SketchUP 8
-
During may, they temporarily had an unofficial version 7.2*, but it seems they prefered a higher number.
*** There appeared some models in 3D Warehouse that showed an error message requiring "7.2"**
-
@thomthom said:
@unknownuser said:
new engine that suport more heavy scenes: NO
7.1 came with an improved engine with better performance.
Hi thomas
"new" is diferent from "improved", and by "new" i mean a XXI century engine with multicore support for some stuff, 64 bits and at least with the shadow bug solved.
The multicore would be great for some calculations like intersect or animation export (why wait 15 minutes exporting a movie when you can what a hour and half...) or the worst part, the plugins (the only thing that keeps the SK beeing use professionally), some could probably also take advantage of that multicore suport. The 64 bits for more ram, more polygons, more and bigger images, more stuff in the screen at the same time. The "piece of resistance" (forgive my frenchglish...
) is, if i remember correctly, layout having multicore suport for some stuff because it was need it...ironic isn't it?Who would tough that in 2010 a old Pentium4 3.4 with 2-4 Gg of ram ddr would be as good (or even faster) than my home desktop with an i7 OC 3.2 with 6Gg DDR3 1600mhz or a any regular graphic worksation...Maybe Ebay still hame some Pentiums to sell, or the "recomended hardware for SK8" is a netbook ...
@bmike said:
@unknownuser said:
(i don't know if i should laugh or cry...)
and AMAZING!
The post i did 2 years ago still aplies here (http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14207&start=165#p107667
"This must be a joke...
For the ones saying this was a good release:New modeling tools: NO
new animation tools: NO
new uv maping tools: NO
new engine that suport more heavy scenes: NO
new engine that do better images and shadows: NO
new (even very basic) ways to simulate diferent light sources from the sun: NO"But to be fair, in modeling now we can do better bolean operations (too bad there's the script booltools...damn you Whaat
), in animation we now have a litle image preview (i don't even know what to say for this one...), and for maping we can now work even better with google earth (we all know how great quality and professional textures that gives us, unless we're doing it for google earth...is there even someone who does that for a living?).Soooo...2 years in development for this...lolol
Ha Ha Ha! Even the shadow bug is here too! HA HA HA HA!
This is just getting better and better
so, I guess you'll be spending your $$ on another program and moving on?
Why not simply donwload the free SK 8, donwload doblecad XT for helping with the dwgs exports and such if needed, buy boltools for 20$, and in the process suport guys like Whaat? Who do you think it's more important to support right now? Plugin developers, that are keeping this (still) alive, or Google, that don't care or respect the user needs unless it's Google earth related? and before you respond count how many plugins you ever used...
-
-
@unknownuser said:
Why not simply donwload the free SK 8, donwload doblecad XT for helping with the dwgs exports and such if needed, buy boltools for 20$, and in the process suport guys like Whaat? Who do you think it's more important to support right now? Plugin developers, that are keeping this (still) alive, or Google, that don't care or respect the user needs unless it's Google earth related? and before you respond count how many plugins you ever used...
I use a handful of plugins, many 'cookieware'.
I may end up buying 1001 bit tools, but I'm not finding it as useful as I thought for my workflow.I have access to AutoCAD architecture, so DoubleCAD is not needed, but is on my list for when / if I need it in the future.
I also use LayOut more and more, so having angle dimensions is something I could make use of.Is booltools as cleanly integrated as the solids tools?
Who are these users? What are there needs? A small vocal percentage that post on forums and mail lists? Or a vast majority that use the program in its simplest form?
Google owns it. It is likely that they will continue to develop it as they see fit.
What else is out there that is free (or low cost) - and would do what you want? -
I'll play devils advocate for just a second here. I'm very unimpressed/disappointed with SU development too..but..
Has anyone tried getting Maxon or Autodesk or Modo or any other giant modeler to add features like inferenceing or snaps or basic usable real world units? I bet you won't get very far with them either.
SU's future development is crystal clear as far as I'm concerned. Someone said earlier "google earth plugin", and I couldn't agree more. Until one of the other companies decides there is enough revenue to be generated by adding some SU like tools into their product line we are stuck with SU as it currently is.
Better learn to love it as is. Its not going anywhere.
-
@fossa said:
I'll play devils advocate for just a second here. I'm very unimpressed/disappointed with SU development too..but..
Has anyone tried getting Maxon or Autodesk or Modo or any other giant modeler to add features like inferenceing or snaps or basic usable real world units? I bet you won't get very far with them either.
I agree, as was sort of my point.
And, I don't think you can buy (or get for free) a Yugo and be pissed off when the 2010 model comes out that magically they haven't given it the handling and acceleration of a Porsche.
I can demand all I want from AutoDesk. I doubt they'll ever scale back their bloatware and come up with something very user friendly and intuitive any time soon.
The only luck I've had with getting specific changes to software has been with a 3rd party overlay to AutoCAD that I use (and its pricey to set up site licenses $$$$$$$$$!) - and that was when they were relatively small. Now that they cater to more than just a niche market - development for my specific industry has slowed. Its still there, but not what it used to be.
-
@fossa said:
I'll play devils advocate for just a second here. I'm very unimpressed/disappointed with SU development too..but..
Has anyone tried getting Maxon or Autodesk or Modo or any other giant modeler to add features like inferenceing or snaps or basic usable real world units? I bet you won't get very far with them either.
SU's future development is crystal clear as far as I'm concerned. Someone said earlier "google earth plugin", and I couldn't agree more. Until one of the other companies decides there is enough revenue to be generated by adding some SU like tools into their product line we are stuck with SU as it currently is.
Better learn to love it as is. Its not going anywhere.
Having been on the beta test process for several Autodesk products, I can say with 100% certainty that requests won't go unanswered. In one of them, they even personally emailed me for more information and how I would use it in my workflow.
As for SU, as I said before, I'm unimpressed with the circa 1980's physical look of the program and wish to heck they would have at least implemented x64. And as others have surmised, the future of SU is indeed in the plugin creators. It is you all that I look up and have great respect.
Rick
-
bmike,
@bmike said:..........I have access to AutoCAD architecture, so DoubleCAD is not needed,...........
Are you saying that AutoCad "Architect" can read and write SU's skp files? What release do you have access to? -
The worst thing in Google developpement process of SU, is that they maintain a big silence before each of their release for finally releasing just some powder (despite their mutiples polls) , making SU a google earth plugin !! Com'on, is that serious ?!!
-
@honoluludesktop said:
bmike,
@bmike said:..........I have access to AutoCAD architecture, so DoubleCAD is not needed,...........
Are you saying that AutoCad "Architect" can read and write SU's skp files? What release do you have access to?No, but i can import / export DWG and DXF as needed for my workflow.
I'm running Acad Architecture 2009.Is DoubleCad actually writing a SKP?
In 3D?
Turning ACAD Blocks into components?Might have to check that out...
-
@honoluludesktop said:
bmike,
@bmike said:..........I have access to AutoCAD architecture, so DoubleCAD is not needed,...........
Are you saying that AutoCad "Architect" can read and write SU's skp files? What release do you have access to?No, it cannot (and I have access to the latest releases). Revit can import SKP.
Anssi
-
a question.
if google decided to upgrade pushpull.
why not add more options? more complete
for example, to multiple faces pushpull
conical pushpull
pushpull within groups.to do user surveys? for what?
are very vague, .... no? -
Surprise
SU 8 Pro found all my keystrokes even when installed in different folder and installed in menus too.
Layout finally worth using and solids are "very solid" Heeee.
Improvements and new adds are all good to have.
Runs a bit faster too.IMO good value for $95 upgrade.
dtr
-
NOT impressed at all. I actually feel it slower than my 6 version(yes,i still use it).
The so much expected 7 let us with wishes unfilled , the 8 version,same... i have no more expectation from Google team but from Sketchucation's rubys developer team. GO,GO Sketchucation! -
We shouldn't expect anything from new software releases - except that the version number increases.
(
) -
The Google Motto, "Don't be evil"...
In v8 they, "Do a few good things"...
We hope, they "Do some more good stuff too..."
-
I don't understand why everyone is so down on the new version. Before I go on, though, let me say that I haven't yet used it, just watched the new features video.
Solid tools! I don't know how well bool tools works (congrats to Whaat for another awesome plugin either way) but integrated boolean operations and automatically created solids is a VERY good thing. I hope that 3rd party rendering software (here's looking at you, Thea) finds a way to import the solid property for calculating density (fog, SSS, dispersion, etc.)
Google Earth integration: we know that Google is focused on this and we would be getting improvements here no matter what, but these look actually useful. Normally I would have to remap a color image over the imported topo -- so this will save time and might be a little more accurate. Increased triangulation will be good as it used to get kind of dicey for closeups. As for making buildings (I know this already existed at some level) might be useful but I'd have to try it before really commenting on it. Still, overall this is a nice improvement.
Layout. I hated layout when it was first introduced and honestly haven't used it since. The new version does look nice, though -- specifically the examples they show. If sketchup can produce decent detail drawings (depends on the work-flow, though) then I'd be excited, especially as it can export (cleanly?) to autocad.
As for the "missing" items, how many of these really matter?
The shadow bug would have been nice to have fixed, but I never use SU output -- it's just so easy to get an unaltered "clay model" type image from Thea or whatever.64bit support? Would have been nice, I suppose, but how much would it have improved anything? Being able to load more into memory doesn't help because it's the inference engine that slows it down (and that makes SU so good -- a pharmakon, I suppose) and more loaded into the model would make it worse, not better.
Multi-core support? I would rather them spend time on openCL (screw CUDA and it's required hardware) since almost the entire SU user base probably has a decent graphics card not to mention that a proper GPU can be vastly more powerful than an extra core or two (try smallluxgpu to see an impressive, real-world comparison).
Animation? At some point it's better to have multiple programs than one that does everything -- especially when blender is free, easy to import to, and already has powerful animation (3ds for you rich people, I suppose
Basic other light sources would have been nice, as would proper UV mapping but as with the previous comment, they're are other programs that doe that -- I would like them to get integrated sometime soon, though.
One thing I haven't heard people mention that I am disappointed with is that they didn't clean up dynamic blocks. That seemed like it had potential but had been awkwardly implemented so that it made it easier (most of the time) to continue doing without it.
I had pretty low expectations and am VERY glad they didn't waste their time improving styles (does ANYONE use styles? With one or two exceptions they look unprofessional -- and those exceptions are people gifted enough to come up with awesome product with whatever tool -- NOT because they had 'styles'). This looks like a quality release -- although it might turn out to be unfinished when I actually get to try it. I have to say, though, at this point I'm pleasantly surprised. I'm done with my rant.
-
(I posted this in the SU v9 wishlist but I'll post it here also since it probably belongs here better)
I'm curious of what the Google team says at basecamp.
Are they proud of this version 8 release?
I mean, what have they been doing each day since last release?
The list of new features and bug fixes is very short.No 64 bit.
No UV enhancements.
No animation enhancements.
No shadow bug fix.
No multiple lights or shadow enhancements.
No Open GL enhancements (like reflective shaders and such).I didnt expect animation to get improved or even the shadow bug for that matter but I find this release very disappointing. So far the only reason for me to consider upgrading would be better speed for third party rubies. Oh, and not to forget...Tadaa!...fixing the toolbar madness.
It's like they havent listened to their customers at all.
Google SU Team customer relations
-
@dsarchs 64-bit support is specially important for SU integrated renderer. Now in 32 bit environment you will quickly run out of memory. Well... there is always a option to use a standalone studion for rendering.
-
@ notareal
I hadn't considered integrated rendering -- thanks for the info. That still wouldn't affect Thea or other stand-alone engines, though, would it?
Advertisement