This could have been the future of sketchup?....
-
Personally I believe Google needs to keep the free version as it is and upgrade the pro version with all the meaty bits, that way there can be a free version for populating GE and possibly have a gmax export facility for game modders. And the pro version will then be more enticing for folks who are serious users to take the leap, with the increased sales of the pro version they can develop SU even further and better.
-
Yes, Google Earthers may well outnumber architects/designers these days. I'm not decrying Google Earth...if I saw a business opportunity in there for FormFonts, we'd be in there quick as a shot, just like yourself. (We've already looked at and dismissed Second Life)
But I don't think the demands placed on the program for modelling comparatively simple meshes for GE and games levels would be sufficient to drive it much beyond where it is right now. I don't mean people like yourself who use GE as a kind of 3D portfolio or billboard to generate "real" design work...if I can put it that way. I mean people who's output never gets beyond a relatively simple GE model. How many of them are driving for extra features or developing Ruby scripts etc?
I expect to see the two versions actually getting further apart in terms of operability and output.
-
I certainly hope that there develops a large difference between the free and pro versions.
A free software doesn't really pay for its own development. $500 for the pro version is steal, as far as I am concerned, especially when you factor in all of the free rubys, components, and help you get, too.
That being said, I would have complained bitterly if Google had charged for V6, as it is not a fully functional release, at least on the Mac side of things. Especially when looking at the complete lack of development of Layout after its release, it is pretty obvious that Google just pushed out whatever they happened to have somewhat ready, without much of a commitment to finishing what they started.
Out of sight, out of mind?
I hope not, and I would be the first to admit my misinterpretation of the circumstances, should that be necessary.
-
I think the only thing we want is sincerity.
Say the truth and compromise.It has not been achieved here yet.
Next time they come they should have it clear.
-
@alan fraser said:
But if there was effectively no difference between the Pro version and the Free version, who would bother to buy the product at all. ...as opposed to the Google Earth and gaming community?...
Personally, I think that would sign the death warrant for the program, beyond its use as a GE adjunct or a level-builder.Hmmm, interesting observation, considering that many free sketchup users move on up to the pro version. Myself started off in the basic version, and after a while i moved up to the pro version. Right now, i am offering up an export service for those who cannot afford the pro version, which is okay and all, and a good way to earn some money possibly.
However, i am not too keen on being inundated with models other people expect me to export other programs for further use, when it could be simply done by themselves at the click of mouse.
Yes Sketchup free and pro should remain separate, but at the same time, let some of the options like exporting features be made purchasable, at least.
-
@unknownuser said:
Yes, Google Earthers may well outnumber architects/designers these days. I'm not decrying Google Earth...if I saw a business opportunity in there for FormFonts, we'd be in there quick as a shot, just like yourself. (We've already looked at and dismissed Second Life)
@unknownuser said:
Personally I believe Google needs to keep the free version as it is and upgrade the pro version with all the meaty bits, that way there can be a free version for populating GE and possibly have a gmax export facility for game modders. And the pro version will then be more enticing for folks who are serious users to take the leap, with the increased sales of the pro version they can develop SU even further and better.
I agree with Pete. There needs to be a clear distinction between free SU and the pro version. It is quite annoying to me (and I'm sure others) that having bought a pro license for commercial work there seems to be little development by Google of the pro app.
On the Google earth side, yes I am interested in the virtual worlds market, I have some Google Earth clients, but as a regular reader of this blog by phd students who do research in this field I think that Google Earth and Second life are likely to be overtaken by the competition such as Twinity.
http://digitalurban.blogspot.com/
Google's policies and restrictions on Google Earth make it very difficult to offer a commercial modelling service but that is the only practical way to populate it!SU could become irrelevant if its focus becomes all about Google Earth.
-
You can already get a mesh from the free version to 3ds via Media Machines.
It imports kmz and exports 3ds and Maya. However, the question remains, why should Pro users both pay for the software and drive its development for the benefit of people who do neither?
The huge Poser community is of a similar nature to the gaming community. In fact there is probably a great deal of overlap. Like any other modders they generally don't do it on a commercial basis...but they still don't expect to get the software for free.
GMax is not really a valid comparison. It's the free...and considerably scaled down version of a very expensive piece of software. SketchUp Pro, on the other hand, is not only very reasonably priced, it is already little different from the free version...without any further concessions. -
@alan fraser said:
You can already get a mesh from the free version to 3ds via Media Machines.
It imports kmz and exports 3ds and Maya. However, the question remains, why should Pro users both pay for the software and drive its development for the benefit of people who do neither?
The huge Poser community is of a similar nature to the gaming community. In fact there is probably a great deal of overlap. Like any other modders they generally don't do it on a commercial basis...but they still don't expect to get the software for free.
GMax is not really a valid comparison. It's the free...and considerably scaled down version of a very expensive piece of software. SketchUp Pro, on the other hand, is not only very reasonably priced, it is already little different from the free version...without any further concessions.Some good points, and i agree, there is overlap. Hopefully, these issues can get resolved one day, seeing that sketchup is too good of a program to overlook. At anyrate, it has come to my attention that i will need to gather some people with knowledge with programming, and see if we can close this gap in one form or another.
BTW, thank you for providing the link, this will be very useful if it can perform all the functions as sketchups 3DS exporting option can do.
-
But MY LORD that photo-realistic modelling video looked HOT.
Just saying.
-
I think if they focus on two areas and forget about the 'advanced user' qualms (I mean how many people actually use SU for that high of a poly-count without having to switch to AutoCAD or Revit to produce some actual working drawings first?) they will have a winner -
- Simplicity (with the ability to model with haste) in modelling and GUI.
- Good looking 'somewhat quirky' presentation.
If you strip all the other cr@p back, that's what it all comes down to - it's the only reason to use SU in the end. We don't need it for working drawings, photo-realism, or advanced Maya-type modelling capabilities. We need what the program has always given us, a simple tool set and the ability to design in perspective with the added bonus of it being a useful client/design interface. Don't get me wrong, I use it everyday, and I want to use Revit as little as possible (ugly, designing in ortho? Come on! What's the point in that?)
Plus, lets not forget that as SU users we are the great 'work-around' type of people anyway. If we weren't, we'd all be sitting on Revit right now (well, I am anyway, but that's not the point). So whatever new tools we are given, I'm gonna wager that we will use them in creative ways that they weren't intended for anyway...
-
@-rich- said:
I think if they focus on two areas and forget about the 'advanced user' qualms (I mean how many people actually use SU for that high of a poly-count without having to switch to AutoCAD or Revit to produce some actual working drawings first?) they will have a winner -
- Simplicity (with the ability to model with haste) in modelling and GUI.
- Good looking 'somewhat quirky' presentation.
Simplicity + good looking somewhat 'quirky' presentation?:
-
@sk.lion said:
...when it could be simply done by themselves at the click of mouse....
.obj exporter already exists for GSU6Free... If you're making money doing it for them, you're smarter than they are on several levels.
-
I refuse to get excited about AutoDesk products, and also refuse to believe that they are really a credible threat to SU at the moment. Even if this Newport technology was developed and released, how much would it cost? Also remember Autodesk's legendary appalling customer service, licensing and over-pricing. With AutoCAD, they were selling the same old obsolete bloated software for over 20 years! They just kept adding bells and whistles and ramping up the price each year. They have copied features from all the more innovative companies, a couple of years too late.
Things which characterise Autodesk applications in my experience are high price, crappy support, indifference to users, frequent expensive updates adding marginal usability, proprietary formats, feature bloat, overly-complex UI and workflow, unintuitive usability and steep learning curve.
Regarding SU, I have no idea what V7 will bring. I have gleaned though that some at Google are a little concerned that the free and Pro versions are too similar and want to make a bigger difference. They are totally committed to the Mac platform (and also to developing some apps to run on Linux), so whatever happens to the Windows version shouldn't affect Mac users too much.
Google do worry me as developers. Yes they have brought some really interesting (and free) things out, but it stays in beta seemingly forever, and customer support appears to me only marginally more responsive than AutoDesk's. Most worryingly, there is no commercial pressure to improve the product as there was when @Last owned it. Google have so much money that they only need SU to drive Google Earth, which potentially is their biggest source of potential revenue. They don't need SU to make money or even be as good as it is. As a company they strike me as being (corporately) very talented but fat, lazy and lacking in focus. My view of Autodesk is somewhat less flattering...
Despite this, I'm not worried in the short term. SU is still far easier to use and much more fun than anything else. I'm sorry but I'm not at all impressed with Autodesk's Newport technology. Most of that stuff you can do with SU already - sort of. By the time Newport comes out I would guess that you will be able to do it all.
I haven't seen a realtime render engine that can produce good enough quality yet, and if Autodesk release it, it's not going to be affordable or intuitive. Texture baking in SU should be way better IMO.
Also, has anyone modelled in SU and imported into Vectorworks to create 'proper' sections? Fantastic! If we get a plugin to draw building components in SU with IFC classes it will get better still, almost BIM. Some of the Ruby gurus here should be able to do that fairly easily I would have thought.
Also COLLADA support will come, as will comprehensive integrated design stage energy analysis with Energy+. Plus low cost and support for a lot of high-end render engines.
So, I agree with Alan, reports of SU's premature death are greatly exaggerated.
-
@bigstick said:
Things which characterise Autodesk applications in my experience are high price, crappy support, indifference to users, frequent expensive updates adding marginal usability, proprietary formats, feature bloat, overly-complex UI and workflow, unintuitive usability and steep learning curve.
What an excellent description!Regards
Mr S. -
I'm not knocking the 3d warehouse -there are fantastic models in there, I'm talking about the time scale required to populate Google Earth with models of a certain standard.
Google Earth is an amazing tool too, but should it be the focus of SU development?
-
Ok....Sketchup as a Google earth tool....mmmm.
Actually, in the last three years I installed Google Earth three times and uninstalled it, some hours later, three times as well.
Sure, GE is fun as a play for some minutes...but after that I still can't find any real use for it.
Good though that it is more to you, Modelhead, and that it actually makes you some money. -
@unknownuser said:
think if they focus on two areas and forget about the 'advanced user' qualms (I mean how many people actually use SU for that high of a poly-count without having to switch to AutoCAD or Revit to produce some actual working drawings first?) they will have a winner
Rich
I imagine there is a significant proportion of SU pro users who are sole traders and small businesses. There is no Revit license in my office. Yes I do use CAD for working drawings but that's not the point. @Last marketed SU as an affordable simple tool for architectural work, Google are not honouring this. Not all architecture involves high poly models, but you can build big models with SU and the potential is there to improve upon this. I don't consider myself an advanced user, but I am a professional user, so I did the right thing and bought a pro license.@unknownuser said:
If the earth itself is one big round mesh with thousands of cells and each cell can be divided into cells and those cells again to a fine granularity then what a great collective relational database we have. So then it follows that we can place everything there and it will remain there in geographical context.
There was nothing altruistic about giving SU away for free. As the new SU slogan says "Model the world" and google expect volunteers to do this. But you only have to look at some of the lack lustre models in the 3d warehouse to see that the quality and accuracy of the virtual world that is being created is potentially not as good as the competition and has limited potential as an accurate design tool.
-
@unknownuser said:
Am I the only guy here that can see a use for a personal Google Earth Server??
No that sounds great.
-
@kwistenbiebel said:
Simplicity + good looking somewhat 'quirky' presentation?:
Ha ha awesome. But no I was referring to the 'sketchy' outputs that proved so popular there for a while...
-
I don't post very much on this forum, I was actually browsing around for a plugin. .. and I fell upon this thread. I am sad to be reading these posts because it tells me that I am not the only one who has not been thrilled to ride the Google "owner ship". I have been an SU user since V2 and have loved it. It got me 3D modeling and away from ACAD. I went to the BaseCamp in Boulder and was blown away by all the stuff they were proposing for future versions. Layout ( or Grizzly) as it was called--which I never use-- notwithstanding. that being said, Phat Walls, and other scripts were pretty exciting stuff. But the innovation and development just havent come around. I TEACH SU for cryin' out loud and my students like it cuz they are doing 3D for the first time and they love it, and it's free but . ..I love SU. I love Podium but my work now is pushing meto toward MAX and VRAY. I am hearing that PODIUM 2 will rival VRAY. is this true TBD? Solo? Biebel?
Thanks to all of you ruby dudes and innovators who have made SU So much fun.David
Advertisement