lottery than to see Google mingle with its flock ...
By the way, did you know that every time you type the word 'Google' in a post, a Google Bot shows up in the list of 'people' browsing the forum at the bottom of the page?
I picture a Google Bot as a brain floating in a jar.
-
I voted for open sourcing SU.I also thought about Linux like some of you did, and linux is thriving, it has lots of cool and stable versions with lots of support and frequent updates, that's what I wish SU had more than anything else.The open source version can be the current SU with all it's qualities and faults, and if Google still want a commercial version, they'll have to rewrite the core for this day and age with the ability to support all that is needed from a modern 3d modeller, but to keep the old SU's simple and easy to use interface.
I'm just hoping SU survives some how the next couple of years i would really hate to have to switch to another app.I also hate that most modellers disconsider Su without even giving it a try, and a lot of guys urge me to swithc to 3ds max or at least Blender, and it's getting very annoying, this for me at least shows that SU has also an image problem, it may not be advirtised anough or in the right way.
That's my 2 cents, Viva LaSketchUp
-
If Sketchup went opensource I reckon it would double the amount of users over night and raise the profile of the product through the roof. To have a 3d program that is easier than Blender, free and totally configurable, everybody will love it. Going open source is a no brainer. C'mon Google!
-
@kwistenbiebel said:
A wishlist for SU8? Nah.....
I don't think people want to get into a wishlist for SU 8 as making one for SU 7 turned out to be a useless endeavour.
How much of what users really wanted made it into 7? Close to nada?
The question that pops up is how you guys see the future for Sketchup.
One without Google doing development and relying on ruby plugins solely?What is the risk of SU becoming full ruby oriented ?
Is the Sketchup core reliable enough for that? etc...A poll.
I have to agree. "If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride"
Lets have a look at the financial side:Lets say you had 1,000,000 people buying SU @ $500.00, (which I doubt) that would translate into $500,000.000 in sales,
Compare that to Googles $5.7b/quarter * 4quarters = $22,800,000.000 from their advertising per year. When you weigh the profits from the advertising versus the sales from SU. I can see why the efforts on the SU side are slim to invisible.Maybe starting an "SU Annoyances" thread would attract more attention
-
@tomot said:
Lets have a look at the financial side: ...
As far as I know, Google philosophy is about trying things out and seeing what possibilities arise from them. I don't believe they bought Sketchup so they could boast the best 3D software to bolster their quarterly returns. If this is true, suggestions for such possibilities should be far more productive than irritating "annoyances", and hopefully result in a far greater acceptance of 3d models as a key part of everyday life (like instructional animation for example). The result would be a greater demand for 3d modellers. If this is to be a new market, the type of models (raw and light, high-end rendered) will be determined by it.
Chris
-
@linea said:
Going open source is a no brainer.
I'm not sure about no brainer but it's a good suggestion. Digital devices could bring life to the market mentioned above.
Chris
-
Tomot, careful with your commas there, using your numbers annual SU sales would account for $500,000,000 or 1/40th the revenue from advertising. Certainly not an amount to sniff at.
-
I guess it's kind of obvious, but people like you and me will stop using it and find something better if they don't fix some of these problems. I agree about the High Poly issue, and also to make things more efficient for ruby programmers, because if they fixed those two issues, things could move along nicely without worrying about google... But remus is right, sketchup needs something big to stop it becoming and artifact (" oh I remember sketchup, it was good for push and pull, and drawing lines, but development slowed, and I found some other program to model with that had what I needed) that's my opinion anyway
-
It is not a question of getting par with the income of their advertising.
The important thing is: if it is feasible, it is feasible. Period!
If I run a business and product A earns me 200 % and product B earns me 130 %, there still is no reason to abandon product B.
Profit is profit.Autodesk isn't doing that bad in the CG industry is it? So it can be feasible.
Sketchup Pro maybe is a bit of a niche at the moment, but so was Googles search engine before it exploded...
-
Well ... what did they expect? "Whoa! Automatic line-breaking! We gotta get updates for the whole office!"
Looking back, I still find it stunning what they managed to come up with after two years of development.
-
@unknownuser said:
It is not a question of getting par with the income of their advertising.
I agree. I don't expect Google to tell us but it would be nice to know how much money is needed to continue developing Sketchup to the level we all want, and are SU Pro licenses able to pay for that? I suspect they don't.
@unknownuser said:
I heard the rumor that SU7 pro is selling badly. The uptake is apparently not as expected. That certainly does not help.
That was the fundamental flaw in Googles business model; put just about everything in the free version too. The pros can pay for Layout.
-
It's funny how things workout... when SU 7 was released, me and some others that were saying that it was a bad released, were "atacked" by a lot of users that called us nuts and telling that there were many "under the hood" upgrades that couldn't be seen in SU7 and that we should be thankfull to google for "their hard work"... and i'm still waiting for an (any) article that would show me that amazing new things that can be done in SU7.
Under the hood...lol...under the hood upgrades it's a phrase from the car world (i have a passion with automotive design) that means that a new car can look like it's previous versions but inside him it has a completly new and more powered engine. Well, SU7 it's the oposite...it looks diferent with some visual tuning(some blue icons and new startup window), it has some new turbos on it's 20 year old engine, so it's a litle faster but breaks more frequently and consumes a lot more fuel (bugsplats and "white window of doom"), sure we can have litle more stability with larger tyres and a harder suspension (ruby) but that will only hide that the car base is old (more tools with ruby but running single core as the rest of the program) and won't still make him as good as the rest of the cars released today...
So right now i see SU7 has a super tuned version of SU4 (the first with rubys) that for more (suposed) speed and stability (7 it's almost as fast as 4...that is 6 years older) lost some of his engine features (shadow problem with the missing carmack's reverse option).
-
I like your analogy...
It looks a little different, sounds a little wilder, probably runs a little different, but it's still a Beetle.
-
Maybe sounds a little silly and utopic....but I am wondering:
Is there anything we, as a community, can do to help Google spicing up the development of Sketchup?
Advertisement