This could have been the future of sketchup?....
-
Dang.
It's times like this when you really realize how stagnant and less than impressive SU is getting. It has gone from one of the most amazing things I have seen on a computer to poorly updated, limited feature set, and poorly coded for using modern equipment.
It is almost depressing.
And can you image how poor SU would seem if we didn't have all of these amazing and inventive Ruby scriptors? In all seriousness, if it wasn't for everyone who is not Google who makes the SU experience what it is (and I am way way including Coen and Gaieus and everyone else who made this forum so fantastic) I would have probably already moved on to different softwares.
I mean, no meaningful updates to the Mac side of things in over a year, and this is with SU being fundamentally flawed on the Mac side. I notified tech support 2 days after SU 6 released that animations exported in ver 6 were unusable because of terrible z-fighting type corruptions and it still hasn't been fixed! I am still doing all my animation exports in ver 5!! I can't tell you how awesome it is knowing I have one of the most powerful computers around and I have to boot SU through Rosetta and use only one core for exporting.
Jeez, writing this almost makes me want to go check out Revit again, as much as it pains me to admit it. I think we all knew it when it happened that Google buying SU was not a good thing, but experience, unfortunately, has proven to be even worse than I imagined.
I mean, look at the progress on Layout, hahaha.
And they give us some stupid, useless for a pro user, Style builder. I use SU every single day and I have not even downloaded that bit of useless fluff.
Can anyone tell that I haven't had my coffee yet?
-rant off-
-
-
-
I have to admit I am disappointed, as a one-time poster boy for SketchUp (don't ask!), about the lack of significant extension of the software. People pay me to do SketchUp and my SketchUp class is still occasionally over-subscribed, but for my own projects I'm spending time with other software.
But you know, AutoDesk makes my skin crawl. I had a dream the other night where President McCain supported AutoDesk-sponsored legislation requiring all architecture to be "BIM-compliant"...and "BIM" meant Revit. And then they made the legislation retroactive, so that any building that had not been made with Revit had to be imploded.
After that it got really scary: the President of AutoDesk, Inc. took over the US Government in a bloody coup televised live on CNN. It turned out that she was in fact a human/marsupial hybrid, with a pouch and kangaroo-type feet. All non-marsupial citizens were required to submit to radical surgery that would equip them with pouches, or else they would be subject to euthanasia without trial...
-
Wow, such hate for AutoDesk
Why? They are no different from MS, Adobe or even Apple! They ALL buy up the little guys!As for the lack of updates and growth of SU I seem to recall the joy of when it was announced on the old forum that Google was buying and there was an almost unanimous cheer that "at least it wasn't autodesk". I myself wondered what Google would bring to the table and path did they intend for SU. At least if a CAD company bought SU that it might continue to grow in that field. I feel freer to voice this now that the forums are not run by Google. I guess we'll see what comes of SU7. Perhaps if I don't expect much we'll get a surprise
-
Nowadays I have the same feeling with Sketchup I had in the nineties with the Commodore Amiga.
The Amiga was wonderful hardware back then (definitely compared to the PC's )...but that wasn't enough to keep development going.
I would hate seeing Sketchup die a slow death like that. -
@unknownuser said:
Nowadays I have the same feeling with Sketchup I had in the nineties with the Commodore Amiga.
The Amiga was wonderful hardware back then (definitely compared to the PC's )...but that wasn't enough to keep development going.
I would hate seeing Sketchup die a slow death like that.....
why revit and AD commonly(they like MS - only make the money...)?
look at some revi-forums/i saw some artistic death.../
but i think that no reason to pannic/AD will not buy SU from Google//// -
@kwistenbiebel said:
Nowadays I have the same feeling with Sketchup I had in the nineties with the Commodore Amiga.
The Amiga was wonderful hardware back then (definitely compared to the PC's )...but that wasn't enough to keep development going.
I would hate seeing Sketchup die a slow death like that.I hope this doesn't happen either but as long as my copy keeps working
I would hope that if Google did let it die that they would at least take offers to buy it and keep it going. -
I'm putting my hopes on 7 as well (6 reminds me of autocad rel 13). If they're dashed (my hopes that is :`) I'll be looking for a program to carry on with large models after sketching them in SU5.
-
I don't know if the film itself was anything special. Everybody knows that nice things can be achieved with software if you have the hardware to do it. Still-look at the slow regeneration when the "realism" is turned on at the near-end of the film. The thing is clearly pre-texturing the environment, just like a video game. The same might happen if the new renderer for SU, developed by someone, or something similar, ever gets done. And it was essentially a rendering app, not a modeller. Someone had still to have modelled all that in Revit. And the commercial product will cost something that only film studios and the like can afford.
I have no problem of using Autodesk software - I do it daily - if I don't have to pay for it myself. I still think i know AutoCad better than SU. But the established user base and their bias toward corporate clients makes it difficult for Autodesk to do anything radical and new, let alone free.
This is what makes me afraid for SU too. Remember the whining with the changes in v.6? So anything new Google brings to SU will also raise a storm of protest: Raise the minimum specs? Double the price?
I always seem to find myself an apologist for Google, but I still have not seen another software suited for designing my humble 3D architectural objects with a better interface. Blob architecture is no longer ร la mode, and my clients wouldn't care for it anyway (not that it is easy to make in any of the BIM packages either).
Professional renderers might see this differently, but I understand that the use of SU among them for modelling (for projects without a BIM model supplied bu the client) is still rather in the increase than declining-even among users of behemoths like Maya or Max
Sorry about my incoherent ramblings
Anssi
-
Gee,
Its a bit sad reading through these posts...I don't even feel like saying I told you so.
The overwhelming concensus is that SU is heading down the gurgler.I would love to think that SU7 [there is such a thing?] will prove us all wrong but I doubt it....my guess is that it will converge with the free version [almost has anyway] and be heavily biased to Gooogle Earth. And then that's it!
I have always had the theory that Brad sold out after SU hit a developmental brick wall....nothing much more can be done without a complete re-write.
Stu
-
I'm not sure how you can suggest that nothign else can be done withotu a rewrite stu, you only have tog lance at the ruby forum to see there is a lot of exciting thigns that could be added as fully fledged features.
-
Since Viz is now officially dead, and 3DSMax Design also claims photorealistic realtime views... am anxious to see it, but it will be a month before the beta comes out.
But as KB's video link shows... Revit is indeed where our firm will probably need to go.
bye bye SU, loved ya.
-
i don t care and i don t know what u deeply think,but i m very satisfied with SU since i discovered it,and i get better for each model that i build in it(my opinion)
Of cource i don t get my bread with it,yet,but i would like to;maybe for this u search others better softwares.The market is big u jsut have to chose,i made my choice
-
Well, Modelhead, good for you!
Unfortunatly the SU ArcVis community that that once formed the core user base wont be so happy and will be looking elsewhere. So be it.
-
@unknownuser said:
@unknownuser said:
almost has anyway] and be heavily biased to Gooogle Earth. And then that's it!
Yes, My guess is that you are right and if so, Bravo!
Seems to me that's where the meat is anyway in terms of application and income. The Google Earth facility is what really got me off the ground. It provided me exposure for free with a few people that needed help with projects. They got in touch and wala!! I have work. I now have models in "Best of Google"..ok, no big deal, but my customers in the Barrie area are very impressed with this sort of thing and it continues to generate emails/enquiries and work. I will continue to build on Google Earth because this has become a very inexpensive and powerful (in terms of reach) sales tool for me. I hope the new release provides an even tighter relationship with GE.
Cheers!!
I am perhaps very confused about Google Earth. If you read the actual licensing agreement, they are very explicit that any product you might derive from using GE can not be distributed to anyone, for any purpose. They go so far as to say that, if you use GE in a professional environment (and by use they mean for your own personal use only) you must purchase the GE Pro, which is $400/year. However, this Pro license does not give you any permission to distribute, publish, place on web, etc, anything you have produced with GE. GE doesn't even own the rights to the satellite imagery. GE says you must apply, via snail mail (!) for permission for each individual use of any product you derive from GE.
Quite frankly, I have operated under the assumption that GE was a tool I absolutely could not use, since I could not distribute anything. What on Earth (no pun intended
)is the point if you can't distribute it?So, how did you obtain this permission? Do you have a special arrangement with Google? Do you use screen shots or flyover animation generated in GE for the media you distribute?
Have I completely misunderstood GE's licensing agreement? There is a whole subforum on GE's website that is stuffed full of threads about this.
I am very interested in this, and I would appreciate your input.
-
I use SU extensively and I make a living with assistance from SU, do doubt about it.
But, as a creative person who is always trying to learn new techniques and expand my knowledge base, I want to expect that same thirst for improvement in the people who make my softwares.
It is major decision when one is deciding whether to learn a new software, or not, or to decide to switch softwares. I want to know that people who are doing the developing are concerned with the same things I am.
A great example of this is Cheetah3D. A one man creation, but with regular and excellent upgrades; a proven track record of requesting suggestions and then implementing them, and a very friendly and knowledgeable forum. It is exciting to be in some way involved with a software that is really going somewhere interesting.
I no longer have that feeling of excitement about where SU is going, If it wasn't for the ruby guys, there would be almost nothing exciting to talk about, other than creative work-arounds for apparent limitations of the software.
I can probably say that another year or so from now, if there have been no impressive improvements on the Mac side of things, that I will be force to look for different solutions that are keeping up with modern hardware and client sophistication.
I mean, come on, SU can't even utilize multiple cores. I mean, really? How long have multi core computers been available. And isn't 3D graphics on of those fields where more is certainly better? More cores, more ram, faster processors, etc. SU starts to feel a bit archaic when you think about it.
-
Am I missing something?
-
Thanks for the reply.
I can see how what you are doing is covered by the agreement. In fact, what you are doing is helping GE and is probably what they want, ie: the free population of the GE environment with 3D models.
I am sure that there is some sort of infringement in the case that someone is using the GE information to obtain bids, as this is way outside the parameters of "for your use only".
Since there is no media distribution then there is no infringement, though the second you printed of a copy of a screen shot and gave it to a co-worker, that is in violation.
Unfortunately, since I am in the visualization and presentation business, and all I do is generate product for distribution, GE is completely useless and a waste of time for me, which is a bummer because I would love to integrate some sexy GE animation into my product.
Instead, I have to manually generate a terrain map that is similar (don't tell anyone but sometimes I might accidentally use GE for reference looks over shoulders), purchase a high resolution satellite image, which is not cheap BTW, and drape the image on the TIN. And then make the animation.
-
@remus said:
I'm not sure how you can suggest that nothign else can be done withotu a rewrite stu, you only have tog lance at the ruby forum to see there is a lot of exciting thigns that could be added as fully fledged features.
You have said finally the right words we all need to hear. We seem to have many people putting all their hopes on SU7, and sadly, that is not the right thing to do. Instead on waiting on official updates and content, this is time when the user comes in an can add in features to the Sketchup. As Remus said, there is still room to grow in scripting in Sketchup, and even more uncharted territory for custom applications and add ons. Look at how Podium has come along, think of the other possibilities that we can accomplish!
It is sad to see a thread like this, i see much complaining about a program that is still in its youth, and has much room to grow in terms of features and ad dons. Perhaps instead of complaining about SU, why not instead think of new ways to add our own custom content and add ons to Sketchup, its not impossible.
To sum up: this is time when we su users come in and make the program to our liking
Advertisement