Will there ever be a MAC version of Sketchyphysics?
-
Greetings everyone.
Just a question - will this amazing incredible software ever be available for MAC? Just a question. I really wish I could help but I am no coder, just a regular architect....
Also: what about putting in real architectural/physics? So that it could be used to test, say snowloads on roofs? That would be amazing.
Please advise
Best wishes to all from Berlin,
thinkbuild
-
Hi thinkbuild,
Have a look at this thread. Todd said he might be able to port
to Mac after Thanksgiving!
http://www.sketchucation.com/forums/scf/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=80When is Thanksgiving? If its past we can 'lean' on him, not too
hard though as he's a big Texas fellow
But also a pure Gentleman
so I imagine he will get around to it sometime.Mike
-
Well, (I think) that Thanksgiving is always the third Thursday of each November. So, the question is, was he referring to Thanksgiving 2007 or Thanksgiving 2008? Let's hope it was 2007, then, if we are lucky he'll think of it soon...
-
Its being actively worked on. I dont have an ETA yet but it will be much sooner than Thanksgiving.
Chris
-
Great news Chris! Thanks so much. I wish you well on this project which I am certain will be very appreciated by many of us.
Since you are tuned in to this thread, can you please tell me what is the current status of the "architecture/reality" simulation question? I know you have written elsewhere that the Newton SDK is not so precise (game engine core, etc.) and therefore SP isn't the best for this purpose, but still, I am curious about eventually using it for building design. Any thoughts on this? Or, perhaps, you could provide a link if this has been discussed elsewhere?
-
I think it would be too hard to get realistic results. For example I have no idea how to simulate a nail or a roof joint. It might look realistic but I wouldn't stake anyones life or reputation on the objects behaving the same way in the simulation and it real life.
-
That is great news. Thanks Chris.
Mike
-
Dear Chris,
For me, the idea of using SP wouldn't be to look at the binding characteristics of nails and other small level details using the physics of individual connections. Rather, I am interested in simulating somehow the overall physics of the structure. Years ago in grad school we used at the time some fancy software which modeled the vectors in structures. These models where extreme simplifications of the building. There were no nails or other little things, we just defined - as you seem to - the joints, saying it was, a pin or a whatever. Then, we would define:
- what the cross section of the element was, - the length - the load - the characteristic (how strong it is)and that's it. Then we would watch our little towers collapse. It was GREAT, simple, intuitive, and very very educational and helpful in developing a relationship with the buildings we were designing. This is what I am thinking - not to use the same model for creating visual "views" or simulations of what the building looks like and feels like - but instead, to use SP as a path for learning about other characteristics of the projects we are designing. I've never actually used SP until now (After all, I'm on a Mac...), but this is not so different I think from your defining solids routine, no?
What I am thinking is that, just like we architects often use high-poly models with fancy texture and light source definition, etc., to create super, competition-winning images of our designs, (which by the way are often total lies when it comes to the actual physics of the designs...;) - I'd love to eventually be able to create models in SP which have another purpose, that is, to explore the the physics - in simulation! of our projects as a step in the research which is design.
Jason
-
Great news, Chris!
Thanks and I am looking forward to using your great (I hear) plugin
Advertisement