Sketchup 64 bit?
-
@unknownuser said:
something else i see happening though is that it's not always a case of outgrowing it.. it's more a case of realizing there are easier (sometimes A Lot easier) ways to do what you're trying to do..
and maybe 'easy' is the wrong word here.. faster is more the right word..
and in some cases, a lot faster.. (due to a more robust toolset)*i mean, the biggest user concern in sketchup is seemingly it's speed..
but why does speed have to always be about how many calculations sketchup can make in one second?
re: free vs pro..
wanna make a key distinction between the two? suFree maintains todays vanilla tools.. pro has a pro toolset..you get to keep the SU is easy&simple&slim concept via the free version.. but the term pro typically says the user desires a more powerful set of tools and they'd also be more willing&able to learn and use more tools..
[and the pro version would have the option to run the normal toolset mode as well.. but you get the importexports and layout etc..]and in my mind, "that's what plugins are for" just doesn't quite cut it.. i don't think the devs had this in mind at the time but when they made solid tools (a tool that was once a premium plugin became a native tool), they showed us the difference between a plugin and an official tool.. their version is +100.. (but that doesn't mean stop there on the solid tools boys.. they can still get a little more luv
).. -
I dónt know about 32 or 64 bit
What I think is that the Pro version has to get much faster for exploding and saving , if it wants to stay alive .If that means that the SketchUp core has to be modified deeply and that that costs a lot of money ,
well then
that would be the difference between Pro and Free .
I would not mind to pay more for that , at all .
But the next version has to address the speeding issue , quite a lot .
I think . -
I don't think it's economical to maintain two or more core engines (old for free, new for pro). Whatever will be further differentiating the Pro version, it will neither be single vs. multicore nor 32bit vs. 64bit or any other performance improvements at the core level. It would contradict the "SketchUp as a platform" plan.
So it could be Pro toolsets, importers, model&project management (xrefs?)... cloud and mobile services that free users wouldn't need...
-
If they switch to 64 bit, don't they then have to maintain both the 32 bit and the 64 bit code? There are still lots of 32 bit machines out there. so its not a simple upgrade to the code and move on. Its adding an entire other code base to maintain. Sure they code's will be fairly similar, but still, that sounds like a logistical headache. I wonder how other companies handle that.
-
@aerilius said:
I don't think it's economical to maintain two or more core engines (old for free, new for pro). Whatever will be further differentiating the Pro version, it will neither be single vs. multicore nor 32bit vs. 64bit or any other performance improvements at the core level. It would contradict the "SketchUp as a platform" plan.
So it could be Pro toolsets, importers, model&project management (xrefs?)... cloud and mobile services that free users wouldn't need...
Absolutely true.
@chris fullmer said:
If they switch to 64 bit, don't they then have to maintain both the 32 bit and the 64 bit code? There are still lots of 32 bit machines out there. so its not a simple upgrade to the code and move on. Its adding an entire other code base to maintain. Sure they code's will be fairly similar, but still, that sounds like a logistical headache. I wonder how other companies handle that.
This is true, too. However I am starting to wonder how they will be beta testing a "legacy 32 bit version" in a year or two. Most of the beta testers also use SU professionally which means they need to keep up with hardware changes more than just grandpa who got my old machine to play with.*
OR they will only release new versions on the 64 bit platform after a while?
*To make sure I do not mean to hurt any grandpas here: it was this month when I finally got rid of my 32 bit XP as my main "production machine" and switched to a 64 bit Win 8. And even this was only because my computer crashed and I needed a complete reinstall (with some hardware changes, too, as my HD and video card got completely wrecked).
-
For some simple programs, 32bit versions and 64bit versions can be compiled from the same code base (just a switch when starting the compiler).
For SketchUp it would obviously require more work and switches and maybe parts of the codebase specific for a 64bit version. Once that is done one can produce SketchUp for both architectures but of course it adds to the complexity and requires more testing (beta testers can install 32bit SketchUp on a 64bit hardware, or virtualize it to keep it separate from their production environment, but who know if there are issues that appear only on a true 32bit hardware).
-
announce a time when 64bit will happen..
when that time comes, everything is 64bit from then on out..
'legacy' 32 bit versions are still available though no longer updated/supported(on the mac side, i don't really see much of a problem though.. i might be only slightly exaggerating when i say EVerybody is on 64bit machines)
-
Hmmm, I dunno guys, we may be completely off here, maybe Trimble needs a lighter version of Sketchup, maybe even an ARM based version, judging by what I see from Trimble this might be their vision.
-
It more like related to this....
...or to be more exact...
But the answer is definitely in there...
-
@aerilius said:
I don't think it's economical to maintain two or more core engines (old for free, new for pro). Whatever will be further differentiating the Pro version, it will neither be single vs. multicore nor 32bit vs. 64bit or any other performance improvements at the core level. It would contradict the "SketchUp as a platform" plan.
So it could be Pro toolsets, importers, model&project management (xrefs?)... cloud and mobile services that free users wouldn't need...
.... but was the Free version really intended as a platform? I thought it was more a case of Google facilitating their wished for GE building populators of which their millions!
-
@solo said:
Hmmm, I dunno guys, we may be completely off here, maybe Trimble needs a lighter version of Sketchup, maybe even an ARM based version, judging by what I see from Trimble this might be their vision.
That look like a GameBoy golf game from the early 90's....
Big fish, little fish, cardboard box.....Jeff?
-
@solo said:
Hmmm, I dunno guys, we may be completely off here, maybe Trimble needs a lighter version of Sketchup, maybe even an ARM based version, judging by what I see from Trimble this might be their vision.
ARM based version would be ok.. but if they're requiring a proprietary device in order to run sketchup, i'm outz... pretty much positive about that..
(edit-well, i guess an ipad is a proprietary device too.. but it can do a heck of a lot more than run one program)
[edit2].. unless of course, the trimble device is something so amazing that it's a must have item.. but if that were the case, trimble would be in the wrong business to begin with..
-
-
@mike lucey said:
... but was the Free version really intended as a platform? I thought it was more a case of Google facilitating their wished for GE building populators of which their millions!
That isa platform already. True that not fully exploited but a platform. Just think of Building Maker integration, Street view texturing and all that crap (I do not really mean crap but since the locations with this data were so limited, it has never become a breakthrough).
Now it's another question, what they needed this platform for. Their GE and mapping services (which are great BTW - just SU could not cope with the growing demand).
-
@gaieus said:
Now it's another question, what they needed this platform for. Their GE and mapping services (which are great BTW - just SU could not cope with the growing demand).
i think they (google & other mapping services) just came to realize they can use satellite imagery to get better data than the 'millions of people drawing their neighborhood' approach..
now, if the 'millions of people' were actually drawing the innards of said buildings, then we'd have something of more value but sketchup->google earth was mainly showing the outer shells.. and the satellites can do that better/faster/more controllable etc..
[edit- or maybe they're using airplanes instead of satellites? regardless....)
-
@unknownuser said:
but was the Free version really intended as a platform?
I meant they put efforts in having one platform (on top of which different tools can be added), and since John said they would still offer a free version, I assume it uses the same engine.As for ARM: Blender is already there... (but as we have found out above, SketchUp does not follow where Blender goes.)
-
@unknownuser said:
...
i think they (google & other mapping services) just came to realize they can use satellite imagery to get better data than the 'millions of people drawing their neighborhood' approach.....and not to forget lidar scans
(Possible one good reason why Google and Trible did found eatch others)Perhaps need of some massive point cloud handling will in some point trigger 64 bit switch on SU.
-
@jbacus said:
This stuff is difficult to understand. I don't think we're beating a dead horse if there are still misconceptions floating around the community about the real benefits of 64bit computing.
The 64bit version is crucial for all rendering engines that are truly integrated DLLs into SketchUp and talk with it through SketchUp C++ SDK.
We would love to see extremely complex models rendered directly Inside SketchUp, but there is a limit how much one can fit into 32bit memory range, regardless how efficient instancing or other memory optimizations related to displacement,relight,repaint,etc. are in a rendering engine.
SketchUp wouldn't necessarily have to display such a complex content. This is being addressed by proxy systems already present in several rendering applications. Unfortunately those really integrated are choking at some point.
The 64 bit solution would also require a "real" SketchUp SDK, not only a way to export or read SKP files. This is very unfortunate that we developers have to "break" into SketchUp through a use of undocumented Ruby methods and a creation of Ruby extensions.
-
@unknownuser said:
This is very unfortunate that we developers have to "break" into SketchUp through a use of undocumented Ruby methods and a creation of Ruby extensions.
I don't normally condone breaking and entering, but in this case I thank you as your SU2TH, as it is frigging awesome, too bad I still need to port into Studio when SU buckles under minimal load (minimal by standards of evey other modeling app available)
-
@tomasz said:
@jbacus said:
This stuff is difficult to understand. I don't think we're beating a dead horse if there are still misconceptions floating around the community about the real benefits of 64bit computing.
The 64bit version is crucial for all rendering engines that are truly integrated DLLs into SketchUp and talk with it through SketchUp C++ SDK.
We would love to see extremely complex models rendered directly Inside SketchUp, but there is a limit how much one can fit into 32bit memory range, regardless how efficient instancing or other memory optimizations related to displacement,relight,repaint,etc. are in a rendering engine.
SketchUp wouldn't necessarily have to display such a complex content. This is being addressed by proxy systems already present in several rendering applications. Unfortunately those really integrated are choking at some point.
The 64 bit solution would also require a "real" SketchUp SDK, not only a way to export or read SKP files. This is very unfortunate that we developers have to "break" into SketchUp through a use of undocumented Ruby methods and a creation of Ruby extensions.
Would love to get a reaction to this from jbacus or another Sketchup developer
Advertisement