PDA

View Full Version : Any Idea when 9.2 UB not beta will be finally released?



juli51
05-01-2007, 07:19 AM
Any Idea when 9.2 UB not beta will be finally released?
Thanks a lot...

Phil
05-01-2007, 07:29 AM
Well it's done. There is no other information available. If you need it now, join the OpenBeta.

juli51
05-01-2007, 07:36 AM
Hi Phill, Do you mean it's allready available?, not the open Beta,.. but the final product,... LW 9.2 UB for MAC?,... I would not believe it.

BazC
05-01-2007, 07:42 AM
No it's still in open beta but you can sign up for the beta and use it straight away. No-one knows when the UB will be released, probably not even Newtek.

juli51
05-01-2007, 07:46 AM
thanks BazC for youor answers, I had the hope it would be a bit earlier... since I bought my intel MAC in September 2006 its being hard to work everyday with LW or Fprime,.. in the new intel macs..

DogBoy
05-01-2007, 07:50 AM
No, Phil meant "When it is done!". It is in Open Beta still, and probably will be for a while.

Obviously, anyone who is using it can't comment much about it. Join the OB and find out how it's shaping up.

G M D THREE
05-02-2007, 04:57 AM
I personally am waiting for the relies of the UB for over 10 months and feel officially let down by Newtek. I don't understand why the non UB version of 9.2 was released before the UB. Apple is selling for almost 2 years now intel macs and since summer 2006 stopped making or selling G5 machines! From my everyday experience the non UB version on a intel mac is 3 times slower than LW 9 on the same machine running under windows.
In my opinion LW 9 relies should have been UB from day one. I don't wont to start any MODO vs LW wars here as I am a die hard lightwaver but face it freaking MODO is UB since the first i book with a intel chip was out.
I would not care if LW was a toy to me that I use in my spare time to impress my friends. Unfortunately it is in the center of my everyday professional life and my team and I have to suffer the delay of the UB relies everyday. I don't want to blame Newtek entirely for the whole dilemma regarding the fact that Roseta is probably one of the worst emulator that Apple has ever released.

Thanx for listening. ///

JeffRutan
05-02-2007, 07:17 AM
I have been away from LightWave for some time now, waiting for 9.2 with Universal Binary to be released. Not too long ago I tried to join the open beta and it said access was no longer available because of too many participants.

So LightWave has been basically useless to me for many months. I just checked the main website and it seems like 9.2 is out already, but I can't find any download links even for the 9.0/9.1 that I already have installed on my older machines.

Where do I go to check on 9.2 availability or to download 9.1 update?

Thanks,
-Jeff

Morbius
05-02-2007, 02:40 PM
Kind of a silly question, but thought I'd just ask.

I own LW 6.0 for Mac with the Purple Eve3 Dongle. Is there a way I can participate in the UB 9.2 Beta?

I'm guessing no. For one I can't seem to register my version of LW anyway. Though, I could be using the wrong SN. I don't have the box anymore.

I'd just like to see how stable UB is on my machine before I upgrade. Kind of a selfish reason I guess, but LW can be a bit flaky on different machines. My version (6) Is almost unusable it crashes all the time.

(Mac Pro Intel Dual Xeon 2.66 - 2gig Ram)

BazC
05-02-2007, 03:07 PM
Kind of a silly question, but thought I'd just ask.

I own LW 6.0 for Mac with the Purple Eve3 Dongle. Is there a way I can participate in the UB 9.2 Beta?

I'm guessing no. For one I can't seem to register my version of LW anyway. Though, I could be using the wrong SN. I don't have the box anymore.

I'd just like to see how stable UB is on my machine before I upgrade. Kind of a selfish reason I guess, but LW can be a bit flaky on different machines. My version (6) Is almost unusable it crashes all the time.

(Mac Pro Intel Dual Xeon 2.66 - 2gig Ram)

Afraid not, you have to be a registered owner of LW9 to participate in the beta. Why not download the trial of LW 9, that should give you an idea of how stable it's likely to be. Hopefully the UB will be even better. Otherwise you'll need to wait until the UB is released then download the trial.

Phil
05-03-2007, 02:18 AM
No, Phil meant "When it is done!". It is in Open Beta still, and probably will be for a while.

Obviously, anyone who is using it can't comment much about it. Join the OB and find out how it's shaping up.

Bah. Since I moved to Germany, my typing skills in English have gone completely to pot. Sorry, yes, *when* it's done, not *well* it's done.

I shall now give my fingers a stern talking to. If they repeat this error, they will be turned into sausages.

At least I didn't tell you about anything useful about the UB build.....did I? :devil:

Phil
05-03-2007, 02:23 AM
Kind of a silly question, but thought I'd just ask.

I own LW 6.0 for Mac with the Purple Eve3 Dongle. Is there a way I can participate in the UB 9.2 Beta?

I'm guessing no. For one I can't seem to register my version of LW anyway. Though, I could be using the wrong SN. I don't have the box anymore.

I'd just like to see how stable UB is on my machine before I upgrade. Kind of a selfish reason I guess, but LW can be a bit flaky on different machines. My version (6) Is almost unusable it crashes all the time.

(Mac Pro Intel Dual Xeon 2.66 - 2gig Ram)

Well one big improvement would be to run the 6.5 update. Aside from that LW on Mac has always been...interesting, or so I'm led to believe. On an Intel Mac, 9.0 and 9.2 run about 3 times slower than the same build under Windows. GLSL OpenGL is also very crash happy under Rosetta. The UB version would have to be better simply because it doesn't have this emulation layer with all its flakiness, but only OB folks would know.

The other caveat is that any 3rd party plugins you might want to use will generally need to be recompiled for the UB version of LW. LScripts might be safer, but given that you are running such an old version of LW, your success level cannot be guaranteed. LScript has always been something of a crapshoot with regard to breakage.

The Eve3 dongle is also going to be a problem : http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62718

Haven1000
05-03-2007, 07:02 AM
I personally am waiting for the relies of the UB for over 10 months and feel officially let down by Newtek. I don't understand why the non UB version of 9.2 was released before the UB. Apple is selling for almost 2 years now intel macs and since summer 2006 stopped making or selling G5 machines! From my everyday experience the non UB version on a intel mac is 3 times slower than LW 9 on the same machine running under windows.
In my opinion LW 9 relies should have been UB from day one. I don't wont to start any MODO vs LW wars here as I am a die hard lightwaver but face it freaking MODO is UB since the first i book with a intel chip was out.
I would not care if LW was a toy to me that I use in my spare time to impress my friends. Unfortunately it is in the center of my everyday professional life and my team and I have to suffer the delay of the UB relies everyday. I don't want to blame Newtek entirely for the whole dilemma regarding the fact that Roseta is probably one of the worst emulator that Apple has ever released.

Thanx for listening. ///

Good software takes time....you'll just have to be patient like the rest of us.
Would you prefer to have a UB 6 months ago that is a pile of steaming s!!!!!!t or wait that half a year for a UB that may well be the best LW Mac release EVER?
Alot of the respected Mac guys on this forum have trust in Chilton and his team...that's good enough for me.
If your a LW9 user it's a no brainer to sign up for the Beta, it may just suppress your anger.

BTW Rosseta was never designed to be used with processor intensive apps, to expect so would be foolish.

Phil
05-03-2007, 08:41 AM
I don't understand why the non UB version of 9.2 was released before the UB. Apple is selling for almost 2 years now intel macs and since summer 2006 stopped making or selling G5 machines!

To deliver a UB version is not as easy as you think. It's equivalent to a port to a new system. You might reserve some of that stinging criticism for much larger companies such as Microsoft, who have yet to deliver a UB version of their software. Autodesk only managed it recently for Maya (note MotionBuilder has yet to see that treatment). Adobe have only just released their UB version as well, and some of the apps are not yet out of beta (like LW). It's really not a matter of shoving the code through a compiler and being done with it, in most cases at least. If it was easy, it would have been done by now.

Like anything major, it takes time to get it right, document it and ensure that 3rd party developers can work with the new system.


From my everyday experience the non UB version on a intel mac is 3 times slower than LW 9 on the same machine running under windows.
In my opinion LW 9 relies should have been UB from day one. I don't wont to start any MODO vs LW wars here as I am a die hard lightwaver but face it freaking MODO is UB since the first i book with a intel chip was out.

It has the advantage of having been written from day one in XCode. As such, there was also no backward compatibility to worry about and no investment from users in an established tool to concern them.

If we're into flinging mud, though, then I wouldn't trust Lux to deliver long term. The linux version that was promised for Modo has yet to appear, for example. I have email from Brad explicitly promising a Linux port....


I would not care if LW was a toy to me that I use in my spare time to impress my friends. Unfortunately it is in the center of my everyday professional life and my team and I have to suffer the delay of the UB relies everyday. I don't want to blame Newtek entirely for the whole dilemma regarding the fact that Roseta is probably one of the worst emulator that Apple has ever released.

Thanx for listening. ///

You're not making huge amounts of sense, though. If you really need UB, join the OB program. Don't expect your addons (other than LScripts) to work with it unless the developers have ported their works, though. Remember - it's in beta. Unlike Google's products, most 'beta' software is actually 'beta'. Bad things can happen, so go in with that knowledge and don't expect to have everything working perfectly.

Rosetta is pretty damn good in my eyes. It's a transition bandaid, nothing more. Like Classic on the PowerPC. It has respectable performance given what it is being asked to do.

Exception
05-03-2007, 12:48 PM
To deliver a UB version is not as easy as you think. It's equivalent to a port to a new system. You might reserve some of that stinging criticism for much larger companies such as Microsoft, who have yet to deliver a UB version of their software. Autodesk only managed it recently for Maya (note MotionBuilder has yet to see that treatment). Adobe have only just released their UB version as well, and some of the apps are not yet out of beta (like LW). It's really not a matter of shoving the code through a compiler and being done with it, in most cases at least. If it was easy, it would have been done by now.

Indeed.
As a win32 user I've been following the progress of the UB version with interests in the beta section, and it's been surprising how much work is being done, how many issues are being addressed from interface standards to export formats, and so on. I have a feeling the majority of the code needs extensive checkup and revision to be able to port this to UB.

If you own v9, there's really no reason not to join the OB team and check it out for yourself.

jayroth
05-03-2007, 01:14 PM
I personally am waiting for the relies of the UB for over 10 months and feel officially let down by Newtek. I don't understand why the non UB version of 9.2 was released before the UB. Apple is selling for almost 2 years now intel macs and since summer 2006 stopped making or selling G5 machines! From my everyday experience the non UB version on a intel mac is 3 times slower than LW 9 on the same machine running under windows.
In my opinion LW 9 relies should have been UB from day one. I don't wont to start any MODO vs LW wars here as I am a die hard lightwaver but face it freaking MODO is UB since the first i book with a intel chip was out.
I would not care if LW was a toy to me that I use in my spare time to impress my friends. Unfortunately it is in the center of my everyday professional life and my team and I have to suffer the delay of the UB relies everyday. I don't want to blame Newtek entirely for the whole dilemma regarding the fact that Roseta is probably one of the worst emulator that Apple has ever released.

Thanx for listening. ///


We did not release 9.2 and the UB version at the same time simply due to the fact that the UB version did not coincide with 9.2 schedule-wise. It was available later in the open beta period than 9.2, and we prefer that it has more testing prior to our releasing the product officially. However, you are free to sign up for the open beta, and get your copy today, as long as you are a license holder of LightWave v9.0 or later. The product is still in beta, but its fairly robust, and many testers have been using the UB for actual projects.

jayroth
05-03-2007, 01:16 PM
I have been away from LightWave for some time now, waiting for 9.2 with Universal Binary to be released. Not too long ago I tried to join the open beta and it said access was no longer available because of too many participants.

Thanks,
-Jeff

There is no restriction to the amount of participants in the open beta program. Jeff, was this an automated response, and if so, how and where did you encounter it?

G M D THREE
05-04-2007, 12:24 PM
Good software takes time....you'll just have to be patient

BTW Rosseta was never designed to be used with processor intensive apps, to expect so would be foolish.

Why am I foolish? Is there an alternative to Rosseta? NO. So what am I suppose to run on a dual quad 3 Ghz, MS Word? Yes Rosseta cant handle processor intensive apps. Therefore it is very dysfunctional to me. I believe that Apple slaked off on making the transition better and developed Rosseta mostly to please there low end costumers.


///

Haven1000
05-04-2007, 01:09 PM
Why am I foolish? Is there an alternative to Rosseta? NO. So what am I suppose to run on a dual quad 3 Ghz, MS Word? Yes Rosseta cant handle processor intensive apps. Therefore it is very dysfunctional to me. I believe that Apple slaked off on making the transition better and developed Rosseta mostly to please there low end costumers.


///

When Apple released the Pro Mac's they pacifically left the G5 quad in their product line up for a period of time which escapes me, but I believe it was a number of months. The reason for this was to accommodate those people who knew their critical applications were not UB and would not be for sometime and they could plan for the future, these people were generally those who used processor intensive applications. I was one of these people who held out buying a Pro Mac until recently. If you bought a Pro Mac and expected native performance in non-UB, then you were indeed foolish.


Is there an alternative to Rosseta?

The alternative to Rosetta is Universal Binary Applications. There is a Universal Lightwave 9.2 Binary in existence, sign up to the beta.


I believe that Apple slaked off on making the transition better and developed Rosseta mostly to please there low end costumers.

What evidence do you have to substantiate this?

Phil
05-04-2007, 01:37 PM
Why am I foolish? Is there an alternative to Rosseta? NO. So what am I suppose to run on a dual quad 3 Ghz, MS Word? Yes Rosseta cant handle processor intensive apps. Therefore it is very dysfunctional to me. I believe that Apple slaked off on making the transition better and developed Rosseta mostly to please there low end costumers.


///

You have choices :

- continue to rail against the injustice of it all, whilst pissing off those of us who are trying to at least guide you
- sign up to the OB program and use the beta that is UB LW. Remember that it's beta, it will have issues and your obligation is to report those issues and respect the NDA. Note also that any 3rd party addons will need to be UB-specific unless they are LScripts.
- install Boot Camp and use the Windows version which will give you respectable performance. Note that Boot Camp is also beta, and you'll probably need to determine where you will install files (MacDrive might help here)

Again, if it were easy, it would have been done. If Apple had stuck to their original timeline for the transition, developers would have been able to more closely match the hardware - a lot of developers were wrong footed by the rapid migration of Apple's hardware.

There is no conspiracy, within Apple or elsewhere.

G M D THREE
05-04-2007, 01:47 PM
Thanx for you response, Phil, Haven1000 and Jay Roth.

First of all I sign up for the UB beta from day one, I wish I had more time to participate in it that I do. I dint bring it up here before as this is not the beta forum.

Please don't get me wrong. I don't think the problem is on the engineering side of things but rather a managing decision. Apple announced the transition to intel processors over 2 years ago. This was before LW 9 was even released. Am I so wrong to believe that commercial software should be up to date whit the hardware available at the current time?

Can somebody explain me please, why are software companies always getting so much slack. If I mess up one deadline, in my industry, just by one day I risk going out of business. I don't have the luxury to line up my paying customers and have them participate solving the problems that my project has. I cant say: sorry I am half a year behind but its really not that easy, you don't want a half a.s.s animation for the supper bowl do ...so you have to wait than.

I truly believe that LW is a great application, reason why I have been using it for the past ten years and hope to do so in the future. I just wish it would stop humping behind with its updates. It is a lame excuse to say that others do so as well.

Peace. ///

G M D THREE
05-04-2007, 02:08 PM
If you bought a Pro Mac and expected native performance in non-UB, then you were indeed foolish.

As a matter of fact we bout several intel macs here at the studio. LW is not the only app we run on them. Calling me foolish not buying legacy hardware is just plain isolating and incompetent.



What evidence do you have to substantiate this?

Why do I need to show evidence. Am I on a trial here? I clearly sad what I believe and dint claimed it is a fact. I believe it is that way because I run constantly into problems with it, when I use memory and processing demanding applications, as used by hi end pro costumers.

///

Haven1000
05-04-2007, 02:29 PM
As a matter of fact we bout several intel macs here at the studio. LW is not the only app we run on them. Calling me foolish not buying legacy hardware is just plain isolating and incompetent.



Why do I need to show evidence. Am I on a trial here? I clearly sad what I believe and dint claimed it is a fact. I believe it is that way because I run constantly into problems with it, when I use memory and processing demanding applications, as used by hi end pro costumers.

///

I don't see the need to play retort tennis with you anymore. If others want to waste their time... Maybe some of us are a bit more understanding with the world we live in.

:bangwall:

G M D THREE
05-04-2007, 02:45 PM
You have choices :

- continue to rail against the injustice of it all, whilst pissing off those of us who are trying to at least guide you
- sign up to the OB program and use the beta that is UB LW. Remember that it's beta, it will have issues and your obligation is to report those issues and respect the NDA. Note also that any 3rd party addons will need to be UB-specific unless they are LScripts.
- install Boot Camp and use the Windows version which will give you respectable performance. Note that Boot Camp is also beta, and you'll probably need to determine where you will install files (MacDrive might help here)

Again, if it were easy, it would have been done. If Apple had stuck to their original timeline for the transition, developers would have been able to more closely match the hardware - a lot of developers were wrong footed by the rapid migration of Apple's hardware.

There is no conspiracy, within Apple or elsewhere.

Sorry phil, it was not my iteration to piss you of. I am not railing against any injustice. Don't understand why you are taking it so personal.

I dint say that there was any conspiracy within Apple, just pointed out the weakness of Rosseta and the fact that it has trouble with hi end apps pushing its limits. Therefor in my conclusion Apple failed to support its hi end costumers that are depending on it.

... and yes we use here boot camp since last summer, but booting up back and for is not exactly as solution to a delayed UB version relies. Is it?

I am aware that no matter what I say, it wont make the relies of the UB any faster. I only spoke out my frustration about it hopping someone from NEWTEK will notice and respond to it. Jay Roth did so and I appreciate his response.

///