PDA

View Full Version : LW 8 - Newtek show it off on any macs?



Ade
07-29-2003, 10:48 PM
Any mac optimisations?
Modeller freeze fix?
OS X specific features?
Dual support for plugins while rendering?
Rendering enhancments for G4/5?

Mac version at all?

luka
07-29-2003, 10:51 PM
if you have an xboxx, you'll be laughing:eek:

Ade
07-29-2003, 11:04 PM
??? 3dBoxx or Xbox console?

luka
07-30-2003, 01:18 AM
excuse my incorrect PC brand terminology that should be 3DBOXX.

Ade
07-30-2003, 04:48 AM
Newtek slowly starting to loose my faith, they just dont bother creating any mac excitment unlike Luxx, Maya and now Pixar.
Here are some benchmarks of Newteks OEM systems from Boxx
rendering (http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1818&p=11)


Atleast these guys know how to get ppl excited.

http://home.comcast.net/~zeio/sig/3.jpg

Jimzip
07-30-2003, 06:24 AM
Oh come now people. Let's not be ungrateful.
The NT team have been working away for a year uprading the app and then it's finally released and people can only talk about the things they don't like on some of the threads I've been reading.
Don't worry about there being a Mac version Ade.. I'm sure it's there.. ;)

I'm extremely excited about this release to tell the truth. There's been a lot of anticipation, and now it's finally here!

Have faith, NT have done well from what I've read! I'm sure you'll find that there have been many improvements made. Although yes, the modeler freeze I'd like an update on.. (I gotta say that recently I haven't had a freeze at all. For a month or so now.. Curious. )

Jimzip :D

Ade
07-30-2003, 06:43 AM
O love Lightwave, all Im saying is we want parity.
And we dont want that modeller freeze bug.
I dont hear anything about mac specific enhancements in LW8, we want to hear about some if any?

Red_Oddity
07-30-2003, 06:50 AM
O love Lightwave, all Im saying is we want parity.
And we dont want that modeller freeze bug.
I dont hear anything about mac specific enhancements in LW8, we want to hear about some if any?

So what is it? Parity or a different version for the Mac (if it's got Mac specific enhancements there wouldn't be any parity now would there?)


And for the rest of you, i work on both Macs and PCs, but i'm not able to watch the stream aswell, because i tend to be sleeping by the time they broadcast...
So stop being such a bunch of ungratefull whining b!tches!

Sorry, but i think you all should be ashamed of your selves after all Proton and the rest of the NT team have done for us...

luka
07-30-2003, 07:40 AM
I can't believe we've turned full circle. Renderman will probably be ported to mac now.

Ade. Judging from those benchmarks I think the G5 will come out on top!

Ade
07-30-2003, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by Red_Oddity
O love Lightwave, all Im saying is we want parity.
And we dont want that modeller freeze bug.
I dont hear anything about mac specific enhancements in LW8, we want to hear about some if any?

So what is it? Parity or a different version for the Mac (if it's got Mac specific enhancements there wouldn't be any parity now would there?)


And for the rest of you, i work on both Macs and PCs, but i'm not able to watch the stream aswell, because i tend to be sleeping by the time they broadcast...
So stop being such a bunch of ungratefull whining b!tches!

Sorry, but i think you all should be ashamed of your selves after all Proton and the rest of the NT team have done for us...

Yeah Red considering I have to make a choice, use Lightwave but no FCP 4 or FCP 4 or no lightwave, so dont come here like some flamer.
Parity im talking about is that stupid modeller bug we have to stay downgraded to 10.2.4 (fcp4 needs higher), we are also missing alot of plugings as policarpo has stated, and we also dont have SMPT support in many plugs, some plugs actually crash layout if it renders with 2 cpus enabled.

Ill give Newtek the benefit of the doubt but I remain skeptical.
I love Lightwave I just thought LW8 would be the first real complete version to make us the same as pc users.
I guess we wait and see..



(maybe Im angry cause my layout just crashed twice)

nawDsign
07-30-2003, 08:57 AM
Hey Red.. at least the PC users have an option to download a working codec.. us mac only users are still left in the dark ages by NT. If there is a codec or mac that can play the stream, by all means share.. thank you.

Ade
07-30-2003, 09:03 AM
I dont even think we can use jpegs without crashing the app.
Im NOT saying NEWTEK programmers are sloppy or incompetent, im saying they never ever spend enough time just for the mac version to get it upto the standard pc users have enjoyed for soo long, other 3d apps share the same non bias parity. I love Lightwave and will fight for the mac version to improve to what we blieve should be.

PC version of Lightwave beats 3DS, C4d and many other pc 3d apps in the quality of code department but in the mac versions I have to say C4d is more consistant than LW is.

Zarathustra
07-30-2003, 09:08 AM
I think Mac users have a very simple request - treat us as equals and give us parity. I think that's a fair request for a program that boasts PC and Mac compatibility.

I don't understand why PC users get so violent over such a simple request by Mac users. I really don't. They have everything in their favor so they should be reveling in their multiple advantages, yet they still need to attack us.

I may one day understand their reasons, but I can't ever see accepting them.

wacom
07-30-2003, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by Zarathustra
I think Mac users have a very simple request - treat us as equals and give us parity. I think that's a fair request for a program that boasts PC and Mac compatibility.

I don't understand why PC users get so violent over such a simple request by Mac users. I really don't. They have everything in their favor so they should be reveling in their multiple advantages, yet they still need to attack us.

I may one day understand their reasons, but I can't ever see accepting them.

It isn't people like you- my friend. It's people who use terms like "Maya" together with parity. The last time I checked the site it said:

"Maya Unlimited™
The world's most powerful 3D animation and visual effects software and the ultimate version of Maya®. Experience industry-leading innovations for the creation of advanced digital content. Maya Unlimited is available on Windows® XP Professional, Windows 2000 Professional, SGI IRIX® and Linux®"

I see there is no Mac support there and for what it's worth that's a shame. This is not to say in anyway that NT doesn't need to strive further towards parity, but that at least there is an attempt at REAL parity. Look, if people think the "complete" version of Maya will do everything under the sun for them that NT can't- please do me a favor and either get it or get on with life. Please don't stop requesting fixes- but lets just keep from saying that the compatition is doing a WAY better job when they don't even have parity in their product line. This isn't even to mention the fact that (and yes cost does mater) renderman costs over $2,000 alone, and that Maya complete (which is far from "complete") costs $2,000 and that softimage starts out at $1,500 for a lame, crippled version that doesn't even run on a Mac.

Why are you here? Why? Because you only have several choices:

A) stick with NT which offers a great product for an great price
and see that 8 will address many issues as well as bring up
new ones like any new software or...
B) Go with the lame Maya complete, eletric-image, C4D (which is a joke), or what else? Oh, I guess you could use renderman...but if money is really no object then why are you here?

I find it funny that many of us Mac users who love to go for the underdog (MAC) also like to go for the jugular of NT when ever there is an opp.


Thanks for keeping it real Zarathustra.

Ade
07-30-2003, 10:04 AM
C4D isnt a Joke, it actually sells the most 3D seats. I know lightwave is a great product BUT I WOULD LOVE TOO SEE HOW LONG it would take to fix the modeller bug if it were on the pc side.

I would love to see what pc ppl would say if they were in our shoes.

This bug is soo freakin obvious many of us mac users have done all the dirty work discovering why it happens. If it int NEWTEK's fault i suggest they pull their weight to ATI to fix it, and stop sucky up to the BOXX systems who would drop Newtek at a dime if the price was right from another 3d app.

Geese Amiga is dead (in the form we remember) and I still hear Toaster gets more love than us.


Atlest Luxology knows how to make us feel
luxology new apps on OSX (http://www.luxology.net/event/2003/siggraph/modo-focus.aspx)

Red_Oddity
07-30-2003, 11:04 AM
Okay, parity, taken, is needed...but i don't see why 'plugins' fall under parity...i asume you mean 3rd party developed plugins?...then why flame NT for this?

As for the Radeon bug?...never had it...i use nVidia...
That doesn't keep my Mac from occasionally blasting to the desktop when i turn on 2 threads to render...but hey...AFX gives me beachballs with every mouse click i make...i'm starting to 'get over' the sluggishness, buggyness, incompetent hardware, stupid features that pop up for no appearant reason (bluetooths/ink/system preferences? no idea why it's doing this right now...), and focus on my work...
If that means saving after every mouse click...fine...it ain't my money...my boss desided we had to work on these machines, and some guy picked this one out for me...fine...

BUT, that doesn't mean you have to go ballistic on NT because you don't see any Mac optimisations...hell, the program isn't ready untill, what?, Christmas? Early 2004?
We're still 5 to 6 months away from a release...

I say, we wait and see...heck, maybe you can try the demo before you buy LW8?
If you don't like it, don't buy it...switch to Modo and the suite it comes with, or Maya....but who sais those will run stable on a daily bases...i bet that, even with that software, it's finding the bugs and workarounds all over again...

And on a side note, i wasn't trying to start a flame war here (again :rolleyes: ), just trying to tell you guys to chill, and wait and see what happens...in the mean time, keep posting in the Feature request forum...

mlinde
07-30-2003, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by Ade
Yeah Red considering I have to make a choice, use Lightwave but no FCP 4 or FCP 4 or no lightwave, so dont come here like some flamer.
Parity im talking about is that stupid modeller bug we have to stay downgraded to 10.2.4 (fcp4 needs higher), we are also missing alot of plugings as policarpo has stated, and we also dont have SMPT support in many plugs, some plugs actually crash layout if it renders with 2 cpus enabled.

Ade,

Parity with the application shipping from Newtek (Lightwave 7.5c) exists as far as current development. Yes, there are still about 3 plug-ins that exist in Windows and Mac OS 9 that don't exist in OS X, at least one of them makes a teapot automatically. Is that a mission-critical plug-in for you?

System bugs and crashes are not the responsibility of Newtek, they rest with the OS and GPU developers (Apple and ATI). I've been in the LW world for almost 5 years, and there was a stage back with the releases of 6-6.5 where PC folks couldn't run XP and couldn't use ATI cards, because of OS and GPU issues that have little to do with Lightwave, except that Newtek attempts to create an application using OpenGL, and runs on the Mac, instead of a PC only app with DirectX.

As for symmetric multiprocessing, it's time for a bit of a reality check. With the VAST majority of machines that run Lighwave being single processor PCs, it's not necessarily in Newtek's best interests to devote time and energy to SMP. I do think they should go as far as making sure that multithreading works correctly with the shipping program. If you have a specific, replicable bug with multithreading causing a crash, it should be listed in the bug thread, with steps to reproduce the error.

And you FCP4 v. LW argument holds little water. You can get a GeForce card on eBay for as little as $100 (or new for a lot more). That solves your problem. Another solution is to have a second drive or partition with 10.2.6 and FCP4 installed, and reboot into the different partition when you need it. Elegant? No, but workable, until Apple and ATI get around to caring. Have you mentioned these problems to them?

Zarathustra
07-30-2003, 11:53 AM
The Modeler bug is an ATI issue, is it not?

It would be nice if NT tried to do something about it, but that would be expecting a bit too much. I'm sure they see it as ATI's problem, not there's. In fairness, everyone pointed the finger at someone else when this bug first came up (speaking of Apple, NT and ATI, of course).

Red: Don't pretend you're unaware of what's inflammatory.

Modo looks cool, but what does it have that LW's Modeler doesn't?

eblu
07-30-2003, 12:01 PM
ok, my threshold has been met.

this thread, and my recent experience with LW mac/and PC.

I have a GForce 4 Ti card, Tons of ram, and a BIG ATA hardware RAID Drive.

I have been seriously frustrated by the speed of Layout for mac compared to the speed of Layout for PC. I pay the same amount as ANY PC user, I Have superior hardware than MANY PC Users, I get less than Acceptable redraw speed from Layout.

I used to think it was IK, makes sense right? Ik uses the processor, and the G4 while really nice doesn't excel in floating point math. Not the case. IK runs plenty fast. Its parenting. if I take a null, and parent it to another null, the parent null will actually slowdown to half the speed of its child. And this is not animation speed, its redraw speed. For a comparison, every PC I have ever seen running LW doesn't slowdown at all.
I like to make my own rigs, I like to make rigs that rely on many parented nulls. When I am done making these rigs, my machine cannot work with them in realtime. Same rig on a cheesy PC, say two generations back, runs in real time, flawlessly.

Newtek has been very slow in addressing this issue (been around since day 1). Don't get me wrong, LW = great, but this slowdown is so drastic, compared with a PC of lesser MHZ, Graphics, ram, and Harddrive, that it is an Obvious bottleneck IN Lightwave. No blaming the OS, Hardware, or OpenGL... The loss of speed is too drastic, and with all the best harware, you still cant get LW to go as fast as a PC of lower speed.

this is the kind of parity that I need. freeze the features, start doing research on how to make a 3d app in MAc os X, and fix bugs.

(btw: I go for the jugular of every product that I believe in, its the best way for me to help the developers make a better product)

cremegg
07-30-2003, 12:53 PM
me modeller, me want modo :D .

mlinde
07-30-2003, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by eblu
Newtek has been very slow in addressing this issue (been around since day 1). Don't get me wrong, LW = great, but this slowdown is so drastic, compared with a PC of lesser MHZ, Graphics, ram, and Harddrive, that it is an Obvious bottleneck IN Lightwave. No blaming the OS, Hardware, or OpenGL... The loss of speed is too drastic, and with all the best harware, you still cant get LW to go as fast as a PC of lower speed.

How can you attribute this issue to Newtek and Lightwave? Why not complain to Apple that their OS sucks up resources and their hardware doesn't perform as well in the real world as it does in their benchmarks?

I'm making one assumption. Since version 6.0, the core of Lightwave is supposed to be the same application for Mac or PC. In that case, the OpenGL commands should be the same for LW Mac and LW Windows. If that's true, and you get better performance with cheaper PCs running with cheaper cards and slower processors, the issue goes back to the OS, or the graphics driver, not the application. Here's my backup. Launch Lightwave. Remove all the plugins. Load an object, and mess with it in Layout. Do whatever you want with it. Do the same things on both platforms. If your performace is markedly different, it could be one of three things:

1) Graphics Calls/Commands - the application makes calls to the driver to perform certain actions. If these calls are poorly coded, this could cause a slowdown. How can you, as an end user, assume it's the application? I have seen Flash, Photoshop, and even Excel slow to a crawl when working with some files. Is it their fault the video card drivers can't handle the data well? There have been a number of video cards for the Mac that specifically work like [email protected]# for 2-D refresh. With so much emphasis on games, drivers for the current crop of Mac graphics cards are optimized to work with games.

2) Graphics Drivers - redraw, refresh, polygon errors, shading errors, blank screens all relate to the drivers.

3) System bottleneck - all of these commands pass through a system bus, designed and regulated by the manufacturer of the hardware and the OS. The hardware and the OS work together to maximize data travelling the bus, if there's a problem at this level, it affects ANY application.

eblu
07-30-2003, 06:51 PM
"I'm making one assumption. Since version 6.0, the core of Lightwave is supposed to be the same application for Mac or PC. In that case, the OpenGL commands should be the same for LW Mac and LW Windows. "

right.
this is where everything takes a left turn.

Apple is now showing, through classes, documentation, and developer relations, that the traditional way of doing things IN OPENGL, is sometimes the slow way to do it in Mac os X.
How can this be?
well, lets take a look shall we?

Apple has
1. a different hardware architecture.
2. a different software architecture.

most companies look at this and assume that Apple does things backwards. This is why Apple is making their own Apps. They are sick and tired of being classified as Less than the competitor, bc they found another way to do something. I think its been proven through safari, FinalCut, Itunes, etc... that its not your tools but how you design them, that makes a quality product.

What the industry is saying about Apple's OpenGl Support is very good. my contacts in the dev community say that Its almost on par with SGI's implementation, and much better integrated with the operating system than MS's offerings. The memory architecture for OSX is so similar to that of Windows that many people think Apple borrowed it from MS. Apple's OS X from a developers standpoint is sane, logical, well laid out, and planned with the idea of growth.

so what does all of that have to do with Lightwave?
Traditional OpenGl programmers Learn on PCs, they read numerous volumes of how to optimize their openGL calls for Windows. This is because there was a time when there was no OpenGL for Macs, and the forefathers of OpenGL Programming did it for PC games... and then wrote books. Now with a Completely new OS, OpenGL implementation, etc... There is a degree of research that IS NECESSARY to learn how to Make OpenGL go as fast as it is capable.

Apple has done a bit of this research, and gives it away freely.

But... all that is beside the main point.
In all likelihood, the offending code doesn't pass through the OpenGL card, but through the processor. So we can in all likelihood eliminate OpenGl from the problem. (many of the functions of Layout are Processor intensive.)

And like I said in my first post.. IK is plenty fast, in fact it shows a marked increase in speed from 7.0 - 7.5c, in OSX (due in no small part to research). Parenting NULLS in the same program slows down the entire IK Chain, drastically (almost by doubling the time it takes to do the transform for each level of the hierarchy). So we can essentially rule out hardware, and the OS, or even OpenGL, since the IK doesn't slow down, then everything below the level of the IK chain Code is fine (hardware, os, etc...). We're essentially comparing apples to apples here. IK solving is much more difficult to do than Transforming a simple hierarchy, and since this disparity in performance is in one application on one computer at exactly the same time, we can reasonably assume that its a bottleneck in Lightwave's code. In addition I can reasonably say that it is a MAC specific problem, because I have not witnessed ANY slowdown of this nature on any PC. (my coworker was amazed that Lightwave was so flakey on the mac, as to be unable to keep up with a hierarchy of nulls)

Now one might say, that the slowdown is a side effect of some calculation that lightwave must do in order to complete the transform. To this I point squarely at the IK engine. It was revamped to gain a solid increase in speed in the last few point releases. Has anyone noticed the IK system failing to make a calculation? no? Then what did they do to make it faster? They certainly didn't remove functionality. They got rid of bottlenecks, which means that they found faster ways to perform the same calculations, or they eliminated periods of waiting in the Loop. And while I think that there is a lot of room for improvement in The drivers for the graphics Cards, This Bottleneck is in Lightwave, and can be fixed.
even platform independent code can have a platform bias, OpenGL programming has been biased in the past towards Windows, and its a safe bet that it still is today.

Ade
07-30-2003, 08:43 PM
Red if u hate the mac soo much why do u still use it and why do u visit the mac forums?

Rey
07-30-2003, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by Ade
...Atlest Luxology knows how to make us feel
luxology new apps on OSX (http://www.luxology.net/event/2003/siggraph/modo-focus.aspx)

I think that's what the problem is. All the Mac heads that used to work at Newtek left and now work at Luxology. I'm hoping modo is just the start and Luxology releases a full 3D software package. That'll light a fire under Newtek for sure.

Red_Oddity
07-31-2003, 02:56 AM
Originally posted by Ade
Red if u hate the mac soo much why do u still use it and why do u visit the mac forums?

*sigh*, not this again Ade, please....

I don't 'hate' the Mac, their very nice machines, but i just don't 'like' working on it as much as i 'like' to work on an x86...
I have 2 G4s, one dual 800, on dual 1.42GHz MDD...both run like ****e 'compared' to the x86 machine i have also sitting here on my desk (atleast in 3D)...So, it's not so much a choise of liking it for some bizarre hatred towards a software vendor (read MS, Apple..even though i do have the right to, being a consumer and they have to bend to my will or i will go somewhere else...), it's more a choise of getting my work done on time, and if anywhere possible with the least amount of stress and anger resulting out of some faulty part in my tools...

Also, the reason i visit these forums is one : it is my friggin right to do so unless in some way i break policy and my punishment is being banned from these,
two : i work with Macs and Lightwave, thus i too (*shock*) have problems too, and thus i either ask questions here aswell, or try to help solve other's....

ackees
07-31-2003, 03:56 AM
Kaydara goes Mac G5.

http://www.kaydara.com/press/index.php?filename=current/2003/20030723

The 3D landscape is changing rapidly, I hope NT can keep up, the cleaver money now go Mac G5. We realy need to know where NT is going to go with LW and the Mac, what was good 2 years ago will not be sufficient today.

The Mac developement cycle is much faster than the PC and those that cannot keep up...

mlinde
07-31-2003, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by eblu
Apple is now showing, through classes, documentation, and developer relations, that the traditional way of doing things IN OPENGL, is sometimes the slow way to do it in Mac os X.
How can this be?
well, lets take a look shall we?

-trimmed for ease of reading -
thanks for the clarification. If I understand you correctly, the OpenGL solution for Newtek is to once again have two versions of the software, one Mac and one Windows, utilizing different OpenGL calls.

The other optimization issues I also feel I understand better, but then does IK and parenting work faster on the PC? If so, you are again proposing that Newtek develop a completely separate codebase for their Mac & Windows versions of Lightwave.

The problem for me, with that issue, is that Newtek has one of three choices:

1) Raise prices to have a completely separate Mac development team.

2) Delay the release of Mac versions of their software so the current team can finish one version, then do the other. Face it, if this option is used, the Mac version will always be later.

3) Continue along the same path, optimizing the application where they can without compromising the cross-platform architecture.

With these three choices, I hate to say I'm for staying with #3. I get Lightwave at the same time and same cost for Mac and Windows. With developers that use the plug-in SDK, plug-ins can simply be recompiled with minor changes to produce Mac versions.

Ade
07-31-2003, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by mlinde
-trimmed for ease of reading -
thanks for the clarification. If I understand you correctly, the OpenGL solution for Newtek is to once again have two versions of the software, one Mac and one Windows, utilizing different OpenGL calls.

The other optimization issues I also feel I understand better, but then does IK and parenting work faster on the PC? If so, you are again proposing that Newtek develop a completely separate codebase for their Mac & Windows versions of Lightwave.

The problem for me, with that issue, is that Newtek has one of three choices:

1) Raise prices to have a completely separate Mac development team.

2) Delay the release of Mac versions of their software so the current team can finish one version, then do the other. Face it, if this option is used, the Mac version will always be later.

3) Continue along the same path, optimizing the application where they can without compromising the cross-platform architecture.

With these three choices, I hate to say I'm for staying with #3. I get Lightwave at the same time and same cost for Mac and Windows. With developers that use the plug-in SDK, plug-ins can simply be recompiled with minor changes to produce Mac versions.

Luxology found a way and theyre smaller.

Zarathustra
07-31-2003, 12:34 PM
Luxology found a way...
Remember, Luxology CLAIMS to have. Nothing is true until it ships.

Also, mlinde brings up a good point about plugs. Having a completely different Mac version would probably further slow or kill future plugs for Mac.

...and if what Luxology claims is true, what about 3rd party plugs? Will it be as easy for them to write to the core then effortlessly convert to other platforms?

Guessing and betting gives me a headache. I'll wait for tangibles.

eblu
07-31-2003, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by mlinde


The problem for me, with that issue, is that Newtek has one of three choices:


but thats exactly, not the case. These three options are not the only ones available.
remember that IK was sped up for Lightwave and again for Mac Lightwave specifically. Did that break the cross-platform codebase? No.
I never once suggested two separate applications, but I did say, flat out, that there is a substantial bottleneck, in Mac Lightwave that needs attending to.
And if the platform independent codebase, is so PC centric, that it excludes the possibility of platform specific optimizations, in the face of already being heavily optimized for the PC, then, Somebody really screwed up the Dev Workflow over there at newtek (btw I don't for one minute believe it). The workflow of the dev environ branches at critical intervals, one of which is where the product is ported to the Platform. In this branch of the development of Lightwave, code is added to support the platform (i/o, windowing, etc...), and code can be changed/optimized (altivec for example).... all without hurting the codeBase or even other platform specific builds. The "base" in codebase refers to it being the bottom most layer on which the rest of the app is built, so "codebase" is definitely Not the entire product.

again, its already common practice in Lightwave, to optimize on a per platform basis. Its a simpler matter of spending some time with the problem, which as i said before, has been around for a Long time, and has been ignored.


As For luxology, they seem to have built a modeler clone. since many of these guys did the original code for that version of modeler, then I would expect it to be similar. Remember tho, their demo was of a mocap utility, and it was designed to tax the CPU, it has nothing to do with the product they just announced. Who knows what that is doing in terms of performance. Even so, I am pleased with the performance of Lightwave Modeler in any case.

paintboy
07-31-2003, 02:47 PM
Eblu
you have been hanging around here long enough to realize that:

A:optimization of LW for the mac has NEVER been a priority.EVER.

b. LW for the mac has been a rickty,ignored, redheaded stepchild,missing part, patched up , gimme $500 to get stuff that should of worked last time, wobbler, for some time now. this software has been responsible for more trouble than ANY software i have owned in the last 12 years bar none. any body who doesnt belive this owes it to themselves to see how it works on a PC...there is a difference.

C.Newtek(imo) is scrappin, scrambling, to compete in a collapsing market,
against big odds, i doubt seriously if the re$our$e$ are there for the work that NEEDS to be done to mac LW, or if it will ever be there ,or the will to fix it...

i for one have grown tired of flinging myself against the myth that this will ever get better...good luck in your valiant efforts to get someone to pay attention...

mlinde
07-31-2003, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by Ade
Luxology found a way and theyre smaller.

Don't know if that's fair or true. So far Luxology has announced a product that isn't shipping yet, so there are no real-world benchmarks or other information about the product that may or may not be any good.

In addition, the team at Luxology includes a number of the original Lightwave coders, including the guy who did the original Mac port. Also, how do you know they are smaller? They list 10 names on their site as senior employees and founders, if they have the capital they could be larger than Newtek. Speculation there, Ade.


Originally posted by eblu
The "base" in codebase refers to it being the bottom most layer on which the rest of the app is built, so "codebase" is definitely Not the entire product.

The application Lightwave (or Modeler, for that matter) isn't very large. The vast majority of tools, features and functions isn't even in the core application, it's in the plugins (try removing all the plug-ins and see how much work you can do). Many of the features of Lightwave aren't even part of the application Lightwave, they are plug-ins. No, the code base is not the entire product. But I'd be surprised if the application itself is much more than the code base and the windowing.

Karl Hansson
07-31-2003, 04:16 PM
Does anyone else get the feeling that NT is pulling away from the Mac? I'm not usually a pessimistic person and I hope I'm just overreacting, but does anyone know if LW8 will be on the mac at all?

Zarathustra
07-31-2003, 04:23 PM
NT already has my $$$ for MacLW8

luka
07-31-2003, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by Zarathustra
NT already has my $$$ for MacLW8

I wonder if it will ship the same time as the PC version

Darth Mole
08-01-2003, 01:38 AM
I've been contemplating all this for a while. The way I see the situation is this: for whatever reason, Brad Peebler, Stuart Hasting, Allen Ferguson et al, have all been pissed off by the management at NewTek (or possibly Tim Jenison himself). They leave.

I've heard they were owed susbtantial royalties from LW, which NT couldn't pay. NT needed VT3 to be developed and released to get some sort of cash-flow going again.

So the key developers of LW are gone, and NT doesn't really have the money or the manpower to continue serious development - that's why we got a small, bugged and horribly late 7.5 patch.

After all, you can't just hire programmers, throw them into a complex codebase with a ten-year heritage dating back to the Amiga, and expect them to just pick it up and run.

I also think this is why the Mac side has been quiet: if NT were desperate to generate revenue, Mac LW is the least of their worries, after VT3 and LW PC. Let's be honest, here - it's still one of their smaller revenue streams.

But I suspect NT are now back in business: VT3 is out and generating cash, and the new programmers are steadily hacking into LW and working on the new update. Hopefully, by the time LW8 comes out (for PC and Mac), we can finally lay the 'difficult' version 6-7 period to rest.

Quite how Ferguson and Hastings can turn their backs on LW I don't know; maybe they just got bored of the same application and the same dumb management decisions (hey, we all get them).

js33
08-01-2003, 02:35 AM
Originally posted by Darth Mole
I've been contemplating all this for a while. The way I see the situation is this: for whatever reason, Brad Peebler, Stuart Hasting, Allen Ferguson et al, have all been pissed off by the management at NewTek (or possibly Tim Jenison himself). They leave.


Um... it's Allen Hastings and Stuart Ferguson. :D

Yeah I agree that something like that probably occurred. As Lee says its all still a legal mess so if we ever find out it won't be until all the legalities are settled. I think Brad, Allen and Stuart wanted to create something they could control away from the shakles of another company. Although it was the Video Toaster on the Amiga that put them on the map. Without being tied to the Toaster to start with they may have never reached the level of success they enjoy today. I wish them well and much success as Allen and Stuart are 2 of the best developers in the world.:D
It will be interesting to see their modeler and whatever else they are working on. So far their products appear very Mac friendly, probably because Brad is a big machead. :D Keep in mind that Newtek is a Video Toaster company first and a Lightwave company second. The VT is owner Tim Jenison's baby so any company decisions favor the VT first. I'm sure Tim has always viewed Lightwave as just one of the modules of the Video Toaster whereas Allen, Stuart and Brad saw Lightwave first and the Video Toaster second if at all. So that was bound to create a conflict at some point and it finally did. As Lee said in a post on the community forum that the Lightwave team at the San Francisco office had a Video Toaster box in the fireplace I guess that pretty well sums it up.

Cheers,
JS

luka
08-01-2003, 02:36 AM
Well Darth after seeing how Newtek used VT? to create streams from Siggraph. It makes me wonder how well that was finished off.

js33
08-01-2003, 02:55 AM
Originally posted by luka
Well Darth after seeing how Newtek used VT? to create streams from Siggraph. It makes me wonder how well that was finished off.

How well what was finished off?

Cheers,
JS

eblu
08-01-2003, 08:00 AM
paintboy,

yeah, i have similar concerns. but its not too much trouble to put my opinions out there, and let Newtek know that there is some customer demand here.

I just don't want to see LW go the way of Hash animation master. Boy, did that product fall apart quick, they were too obsessed with features, and they didn't give a crap about fixing bugs. So basically they shipped a Product that does not run. The box it comes in is really amazing, every catch phrase and whiz-bang feature possible, but none of em worked.

look closely at LW8, you'll see new features, but no word on increased stability, or optimization. Its a sad thing to watch a good product turn south, for whatever reason.

Red_Oddity
08-01-2003, 09:51 AM
I think the reason they don't show catch frases like 'we finally fixed the bladieblad bug!', because that means you're admitting something is wrong with your product...and when your trying to sell something you don't go pointing customers at the faults of the program (even though it means you fixed them, it does leave a funny taste...and you go shop on...hey look...the Alias stand...)

paintboy
08-01-2003, 10:21 AM
Eblu
Yeah, i got a few "hash marks" on my arm as well...clearly a case of you get what you pay for(nuttin for nuttin).The reason you dont see any touts of increased stability or optimization, is for most of the customer base(not us) it already is.

Red, i am not sure thats true, Alias to use your example
has an extensive qualification list for both PC and other platforms, with pretty explicit details about what works and what doesnt? seems way smarter to me
from a customer relations standpoint, i was able to go there before dropping 2Kand find that the part of the program that i was most interested in(paint effects) basicly doesnt work with any of the current mac video cards.( but works on even the cheapest bargain wintel box?)Of course maybe your right, if newtek
had posted the list of problems with mac LW i dont think i would have gone there,
but it too durn late now, lotta time invested in this thing to run now.
I am not one to give in easily, and i LOVE my macs, but after 3 years of watching this, i am hopeless, and currently engaged in selecting a pc for my LW work.
(which by the way i thinkEblu works with guys working on PC's, any input on XPpro vs. win 2000? getting alot of mixed opinions there?)
good luck guys

Darth Mole
08-01-2003, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by js33
Um... it's Allen Hastings and Stuart Ferguson. :D
JS

DOH! Er... I mean, the names have been changed to protect the innocent.

eblu
08-01-2003, 12:02 PM
paint boy:
and i quote:
"windows 2000"
this is what he uses. does he recommend it? well, he hasn't had many problems with it.


Red, not tru. while they dont write it on the box, Newtek is Very vocal to the community whenever they Optimize something in Mac LW. I remember when LW rendered the fastest on macs, when Altivec was added to a few plugins (and greatly over-stated by newtek), the IK thing I've been referencing. Almost every release since 6 has had Mac specific Optimizations in it (minor ones). many of the more exciting enhancements have been mentioned in the forums by the developers Before the release. They make a big deal when they do something right, and they get a lot of free press for it. architosh.com for example has followed almost every tiny Mac centric change to LW with a story that actually sees other target markets than flay.com does. LW 8 is pretty much a vacuum in comparison to every other version since 6(as far as bugs and optimizations go).

Anyway, I am a big supporter of completely divulging issues to the community, especially This community. The LW community is one of the most active Communities I have ever had the pleasure of being a part of, there is an obvious passion for Lightwave here, as well as constructive criticism, that can only benefit the product.

Red_Oddity
08-04-2003, 02:03 AM
I'm sorry, i thought you where talking about LW during Siggraph...

Duh, we know NT have always been pretty straight forward towards the community...but i can't seem to remember any commercials or ads in magazines saying they finally got rid of this and that bug...
They do treat it as an 'added feature' though...Which is what every company does...

Beamtracer
08-04-2003, 03:45 AM
I don't think software companies need to place advertisements to say that they got rid of a bug. But a release note somewhere would be helpful.

For example, one Lightwave bug that irritated me caused Quicktime to render at incorrect framerates. It has been fixed in LW7.5c, though I didn't know it. I only found out when Luxology's Arnie Cachelin posted a note on this forum.

Actually, the 7.5c update destroyed my confidence somewhat. The 7.5b update had to be withdrawn. The installer it came with didn't work at all, which means it hadn't been tested once by anyone before it was released to the Mac Lightwaving public.

Because of this, I'm going to wait until others have tried LW8 before I put my money down. I want to see it working first. Same goes for Luxology or any other software product. I'm becoming less trusting these days. When it is proven to be working properly then I'll put my money down.

By the way... I suspect that Luxology actually owns the code that is known as Lightwave Modeler. I suspect that their MODO application is just the next version developed in the way that they wanted to develop it.

Newtek also has the rights to keep developing Modeler. So we see the same application being developed by two different companies, who will each take it in a different direction.

Karl Hansson
08-04-2003, 04:26 AM
<<<By the way... I suspect that Luxology actually owns the code that is known as Lightwave Modeler. I suspect that their MODO application is just the next version developed in the way that they wanted to develop it.

Newtek also has the rights to keep developing Modeler. So we see the same application being developed by two different companies, who will each take it in a different direction.>>>

My thought exactly. I think MOBO is an ofspring from modeler.

Ade
08-04-2003, 04:42 AM
Luxology is in my good books, Newtek from 7.5c isnt.

silvergun
08-04-2003, 09:05 PM
I'm pretty pissed off with lightwave. It's like newtek just don't give a toss about the mac platform and for spending so much money on an app I think we should be entitled to software that actually works properly. Crap UV, terrible rigging and plugins that dont even work for mac..lscripts anyone. I hope modo turns out to be great so I can finally move away from lightwave. It's superb modeling is the only thing that keeps me hooked to this app but modos really caught my interest. Newtek better pull it's finger out as I think theyre likely to lose a large part of their mac market. I know i'll get alot of slander but I can't be arsed for half arsed conversions of applications. I'm not mocking Lightwave...okay so I am but a good version for mac is all im asking for. And proper multiple undos for lightwave 8 please.

Karl Hansson
08-04-2003, 11:17 PM
What kills me is that they don't even comment on our concerns. I like LW and I have invested alot of money in it. I hope the support for the mac will continue. It will continue, wont it newtek?