markf Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I think the overwhelming majority of customers (from what iv read on various forums do not want different products, This seems like the bottom line. The OVERWHELMING majority of customers do not want different products, and yet AutoDesk decides to go against the wishes of the OVERWHELMING majority of customers. Perhaps they should have polled the user/customer base about this before finalizing the decision. I love using Max and personally don't have issues with crashing or instability. I'm probably going to "choose" Design. I expect to continue to enjoy using it. Count me as one of the overwhelming majority of customers who can't understand the benefits of splitting Max into two (almost) identical products. Some different tutorials and interface features don't seem to justify all the trouble of having two versions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I'm thinking that if there is no difference in price, why not simply have one product? The main allure of VIZ was its smaller price. If they want to appeal to the ego of users who feel special having a such a similar product specifically for their industry, then it's not prudent IMHO. It's annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Smith Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 i think that nothing will change with Autodesk until someone forces their hand, similar to the way V-Ray's improvements in the last few years forced Autodesk to incorporate things like proxies. you can be sure that all of the things that Chaos comes out with in 2.0 will eventually find their way to later versions of Max. if you want Autodesk to add a new feature, perhaps the best way to push for it is to ask other software developers that will listen and build those features into their software...thereby forcing AD to do the same. if a new software developer comes along and builds a decent 3D package with a realtime interactive walkthrough feature, and doing so takes a chunk of the Max user base, you can be sure that AD will no longer stand by and not include the same thing in a future release of Max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattclinch Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 ok.. just read this whole thread to get an idea of what is going on here.. 3 simple questions... 1. if merging the Viz userbase into the Max userbase was the main thinking behind creating Max Design, should more advanced users who traditionally have needed more toolsets and software freedom than available in Viz be sticking to 3ds Max? 2. if the thinking behind creating the offshoot of Max Design was to allow Viz users to smoothly transition into Max, why not simply have a single Max version which had UI switches? (i'm thinking of programs similar to After Effects), where only toolsets needed by the user for their particular chosen task are shown (compositing/effects/editing etc) - it's provides a far less daunting user interface whilst still retaining all of the program functionality and all in one box 3. the decision to split the software into two more distinct usage groups has clearly caused a lot of worry - primiarly over the feature sets that will be available in the future in both versions, the additional cost of potentially crossgrading if a user discovers they have need of something only available in the other version, and lastly any users who find their work straddles both feature sets - yet there is no longer a "complete" package solution. in light of the fact that there also seems to be very limited amount of information about the future directions of both these products to allow people to make the correct "future-proof" decision, does autodesk plan on providing the user base with this information so that they can correctly make the decision they have been asked to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Forreal Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 yet there is no longer a "complete" package solution. in light of the fact that there also seems to be very limited amount of information about the future directions of both these products to allow people to make the correct "future-proof" decision, does autodesk plan on providing the user base with this information so that they can correctly make the decision they have been asked to? i couldn't agree more. going back to your car example - you're offering the 'model with 18 inch alloys' OR the 'model with air conditioning'. what if I want air con AND alloys? then i MUST buy both cars and then simply remove the alloy wheels from one and fit to the other! then i can just throw the rest away or have a useless extra car in my drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 We're kicking off because we know something is going to happen, and absolutley none of this seems like a good idea for your end user. Did whoever made the decision to force this choice and tell everyone they'd have to spend money to change not take into account the state of the market and that a lot of it's users small firms are struggling? This is the last thing a lot of people needed right now and will have contributed a huge amount to the amount of backlash you're getting. re: "something is going to happen" Interesting. You seem able to make definitive statements about the future of 3ds Max. Maybe you know something that I don't. AFAIK, this statement is not borne out by the existing facts which clearly show limited divergence to date. re: "struggling firms" Yes, so we gave all Subscription users a free opportunity to cross-grade to whichever version they preferred. It isn't clear to me why that will increase their risk. It's quite clear what is in either flavor at this point so the choice is pretty straight-up based on the facts. The future is pretty scary right now, perhaps some of that fear is blurring what we're trying to tell you. Perhaps we can put this conversation on hold for awhile and see if any of the dire predictions actually come to pass. So far, another year has passed since the split and nothing incremental has happened as far as I can see. Many on the forum are claiming this is the best release of 3ds Max in quite a few years. That might imply we know what we're doing or perhaps nothing will convince you. It will take time for people to get used to the situation, so all we can do is give what guidance we can give and hope we keep the ride from getting to bumpy. Thanks to everyone for opening up and communicating your concerns. Trust me, your opinions are convincing me that touching differentiation any further is like the 330V line in the subway. I have no desire to become a bunch of crusty carbon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 1. if merging the Viz userbase into the Max userbase was the main thinking behind creating Max Design, should more advanced users who traditionally have needed more toolsets and software freedom than available in Viz be sticking to 3ds Max? 2. if the thinking behind creating the offshoot of Max Design was to allow Viz users to smoothly transition into Max, why not simply have a single Max version which had UI switches? 3. does autodesk plan on providing the user base with this information so that they can correctly make the decision they have been asked to? re: VIZ Today, 3ds Max Design provides the most features if you don't care about the SDK. This has been true for two releases now. With 2010, we've just spent some effort on making the UI look different, they are functionally identical and of course, you have a lot of UI customization choices anyway. I think if you were really focused on getting into Games, then you'd probably want "3ds Max" - only because the presets are a little easier to get started with. Specialists in VFX certainly could go either way. It would seem impossible to imply that any differentiation could be achieved in that space. It overlaps too completely. I'd simply recommend that if you don't intend to work in a Game or VFX shop then you probably should look at Design. There is clearly a class of users that could go either way. If you're biased towards Architecture, then Design would seem more obvious. re: switches Honestly, we had a small dev team at that time and there was no way we'd be able to do everything we wanted to pull that off (I think people forget that 3ds Max 2009 was a six-month release cycle). Plus, we wanted all the marketing materials more focused on specific markets (including packaging). Doing the split has made 3ds Max easier to sell, which you probably don't give a damn about, but you should. The more growth in 3ds Max = bigger dev team = more stability, performance, features. I think 3ds Max 2010 bears that out (or will). re: future We're not permitted to discuss the future unfortunately. See my blog on the subject: http://area.autodesk.com/index.php/blogs_ken/blog_detail/all_3ds_max_secrets_revealed/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SandmanNinja Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Forgive a silly question but if you Migrated Viz users to 3ds, why are you making a 'new' Viz? That's what it seems like to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Forgive a silly question but if you Migrated Viz users to 3ds, why are you making a 'new' Viz? That's what it seems like to me. Depends on how you define VIZ. If you define it as a limited version of 3ds Max, then we're not making that at all. 3ds Max Design has MORE features than 3ds Max if you don't care about programming using the SDK - because it has Exposure and 3ds Max does not. I thought we had made it quite clear the goal is not to produce a feature limited version of 3ds Max. That would be duplicating VIZ - and be a severe mistake IMHO. We just got rid of VIZ (which everyone seems to pretty much have welcomed) so why on earth would we go down the same path? According to my friend Spock, it would be most illogical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I'm disappointed that, when the time came for Autodesk to fish or cut bait on the VIZ issue, they chose to widen the gap. It just seems to me that putting the development resources all in the same pool would work more effectively to give us users a better single product. Autodesk obviously sees the opportunity to sell more seats and I guess I can't blame them for wanting to exploit that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Smith Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) well from what i've seen playing around with 2010, it is definitely the best release in quite some years. for that, my hat is off to the developers. but i'm still irritated that 10 years after the SmoothMove plugin came and went, we still have absolutely no realistic interactive/walkthrough capability with this program without having to purchase an expensive 3rd party product. is it really that hard to make? smoothmove did it ten years ago and it was free. granted you were limited to a predefined path, but we still can't do this simple little thing. Edited February 17, 2009 by Brian Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil_cg Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) The future is pretty scary right now, perhaps some of that fear is blurring what we're trying to tell you. Not at all - i'm pretty secure, I was talking about the backlash you were getting from other people and how it was simply a bad buisiness decision to announce it then. What exactly are you trying to tell us? Youve not said that in 2 years time the differences between the 2 versions will be a similarly small gap, so it's pretty obvious something is going to happen and they are going to spread. Yes you have made a good version of max, well done. Making good software and making terrible decisions are mutually exclusive things though, I dont see your point. Apart from 'tailoring to your users needs' (in what way exactly?) If you can give me one good thing that will come from this split I will be satisfied, but so far i've not had a single practical benifit presented to me. Just problem after problem. Use the point of view of a company that uses a lot of high end vfx techniques in architectural work. Neoscape/uniform kind of work. Edited February 17, 2009 by Neil_cg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I'm disappointed that, when the time came for Autodesk to fish or cut bait on the VIZ issue, they chose to widen the gap. It just seems to me that putting the development resources all in the same pool would work more effectively to give us users a better single product. Autodesk obviously sees the opportunity to sell more seats and I guess I can't blame them for wanting to exploit that. Perhaps I don't understand you, I think I've stated at least once that there is now only one development team for 3ds Max/Design. There is a single binary and a single dev team. You're absolutely correct - it is more effective and it does create a single product. The dev team is working at maximum efficiently because we're not asking them to create complex features that have to work in one package but not the other. This is reason 1,567 that we're not eager to pursue feature differentiation without it being for a compelling purpose/value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Perhaps I don't understand you, I think I've stated at least once that there is now only one development team for 3ds Max/Design. There is a single binary and a single dev team. You're absolutely correct - it is more effective and it does create a single product. The dev team is working at maximum efficiently because we're not asking them to create complex features that have to work in one package but not the other. This is reason 1,567 that we're not eager to pursue feature differentiation without it being for a compelling purpose/value. I admit that I haven't read the entire thread, so I'm the one who misunderstood. My thoughts were regarding your comment about not having the development resources to implement switching for Max 2009. But, since someone has to say it, if you all are so reluctant to pursue feature differentiation, then why have two products? The different packaging just seems like a marketing ploy to me. So, in the end, I guess this whole issue is just a harmless bit of nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 how it was simply a bad buisiness decision to announce it then. What exactly are you trying to tell us? Youve not said that in 2 years time the differences between the 2 versions will be a similarly small gap, so it's pretty obvious something is going to happen and they are going to spread. Apart from 'tailoring to your users needs' (in what way exactly?) If you can give me one good thing that will come from this split I will be satisfied, but so far i've not had a single practical benifit presented to me. Just problem after problem. re: bad business That is simply your opinion. We don't view it at all that way. The fact that some people are vocal about not liking things a particular way doesn't mean it is a "bad business decision". You forget that most users are actually OK with what we did and we've already seen in the stats that they are favoring Design by a 10:1 ratio. In fact, we just saw a huge bump in subscription renewals last week - so I don't see any way this can be called a "bad business decision" in the general sense. re: future I thought I've repeated myself a few times in this forum about our inability to give you explicit details of the future. I've also pointed people to my blog entry on the subject, "All 3ds Max secrets revealed". It explains are limits on forward-looking statements. You are trying to apply the logic of, "well, he didn't say they won't be the same, therefore they will be different". This is flawed because I cannot speak on a public forum. I then went on to offer people access to the beta, which many of you took action on, because that is covered by an NDA and you can get a better sense of our direction from it. re: practical benefits Tailoring the user experience for different workflows seems like a practical benefit. OK, you think we should have implemented it a different way than we did. Sorry, we did the best we could at the time with the resources we had. AFAIK, there is no existing problem with the flavors as they are today, you are stating that there will be a future problem and that we'll do the wrong thing. OK, that is your opinion. I hear you. It isn't a fact, just a pessimistic view of the situation. It is at least as likely we'll do something benign or even positive given that we didn't touch the feature differentiation in the 2010 release. So, I can prove that we're being careful and you can claim we're idiots and don't know what we're doing. I guess we'll just have to wait and see who is best at predicting the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil_cg Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) This is getting a bit too hostile, I think we've gone over all we can too... To clear something up though - 'bad buisiness' referred to waiting until we were in a recession and most people were on the verge of going under before telling them all they may have to spend more money in the future - I wasnt referring to the fact the split existed, just your timing on the announcement. Regardless of sales, my version of the term is how it makes you look - i'm on the other side, remember. Throwaway comment anyway, it's not important. I never said that you were idots either, far from it - more that it looks from my perspective like you were just trying to find new ways to take money from people. Kneejerk reaction to a lack of information or reason. Thanks for your time - I assure you it wasnt wasted. 2 years from now, same place. I'll print my posts out ready Edited February 17, 2009 by Neil_cg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Thanks for your time - I assure you it wasnt wasted. 2 years from now, same place. I'll print my posts out ready We should put some money on this, but since we're accused of doing this all for the money anyway, it might be in bad form. I can tell you, that the future is very bright as far as 3ds Max/Design is concerned because we have such passionate users and pretty interesting roadmap (some of which has been revealed on the beta). Very last thing, we don't even really think of these as "two separate products" internally. There is a single beta for 3ds Max with a mixed group of users contributing to it that is 50/50 Entertaintment/DesignVis. We see no reason to change this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic H Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Very last thing, we don't even really think of these as "two separate products" internally. There is a single beta for 3ds Max with a mixed group of users contributing to it that is 50/50 Entertaintment/DesignVis. We see no reason to change this. arrggghhh then why the split!!!!!!? seriously? and please please please dont say to tailor it to specific users (as that can be done with a customised UI) i cannot read this thread anymore, you have done well ken but the marketing shine really isnt convincing anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Brian, I understand the position Ken is in. Someone needs to take the shovel away from him though. By my estimates, he's about waist high by now. He has his talking points and we all have ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Smith Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 When no one from Autodesk was available for users to talk to they were the 'evil faceless corporation', when guys who are 'really' in the know about what is happening with Max engage the users they are 'misleading con men' simply fronting the 'evil corporation'!! Guys, chill out, watch what happens, make your decisions based on solid evidence, not pure speculation!! This is Software we are talking about, not something REALLY important like people, which Ken happens to be. [i assume ] Regards Bri Are you sure Ken is real? Has anyone ever seen him? Maybe he's like that computer in the movie Eagle Eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 To be honest, his willingness to take hits in public forums when he really doesn't need to makes him seem not as human as I expect I would be under the same circumstances!! I think the clinical diagnosis was advanced masochistic tendencies. Lucikly, they have little blue pills for that. It may also explain why some of our decisions are not really understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Smith Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 What I find most amusing, is that Ken is almost halfway to becoming a Senior Member in just one post. That's GOT to be a record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenpimentel Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 What I find most amusing, is that Ken is almost halfway to becoming a Senior Member in just one post. That's GOT to be a record. I couldn't have done it without all your help! Thanks for pointing that out Brian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Forreal Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Lucikly, they have little blue pills for that. i thought the little blue ones were for something else... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vizwhiz Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 (edited) we should give Otterdisk an ultimatum PUT IT ALL BACK INTO ONE MAX SOFTWARE BY THE NEXT RELEASE (or else) i am still on 2008 ADT and Max but i would like To do This latest upgrade(s) it seems cool not sure what The OR ELSE should actually be (= maybe just dont do anymore upgrades for a while) Randy's Rule of Thumb, Upgrade(s) = DownTime (hey where i$ our Bailout? i am $till paying La$t month$ Bill$ with next month$ money) Edited February 18, 2009 by vizwhiz 's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now