Who said SketchUp doesn't need to be 64 bit?
-
Wow, this thread has really taken off.
A worrying thing is that it seems they haven't even started converting to 64 bit to future proof SU.
But maybe SU is the exception from the rule and wouldn't in anyway benefit from being 64bit.
I would have thought that this process would be ongoing at some low level at least. The first thing that I thought about when I heard Trimble had bought it was that they really have to make SU able to handle files with dense geometry better now.
I and other professionals use many different 3d software that is 64 bit and doesn't have the kind of problems SU has with 'more geometry'. Why is that?
I know J. Bacus have said that: "Access to memory is not the bottleneck in SketchUp where 'more geometry' is concerned."
If it isn't then please tell us what the bottleneck is and fix it.By the way, how many developers are they? Does anyone know?
Those of you who were at Basecamp maybe have a clue.Is there anyway to run some diagnostics in the background that if SU runs out of memory makes a dump of all running processes and memory used at that point?
When these crashes appeared I didn't get a bugsplat I simply got that popup and another with "The application has unexpectedly closed". And it was gone. -
@pixero said:
A worrying thing is that it seems they haven't even started converting to 64 bit to future proof SU.
But you'll never need more than 640k, applications will never be too big for a handful of 720k floppies, or manage to fill up a 40MB hard drive, or...
-
Well.. in this thread, at least I finally heard the reason why in 2014 a.c. there's still no x64.
Two man years is (in other words ~$200K, or what is a typical programmer's salary at Google BTW?) too unbearable 'loss' for Google\Trimble.
Unbelievable! -
@hieru said:
A good point well made. 64 bit can take a flying leap if subD, quads and proper UV mapping is in the works.
Don't count on it:
@unknownuser said:
jbacus @jbacusfrom Twitter02 Mar
SU isn't a quad modeler. Nor is it more likely to become one in the future than it is to become an aardvark. Why must it?
jbacus @jbacusfrom Twitter02 Mar
SU isn't a sub-d modeler. Nor is it more likely to become one in the future than it is to become an aardvark. Why must it?
-
From what I have seen (working with other software companies) the real issue is a 64-bit Mac version -- converting the PC side of things seems to be very simple by comparison, whereas the Mac side requires essentially a full rewrite.
This is also why the latest version of formZ (beta
was specific in mentioning that they had added not only quads/subD capabilities, but also full 64-bit Mac version.In the past it has been mentioned that the SketchUp team is anti-PC (or pro-Mac if you want to look at that way) -- so they may be reluctant to give the PC version features they are unwilling to give the Mac side.
As far as I am concerned the only real issue with SketchUp is that Bacus is in charge of its development. As long as that is true the software and I (and it seems the rest of the 3D world) will continue to go in different directions.
Those of you who are happy with the status quo are just setting yourself up for bigger issues later down the line.
-
That's too bad Pixero.
I can't really make sense of Bacus' attitude. The fact that Sketchup users repeatedly request features offered by competing 3D apps should be reason enough to consider adding them.
Presumably if users don't like the development roadmap, they should just stop using Sketchup - is that the gist of things?
-
@hieru said:
Presumably if users don't like the development roadmap, they should just stop using Sketchup - is that the gist of things?
the main problem with that is that there is no development roadmap.. not publicly available at least.. they're entirely too secretive about the future of sketchup. (imo)
-
I tend to think they are very forthcoming with what's planned generally.
Remember the 'what's your most needed fix?' thing they ran a few years back? I'd say the top 6 annoyances are now addressed.
We've just morphed into a different type of user since that has has an insatiable appetite for more, more, more.
-
@rich o brien said:
I tend to think they are very forthcoming with what's planned generally.
Remember the 'what's your most needed fix?' thing they ran a few years back? I'd say the top 6 annoyances are now addressed.
We've just morphed into a different type of user since that has has an insatiable appetite for more, more, more.
hmm.. yeah, maybe.. i guess the thing with that is none of my personal top 6 annoyances were addressed
idk, if you look at my wishlist postings over the years, none of them are 'give me more'.. they're always 'fix this on mac'
to be perfectly honest, i don't expect anything out of sketchup which isn't already available.. i have in the past but after a few letdowns, resigned to the position of "ok, how about just fixing some of the UI problems".. but even then, i can't get any of that stuff heard/discussed much less addressed.. and these aren't strictly just my opinions -- some of the stuff is just flat out faulty.
i mean, i don't think i'm just ranting(?) about it.. i really feel like i've been patient and civil and tried raising my concerns through decent channels with thought out explanations etc.. and nothing.. nada.
so yeah, maybe i'm a little bitter these days or i might make a flippant remark- "the devs ignore the users etc" but i don't think i've come to these conclusions without reason.[EDIT] hah- well that's heading in the direction of me repeating the same thing i said last year.. i'm not doing that again.. i don't care enough anymore to go through that again.. i really don't
-
@jeff hammond said:
the main problem with that is that there is no development roadmap.. not publicly available at least.. they're entirely too secretive about the future of sketchup. (imo)
Maybe they are soo secrative because otherwise the competition would copy their upcoming new linetool...where you can draw a line from point B to A.
-
I think the thing here is that last week i sat and had a beer and a chat with some of the dev dudes and the common theme was 'the team is growing'.
bigger numbers means more done. we'll probably never know the extent the google years had on su development but my guess is that any forward momentum during that period was pretty much static.
-
I'm with you Jeff,
I have put long lists of suggestions and wishes on the forum over the years, and, like, most of them were modifying existing features as opposed to looking for new ones.
And, like you, I have been almost completely discouraged by the lack of anything ever happening.
Though I must say that I have been very pleasantly surprised by Marc Durant being so engaged with my Layout suggestions; it sounds as if that might actually result in meaningful changes to the software.
And, quite frankly, the last 3 updates to SU have anemic at best and downright laughable pathetic at worst. I, too, have wondered if there is either a lack of leadership, or misguided leadership at the top and this, coupled with perhaps not a great corporate support structure, leads to paltry releases with no movement on core improvements. And the iPad viewer they released? laughably useless. So so much for that getting much better any time in the future...And no real face making real-time sections? It's not like we are asking for the earth here...
It is, without a doubt, completely and utterly ridiculous that they don't have a 64 bit version in the pipeline. That list of processes you posted a couple of days ago was pretty painful to see...
-
@unknownuser said:
For Mac OS X 10.6, Apple has started recommending developers to build their applications 64-bit. The main reason is that there is a small speed increase due to the extra registers on Intel CPU's, all their machine offerings have been 64-bit since 2007, and there is a cost for reading all the 32-bit libraries into memory if everything else is 64-bit. If you want to follow this advice, there is only one choice, 64-bit Cocoa.
just quoting...
-
@jeff hammond said:
the main problem with that is that there is no development roadmap.. not publicly available at least.. they're entirely too secretive about the future of sketchup. (imo)
We might not know what is on the roadmap, but Jim Bacus' comments seem to clearly indicate some things that definitely are not.
As Rich says, our needs have evolved over time and I think most of us here at SCF (and in the 3D community as a whole) want more than just a user friendly programme that only gets used for sketching things out in 3D.
It's one thing to claim that SU doesn't need to be 64 - I can appreciate the difficulties and arguments for not doing so - but it's almost unforgiveable for Bacus to seemingly bury his head in the sand and ignore how the usage of Sketchup has evolved.
-
@driven said:
just quoting...
heh.. shoulda put the release date of 10.6 so those unfamiliar with osx would have a time reference..
10.6 was released in 2009(also shouldn't have snipped the quote so soon.. the part about making applications 64bit so users can enjoy thumbnails with graphic displays of what's in the file)
this part is fictional.. the quote doesn't really include that. -
"this community is only a drop in the ocean compared to the multiple millions of active SketchUp users in the world, and I very much doubt that anywhere near even 5% of world-wide Pro users would see tangible gains from adding 64-bit support"
Andrew[/quote]Andrew, I would disagree on several points here. First, while the active users from here may be 'a drop in the bucket' consider that many in the rest of the ocean are people who have the free version installed and are modeling things for fun from their basements. For many of us here, Sketchup is our bread and butter. It is a tool in our business plan. The type of users represented here are your biggest evangelists, scripters, salesman, and customers - though small by percentage. By ignoring them for the vast ocean, you may slowly loose some of your greatest assets. Furthermore, if you really are aspiring to compete with the 'big boys' as it relates to BIM and IFC, you simply cannot ignore the 64X issue. Not developing 64X sounds like a dollars and cents decision, which may, in the long run, prove to be short sighted. Not going to 64X may also be tipping the hand as to who the intended user base is, and it seems that may not be many of us here.
Second, I seriously doubt only 5% of users would realize the performance improvement. Anyone working on a large architectural model is familiar with the perfromance issues especially with terrain. If this isn't an issue, why does almost every Basecamp have sessions on working with large complex models?
-
@jdagen said:
Second, I seriously doubt only 5% of users would realize the performance improvement. Anyone working on a large architectural model is familiar with the perfromance issues especially with terrain. If this isn't an issue, why does almost every Basecamp have sessions on working with large complex models?
And when it comes down to it, they aren't actually that large or complex. Just more complex than a few cubes. Other 3D apps can munch through high poly models but sketchup still does not. I don't understand why and don't claim to be a computer guru, but it's getting to the point where many of us are exhausting the possibilities of SketchUp and don't care for it any more. I really can't see what significant improvements have been made in terms of poly count. Same old SketchUp; you open up a few trees and it freezes!
-
@otb designworks said:
... And the iPad viewer they released? laughably useless. So so much for that getting much better any time in the future...And no real face making real-time sections? It's not like we are asking for the earth here...
...
A $9.99 viewer at that.
Yet AutoDesk continues to develop and refine their mobile 3D app FormIt. Sure it's target user is the Revit group but nothing stopping a non revit user from using it. I believe obj and stl exports are coming soon.
-
I don't believe that the inference engine can be used as an excuse -- formZ has a very similar inference engine (which by the way allows you to choose which parts it will snap to, or not, anytime you want).
I'm not sure there is an excuse beyond the desire to make SketchUp cater to the lowest common denominator users (hardware-wise)... and I don't view that as a desirable thing either, but I think Bacus does.
-
@olishea said:
Other 3D apps can munch through high poly models but sketchup still does not. I don't understand why...
Maybe one reason is the inference engine, because this is the main thing that separates sketchup from other 3D apps. This would be the only point i can think of why SU is still at the level of what other apps where maybe 15 years ago. But even then there should have been some kind of progress over the last years... maybe at least doubling the performance
(where other apps can maybe hold 10-100 times more today - depending on the RAM and video card and display mode)But the inference engine can't be an excuse for the slowest saving function i have ever worked with.
Btw. i really don't understand why SU hasn't at least got a bounding box mode for objects long time ago...
And concerning the "drop in the ocean" comparison i really would like to see some statistics as a proof. Where are the numbers from? Counting the downloads of the free version? Sold licences?
I think almost every serious SU user sooner or later will find his way to this forum (there are already 261.151 accounts). And i think the majority of the other users will be free users. And like others said, maybe these people would want the same like all these shameless power users - if they ever knew it would be possible. And then there are the people who never used SU because of the lack of high poly support...@rich o brien said:
We've just morphed into a different type of user since that has has an insatiable appetite for more, more, more.
I would say that 3D as a whole has evolved a lot within the last 10 years - but SU...
Advertisement