Simon Hammett <s.d.hamm...@googlemail.com> wrote: > which is yet another step in the process. > that's making things more complicated, not less. > and .lwo works rather nicely so why change?
Because .osg can capture also things that are native to the scenegraph that you cannot capture in .lwo (e.g. shaders). Moreover, the compiled .ive is optimized by the OSG optimizer, saving even more loading time. > Sometimes our apps are rolled out to many hundreds of machines; > am I supposed to ask them to install blender, install the export > script, then install our app > x 700 times? That's just not going to fly. Then you are doing it wrong, in my opinion. If you are provisioning 700 machines, you should have a premade system image with all this preconfigured or an installer that will install all the tools the user needs in one go (Blender and the scripts are freely redistributable). Then having an extra exporter or whatever doesn't matter. Are you really saying that you are installing (or have the users install) 700 machines manually?? I do not know your exact situation, but this sounds rather crazy to me. Anyhow, I am not going to tell you how to do your job - if it works for you, by all means stay with it. > btw, do you have any xp with that library? > I'd much appreciate any thing extra you can tell me about it. No, I didn't try it, I just saw it in Bullet when I have played with it. Regards, Jan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
