This could have been the future of sketchup?....
-
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
-
The only way it seems to go is to take off from Google the remaining @lastpeople.
Come on you Google guys...
we are for them .
anybody listening ?
eim ?
-
It wouldn't seem so Juan.
Actually it's the fantastic Ruby work that is coming up that is putting Google's efforts to shame.
Why is it that some guy [for example] working between classes or after the kids have been put to bed can come up brilliant SU innovation while Google's best effort in a couple of years seems to be, the rather dated, 'sketchy edges'?
Maybe Google should give SU away altogether and go open source and leave it to the people who could really make a difference.
-
I have watched the video and read the posts here and need to add my proverbial two cents.
Sure that looks awesome even using the 'Big brother' rig with multiple quad cores and ram out the yaya, which is probably the standard rig when that product reaches it's first upgrade.
Does anyone remember seeing a Sketchup demo video?, I do and it blew me away too.
IMO they can imitate but not duplicate the excellent app we all have learned to love.I am not sure of Google's intentions with SU, but I am sure they realize the gem of a product they own and the potential it has now and in the future. It has stood tall with the 'big boys' and even earned their respect, there is no other product out there with the equal ease of use to result ratio which is available to everyone.
Sketchup is 3d for the people, and with the ruby possibilities also by the people.I have noticed a lot of people basing the future of SU on the next release, I think they may have overlooked something thats right in front of them....us!.
We have a rapidly growing site with new users joining daily (notice we passed 4000 users yesterday), with this growth comes a huge voice and a loud one, not only that, we also have very talented scripters and coders that has us more excited for the future of SU than version 7 with their smoothing, offsetting, lighting, layering, joint pulling, video texturing, instancing, etc rubies just released or still to come.Revit may be cool and for some it will be the answer, but for me, I am home right here as we have a community unlike any other with a true love for the product we congregate to celebrate. Long live SU, with or without Google we will grow.
(Inspired by Bill Pullman's speech as president in Independence day)
-
Solo,
I agree that SU users form a coherent community and that SU momentarily survives on the great efforts the script coding people make.However, SU won't survive just by Ruby scripts imho.
Yes, maybe for one more year....but you must agree that Sketchup will need some development (and I mean some hard coded changes to the core) to keep up with a changing hardware and software world.
It is not a question of bashing sketchup...it is a question of users being concerned about the future of their beloved Sketchup. -
Biebel
I agree with you that Google needs to overhaul the engine in order for this product to grow bigger and better, no coding can cure the polygon issue (which is a major concern) thats were Google needs to be involved, but I am not sure they can do it. I am not in the know as to what was retained when they bought SU from @last, but I do hope they have the designers nearby.
I would like to say that the whole style builder was a distraction but that would be unfair as because I have no need for it does not make it unneeded.
So in closing I agree with you and hope that the powers that be are watching these threads too, and maybe just maybe we get a surprise in version 7 with high polygon support, but lets not rest our allegiance to the possibility that we may not get our wishes answered. -
Read any architecture magazine or article where there is associated 3d generated images and you will see Sketchup mentioned. It is the defacto computer sketching program. Can it survive if the programmers don't upgrade and improve it NO...but what software can. SU may suffer from it own success IE: it is successful because of it's simplicity. and it's simplicity may hold it back from further success. As the demand for BIM or what ever it's called these days grows and the client and architectural firm owners knowledge and expectations for integration between 2d (CAD) work and 3d BIM grows so to will the expectation that the 3d software that their designers use is seamlessly integrated into the complete project time line through construction etc. SU has and will always be primarily a visualization and presentation tool. It is not BIM and may never be. As the BIM software packages slowly integrate the presentation and visualization capabilities of SU the need for SU will diminish. I am afraid that the Google purchase and emphasis on SU as a simplistic modeling app for Google Earth or 3d warehouse model production it's development as a professional architectural BIM tool has diminished. I for one have never used REVIT but it seems to be the wave of the future for Architects and AutoCAD seems to be the legacy app.
-
@solo said:
...there is no other product out there with the equal ease of use to result ratio which is available to everyone.
SketchUp is 3d for the people, and with the ruby possibilities also by the people.Having dabbled dabbled with many other 3D apps (and almost learned them) I can tell you this is the truth.
I've only gone through a few tuts, and this is by far the fastest, most versatile and easiest
3d app I've ever seen.No, it isn't 3DMax or Maya or Blender, but not everyone is looking for a Ferrari when all we need is a Ford.
So is there really going to be v7?
-
I cant see any reaosn why there wouldnt be V7. SUs good at the moment, but that certainly doesnt mean there's nothing to improve. High poly modeling for a start,ability yot use multiple cores etc. And as someone mentioned, you can't fix everythign with rubies.
-
I think the core problem is that SketchUp is only owned by Google because it provided an easy and cheap (free!) way to populate Goggle Earth. Google Earth is an important aspect of the Google Empire. SketchUp is just a handy little tool for them, nothing more. Google will work only on those aspects of it that help make Google Earth more popular.
It simply isn't in Googles interest to focus on developing the software in a way that will provide benefits to Architects, Woodworkers or any of the other minority interest users.
Google only wants tools that the masses can use. Adding more features, particularly powerful features, nearly always makes a program more complicated to use. This is the exact opposite of what Google wants. Google is well aware that people who want more powerful 3D solutions can find plenty of alternatives elsewhere. It will be more than happy for them to do so because these people are not its customer base. SketchUp does not make its owners any money so there is no real incentive to invest in its future. It does the job thats required of it now and if something else is required in the future then Google will simply buy the company (like @last) when needed.
Google has the money, people and resources available to improve SketchUp in ways that @last could only of dreamed of. Why haven't why the simple bugs been solved. Why hasn't DirectX been considered as an alternative to OpenGL? (Sorry, Mac owners!). I have seen many good suggestions made for improvements by other users.
Why haven't these things happened?
Mainly because, despite a fantastic and dedicated small team at Google (mostly the @last people?) and a loyal and passionate user base, there is no serious money to be made.As usual, it's all about the money.
Like a previous poster mentioned I was also a part of the Amiga community in its heyday.
That was supported by many great third party companies and the efforts of many individuals who created great software for free just like the Ruby scripters of today.
Despite all this the Amiga failed. There were many other different factors involved in that failure. But the main one was that the parent company failed to make money.Hopefully, I'm wrong. Maybe Google really does believe in "Don't be evil". Maybe they will want to make a great program a fantastic one. But the cynic in me doesn't really believe it.
In the same way that I loved and still have happy memories of the Amiga, I intend to use and enjoy SketchUp for as long as possible.
Regards
Mr S -
Ho-hum.
As Mark Twain once said "The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated." -
@alan fraser said:
Ho-hum.
As Mark Twain once said "The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated."Some people only need one sentence to make themself clear.
Great post Alan...and hopefully true.
Advertisement