SketchUP 8
-
@jbacus said:
@d12dozr said:
John,
I should have been more clear, I meant rendering with a plugin inside Sketchup. I use Twilight, I understand Vray and other render programs have similar trouble. Depending on model size, trouble can start at 2000 px.Thanks for replying.
Photorealistic rendering operations surely benefit from 64-bit processing. Rendering plugins do not have to execute rendering operations inside SketchUp's 32-bit environment, and can be built to run in their own 64-bit environment outside of the main SketchUp process. I think many of the more popular ones are already doing this.
john
.Thanks for the explanation, John. I appreciate your personal attention.
-
John, a lot of your answers seem to suggest that SU must remain elementary because it has a wide user base which includes those unfamiliar with more complicated 3d issues. That makes a lot of sense for the free version but less sense for the Pro version. Do you envision the Pro version incorporation more of those tools used by professionals, or do you feel that the current (small) gap between the free and Pro versions should be maintained?
-Brodie
-
@jbacus said:
@rv1974 said:
"No one will need more than 637 kb of memory for a personal computer." -Bill Gates, 1981
"64-bit processing will have no benefit" -John Bacus. 2010(sic!)
Be polite. I'm making a more complex point than you're giving me credit for making.
john
.=======
'I don't think ordinary users will see any benefit from a 64-bit SketchUp'-
http://www.deelip.com/?p=2643
Being responsible for your sayings\deeds (or lack of deeds)- that's what I'd call to be 'polite' -
@unknownuser said:
John, a lot of your answers seem to suggest that SU must remain elementary because it has a wide user base which includes those unfamiliar with more complicated 3d issues. That makes a lot of sense for the free version but less sense for the Pro version. Do you envision the Pro version incorporation more of those tools used by professionals, or do you feel that the current (small) gap between the free and Pro versions should be maintained?
-Brodie
UV mapping would be a very nice Pro tool. Would be a good selling point to get people to upgrade. Better that than taking away features, like DWG and North - that just gives out a negative signal.
I like the idea of SU Pro having some extra extensions that can be enabled.
But I'm still in the category of those that hope to see SU further developed as a platform. I love to be able to shape the app or features I use. Like Firefox.
-
@thomthom said:
@unknownuser said:
John, a lot of your answers seem to suggest that SU must remain elementary because it has a wide user base which includes those unfamiliar with more complicated 3d issues. That makes a lot of sense for the free version but less sense for the Pro version. Do you envision the Pro version incorporation more of those tools used by professionals, or do you feel that the current (small) gap between the free and Pro versions should be maintained?
-Brodie
UV mapping would be a very nice Pro tool. Would be a good selling point to get people to upgrade. Better that than taking away features, like DWG and North - that just gives out a negative signal.
I like the idea of SU Pro having some extra extensions that can be enabled.
But I'm still in the category of those that hope to see SU further developed as a platform. I love to be able to shape the app or features I use. Like Firefox.
You make a good point. Perhaps some of the current frustration is that we seem to be in a sort of middle ground. In the long run given what I know now, I think you're right that a platform scenario would probably be better. I'm not a programmer but based on what I've seen just a few of them do (you, Fredo, Whaat, TIG, etc.), it seems to me if that if they opened up the program to you we would be much better off. It may not solve the poly issues, but could greatly help things like UV tools, status bars, UI improvements, etc. Is that what you're thinking?
-Brodie
-
Yea. I'd be very happy if SU was developed as a platform where they [Google] worked on the core of the application and kept improving the API and SDK which would allow third party users to create custom fit environments for various speciality areas.
Entity A could develop a BIM solutiuon
Entity B could develop UV Tools
Entity C could develop landscaping tools
Entity D could develop gaming toolsIf you build an app for everyone you end up with a bug huge bloated beast where most users doesn't even use a fraction of the tools. But yet they'd pay a premium for all the features added. Like AutoCAD and that type off application.
But if you develop a core and a platform it can be moulded to fit each niche's use - and it could be developed by completely separate entities. That means parallel development for the platform you use where you pick and choose exactly what you want to use and you pay also only for what you use.
Much more agile than an include-the-kitchen-sink solution. -
Good assessment Tom, This structure would allow the development cost of the core application to stay reasonable. Google could even charge "api use" fees to those who generate profit from the sales of entities.
On the negative side, improperly done, there would be problems for those that have partial need out of several entities, as the overall cost, and overhead would then increase.
I think that it was smart on the part of Google to build separate applications like LO for SU Pro, allowing SU to remain an independent application. However, IMO it was a mistake to remove functions like Dxf/DwgIn from "SU free". SU free's Dxf/DwgIn functions should remain as provided by SU v7. SU Pro v8+'s Dxf/DwgIn/Out would be differentiated by adding additional support for surfaces, solids, textures, images, text, etc.
-
I agree, the tone is getting better. jbacus is listening and answering on a holiday weekend. That should speak for itself.
If you are unhappy with SU free, buy Pro. If you are making money off this program, buy Pro. We vote with our money. THAT is an effective way to keep SU going, not complaining. We need to be clear and specific about what direction or feature means something to us. I'm voting for better performance through OpenGL http://goo.gl/mod/vpGZ, dynamically linked files http://goo.gl/mod/uBBj, and a new program to sequence images fileshttp://goo.gl/mod/6JQZ. Let's stay constructive in our discussion. We may all get something out of it.
If SU can be the engine/platform that remains extensible and accessible, we can continue to grow the program in meaningful directions.
-
@jbacus said:
The old 'from Earth' method was actually providing you with considerably less detailed data. Particularly so in the case of the terrain data, which is now pulled directly from a shiny new terrain data service that gives you direct access to the best quality that Google has in your chosen location. As far as the imagery is concerned, the new "Add Location" UI gives you exactly what you see on the screen when you press the 'Grab' button. If you want more resolution in the imagery, zoom in.
john
.John,
In my view the new Add Location has a huge shortcoming compared with Get Current View. It does not allow the user to align the view rectangle to the building etc. That becomes an issue when using the snapshot to texture built-up terrain. It means the file size will be up to twice as large as it would be if the view could be aligned.
Given that the new interface has the 4 push-pins, surely it would have been a simple matter to allow the user to rotate the rectangle defined by those pins.
-
@jpac said:
If you are unhappy with SU free, buy Pro. If you are making money off this program, buy Pro. We vote with our money. THAT is an effective way to keep SU going, not complaining.
I'm underwhelmed by the release of SU8 Free. I've played around with it for a little bit, and I do think the introduction of colour imagery from GE is a good thing and the process will be made easier, but I don't think there's very much to be excited by.
But tbh the suggestion that people unhappy with SU8 Free should then go on buy the even more underwhelming SU8 Pro is utterly ridiculous. I'm disappointed by SU8 Free and wish it could have been better, but there's no way on earth that I'd toss Google $500 in the hope that the extra sales will spur them to make improvements. I don't think the world works like that. I think if Google knows they'll get enough sales with minor improvements then that's all they'll do. The best way to "vote with our money" is to not buy the pro version because then the message will be driven home that it doesn't offer enough for $500/$100 update fee/
-
@unknownuser said:
But tbh the suggestion that people unhappy with SU8 Free should then go on buy the even more underwhelming SU8 Pro is utterly ridiculous. I'm disappointed by SU8 Free and wish it could have been better, but there's no way on earth that I'd toss Google $500 in the hope that the extra sales will spur them to make improvements. I don't think the world works like that. I think if Google knows they'll get enough sales with minor improvements then that's all they'll do. The best way to "vote with our money" is to not buy the pro version because then the message will be driven home that it doesn't offer enough for $500/$100 update fee/
Thank you. This perfectly articulates my point about things.
-
I see a lot of disappointment here in response of SU-8
Since I have been using CAD for my architectural work since 1988 I feel rather different. SU is a wonderful package made for CAD enthousiast for simple and small buildings. Of course you can do big stuff with it. The same way someone here in Holland made a viking ship of matchsticks. The majority of people don't do big stuff in SU and never will. Simply because for major organic modeling or complicated modeling involving nurbs or subdivision or parametric dimensioning etc you need a totally different approach, an approach that can only be paid for in larger projects were this effort is not too much of weigth. In such cases you get Modo, Revit, maybe Rhino, Maxwell, Vectorworks or what ever. The time invested in such applications is worth it easily. People who try to compete with SU are admirable but looking like draining a lake with buckets. Sometimes all you have is a bucket and then ok...Experienced SU users should get out of their comfortzone and move on. Google now has for years made it clear what SU is for and what direction it is taking for further development of SU. This thread hardly teaches me anything about SU 8 other than that it is disappointing if you are a hardcore modeler who should actually use totally different software.
Or am I wrong and SU8 isn't worth it like what was said about previous updates.
Francois
PS, we decided not to upgrade...because of the crisis. Not for the price of SU itself but for the time we might need to update plugins and deal with unexpected problems. -
@johnsenior1973 said:
@jpac said:
If you are unhappy with SU free, buy Pro. If you are making money off this program, buy Pro. We vote with our money. THAT is an effective way to keep SU going, not complaining.
I'm underwhelmed by the release of SU8 Free. I've played around with it for a little bit, and I do think the introduction of colour imagery from GE is a good thing and the process will be made easier, but I don't think there's very much to be excited by.
But tbh the suggestion that people unhappy with SU8 Free should then go on buy the even more underwhelming SU8 Pro is utterly ridiculous. I'm disappointed by SU8 Free and wish it could have been better, but there's no way on earth that I'd toss Google $500 in the hope that the extra sales will spur them to make improvements. I don't think the world works like that. I think if Google knows they'll get enough sales with minor improvements then that's all they'll do. The best way to "vote with our money" is to not buy the pro version because then the message will be driven home that it doesn't offer enough for $500/$100 update fee/
But the problem is Brad Schell baby went out too good. Good enough to cover the thumbs twiddling of 70 people for 4 year period
-
Hello John!
Thanks for the reply but you were wrong ... John was just one seat and a bench made me wait for 18 hours ....
These are the new versions of Sketch, rotate or open large files faster yet, just .... The file still has 80 megs, 120 megs in itself it is as heavy as before.
You do not agree but are heading back to the Sketch. Every week I read news about technology, there is always news about Google creating a program to compete with other large programs or systems and yet with sketchup she is only waiting for major innovations with GE hoping that one day the world is set up for her free 3D.
This is not my view John as well as most of the professionals who use SketchUp and you only look at the hand of the person who wanted to play furnishing her home in a different way of reality. Where is the professionalism in that?
The google team develops systems and concurrent programs to large programs on the market but for 3D you prefer to let it go. Why not make the pro version in PRO really? I thought that Google was more ambitious and one day have a great platform for 3D work including an innovative rendering created by you but I see that much thought wrong!
The 3D is already there for all to John that Google has already achieved and is maintaining it for the professionals but she closed the door and said so or will stay with us or change the program .... what do you think I'll have to do if I want to evolve in my work?? You know the answer John!
It is a shame to see Google get into several areas with programs of weight forcing the competition to innovate and improve their systems but in 3D area Google will slowly stopping .....
Forgive my English ...
-
Sorry: Mr. jbacus, I think he should renounce because he can not with his job ...
In fact I think all the “Development Team SketchUp” should renounce for incompetence !!!!!!!
And I think people as thomthom, Fredo, Tig, Didier, Chris, jim, etc ... should be in charge of the project.
They yes do have the desire de evolve...
Please, Add to the Ideas for SketchUp
Those who wish a new “Development Team SketchUp”
And be surprised by the results in the Ratings... -
@susy said:
Sorry: Mr. jbacus, I think he should renounce because he can not with his job ...
In fact I think all the “Development Team SketchUp” should renounce for incompetence !!!!!!!
And I think people as thomthom, Fredo, Tig, Didier, Chris, jim, etc ... should be in charge of the project.
They yes do have the desire de evolve...
Please, Add to the Ideas for SketchUp
Those who wish a new “Development Team SketchUp”
And be surprised by the results in the Ratings...Susy, I think that is way too harsh.
We don't need a new Development team, if anything that will invite incompetence because of they're lack of experience with the product.
What we actually need is a new outlook regarding the communication between users and developers, not just these discussions once ore twice every two years, but something more permanent and open.
If we can have a clearer idea on what Google wants and Google has a clearer idea on what we want and need, maybe we can avoid these mass disappointments for further releases by knowing what is possible or impossible.Like I stated before, I'm not too satisfied with the new version 8, but that's not because of the Dev team's incompetence or poor quality of the product, it's just because i had completely different expectations like most people who are disappointed.
Here's for a disappointment free Sketchup 9.
-
Oh Susy, put a cork in it!
Your abusive and insulting rhetoric is getting boring.
-
Suzy
If you feel so strongly about this as your response suggests, get a shed load of money together and make them an offer and then try to employ your own development team.
Imagine yourself in the position of developing a product where there are so many different views as to how it should progress (mostly driven by specific personal usage and needs) and a multitude of different tasks required of the product by an enormous volume of users. Lets see how you do. Could you please all of the people all of the time?
Reading through this thread the most important thing that appears is that there is a dialogue between developers and users which is the most valuble thing to maintain in the context of a constructive discussion.
Personally i am still glad that SU provides the opportunity for anyone with the lowest level of hardware to have a go at 3d modeling. Maybe i will think differently the next time i am waiting impatiently for something to explode at snails pace, but i will still probably continue to do just that (and have only myself to blame).
Regards
Sam
-
I was prepared to put up with all of the newly introduced bugs and reduced features (eg. Get Current View replaced by inferior alternative, plus various other bugs I have raised at https://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=24a7a)
Unfortunately the entire program has become totally unusable due to the dreaded "Model turns grey" issue. See http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/sketchup/thread?tid=008b07ee8e753e4d&hl=en
It used to do it after a few hours of editing. It now does it constantly from the start and with all models and makes the program totally unusable. Every time I pan, zoom or rotate, the whole model turns grey and takes about 3 seconds to return to normal. Restarting SU does not help.
I was somewhat disappointed that Google did not respond to that previous posting so there is no indication as to what is causing the problem.
I thought it could be related to the "Sketchup.full_detail_render_delay_min=1.0" stuff referred to half way down the page at http://sites.google.com/site/sketchupsage/faster/computer but playing with that does not help. And I do NOT want any such delay at all. I want the textures to remain in view all the time. There are no performance issues with normal panning and zooming etc.
I do not know if it is something to do with styles. I tried to make a couple of style changes using the totally unintuitive Styles menu and that may have caused it.
-
I really can't believe some of the things that are being said here to John Bacus... you're embarrassing the SCF community by treating not only a new SCF user this way, but the Head of SketchUp's Team. We are lucky to have not just anyone from the company here making comments or invitations to comment, but someone who is meeting each of you at your own questions and doing so slowly, competently and politely...
Some of you are lucky I don't still have Admin here... I would be deleting some of these useless, derogatory replies. that are adding nothing to this conversation.
if you have a question, ask it... if you have a comment add it... but be respectful please. you represent all of us each time to post here.
I for one, am reasonably sure that the SketchUp Development Team eats, breathes and sleeps SketchUp every day and that they work very hard to bring us the best that they can. of course they can't please everyone but they are here asking us what we want. and we're going to insult them? I think not...
Advertisement