Re: [Bf-committers] Current state of Blender's user experience (Ton Roosendaal) (Sybren A. St?vel) (Ton Roosendaal)
Hi Joe, I talk about mails people send to the Blender Foundation, with a list of requirements for them to start using Blender. I then try to encourage them to then share their ideas in public or to get involved in one way or another. That is (for the reasons I outlined) not possible for many professionals. -Ton- Ton Roosendaal - t...@blender.org - www.blender.org Chairman Blender Foundation, Producer Blender Institute/Studio Entrepotdok 57A - 1018AD Amsterdam - The Netherlands > On 26 Apr 2016, at 21:25, Joe Eagar wrote: > >> I often get mails from professionals who say "nice job on Blender, but..." >> and then come with a list of favourite Maya or Max features. This might be >> an acceptable consumer attitude towards commercial software, but it's very >> not helpful for a public open source project. Dynamics here work >> differently, it's not based on market shares or consumer satisfaction, it's >> based one time and energy - contributions. > > Oh really? Care to explain? I find such feedback incredibly helpful. > I think you're making the mistake of thinking that if a user wants > something, he should get it now. > > That's just silly. I'm perfectly happy to take a commercial user's > input, and factor it into my medium and long-term thinking. An > example of that is superknife, which I designed as a hybrid of two > different commercial package's knife tools. It took years for BMesh > to reach a state where I could implement it. Geoffrey Bantle thought > the same way, which is why the BMesh data structure he designed is so > flexible and yet simple to work with; it's meant to cover all an > enormous number of use cases (except cad, which requires holes in > polygons; both of us were too intimidated to attempt it at the time). > We loved getting ideas from commercial software and the users of that > software. > > Of course, given the human tendency to turn every public conversation > into a flame war over "which is normatively better, my tribe--erm, I > mean app--or yours?", most of these conversations happened > semi-privately on IRC or through email, and occasionally the main > developers list. > > I love feedback. Feedback is wonderful. Software development is an > incredibly complicated constrained optimization process. Feedback > helps you prioritize goals. It doesn't have to be implemented > immediately; in fact it can take years, and I think that's okay. I'd > much rather have knowledge I cannot act on now, then live in ignorance > until I have the means to implement said knowledge. When I finally do > implement it, I'll have had years to think about it. > > Cheers, > Joe > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Thomas Dinges wrote: >> It's Ton, not Tom. ;) >> >> Am 26.04.2016 um 15:23 schrieb David Ballesteros: >>> Hi Sybren, >>> >>> It's simply crossed to me as a too much white & black answer, nothing else. >>> I just read Tom new answer and I understand his original answer. >>> So all is good. >>> You don't appear like an avid hater, so why do you feel he is addressing >>> you? Cheers, -- Sybren A. St?vel >>> - >>> Hi Tom, >>> >>> Thanks for the welcome and the answer. >>> Now I understand much better your points. >>> >>> I'm very glad to read you're open to suggestions form "commercial" software >>> users. >>> >>> A simple argument can be used to those users that want feature X in Blender >>> is asking them how many features suggested by them got implemented on their >>> commercial X software. ;) I know several of mine were completly ignored in >>> LW and Modo :D >>> My expectation was that we could use the dynamics of the 2.8 project to >>> include that target. But I'm still not convinced we are ready for it now. The project is too >>> complicated, with too many inactive stakeholders and not enough active contributors. But we >>> make progress here... >>> >>> I read the document you attached yesterday, and I'm very glad to see where >>> is going, and I guess you mean it was for the 2.8 branch and still under >>> disscusion if it oges or not?. >>> >>> I liked the consolidation explained area by area, that will really >>> streamline Blender and make it even better. >>> >>> I still have a lot to read on Blender internals to even know where to start >>> to touch without breaking anything :) I'll try to do my best. >>> >>> To the OP (Daniel): >>> I read that reddit thread, and I think better ignore it. Too much energy >>> spent in a discussion that doesn't take anywhere. >>> >>> Cheers >>> David. >>> >>> Message: 6 Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:17:51 +0200 From: Ton Roosendaal Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Current state of Blender's user experience (Ton Roosendaal) To: bf-blender developers Message-ID: <667e96f1-d629-4e04-9389
Re: [Bf-committers] Current state of Blender's user experience (Ton Roosendaal) (Sybren A. St?vel) (Ton Roosendaal)
> I often get mails from professionals who say "nice job on Blender, but..." > and then come with a list of favourite Maya or Max features. This might be > an acceptable consumer attitude towards commercial software, but it's very > not helpful for a public open source project. Dynamics here work > differently, it's not based on market shares or consumer satisfaction, it's > based one time and energy - contributions. Oh really? Care to explain? I find such feedback incredibly helpful. I think you're making the mistake of thinking that if a user wants something, he should get it now. That's just silly. I'm perfectly happy to take a commercial user's input, and factor it into my medium and long-term thinking. An example of that is superknife, which I designed as a hybrid of two different commercial package's knife tools. It took years for BMesh to reach a state where I could implement it. Geoffrey Bantle thought the same way, which is why the BMesh data structure he designed is so flexible and yet simple to work with; it's meant to cover all an enormous number of use cases (except cad, which requires holes in polygons; both of us were too intimidated to attempt it at the time). We loved getting ideas from commercial software and the users of that software. Of course, given the human tendency to turn every public conversation into a flame war over "which is normatively better, my tribe--erm, I mean app--or yours?", most of these conversations happened semi-privately on IRC or through email, and occasionally the main developers list. I love feedback. Feedback is wonderful. Software development is an incredibly complicated constrained optimization process. Feedback helps you prioritize goals. It doesn't have to be implemented immediately; in fact it can take years, and I think that's okay. I'd much rather have knowledge I cannot act on now, then live in ignorance until I have the means to implement said knowledge. When I finally do implement it, I'll have had years to think about it. Cheers, Joe On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Thomas Dinges wrote: > It's Ton, not Tom. ;) > > Am 26.04.2016 um 15:23 schrieb David Ballesteros: >> Hi Sybren, >> >> It's simply crossed to me as a too much white & black answer, nothing else. >> I just read Tom new answer and I understand his original answer. >> So all is good. >> >>> You don't appear like an avid hater, so why do you feel he is addressing >> you? >>> Cheers, >>> -- >>> Sybren A. St?vel >> - >> Hi Tom, >> >> Thanks for the welcome and the answer. >> Now I understand much better your points. >> >> I'm very glad to read you're open to suggestions form "commercial" software >> users. >> >> A simple argument can be used to those users that want feature X in Blender >> is asking them how many features suggested by them got implemented on their >> commercial X software. ;) I know several of mine were completly ignored in >> LW and Modo :D >> >>> My expectation was that we could use the dynamics of the 2.8 project to >> include that target. >>> But I'm still not convinced we are ready for it now. The project is too >> complicated, with too >>> many inactive stakeholders and not enough active contributors. But we >> make progress here... >> >> I read the document you attached yesterday, and I'm very glad to see where >> is going, and I guess you mean it was for the 2.8 branch and still under >> disscusion if it oges or not?. >> >> I liked the consolidation explained area by area, that will really >> streamline Blender and make it even better. >> >> I still have a lot to read on Blender internals to even know where to start >> to touch without breaking anything :) I'll try to do my best. >> >> To the OP (Daniel): >> I read that reddit thread, and I think better ignore it. Too much energy >> spent in a discussion that doesn't take anywhere. >> >> Cheers >> David. >> >> Message: 6 >>> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:17:51 +0200 >>> From: Ton Roosendaal >>> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Current state of Blender's user >>> experience (Ton Roosendaal) >>> To: bf-blender developers >>> Message-ID: <667e96f1-d629-4e04-9389-774609ed1...@blender.org> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >>> >>> Hi David, >>> >>> Thanks for sharing, I just addressed the Blender haters out there, not >>> users of other 3d tools. >>> >>> It is great that there are so many people involved with our projects who >>> used (or still use) commercial 3d software as well. We can learn from them, >>> especially because they were curious enough to invest time to figure out >>> how to use Blender, or what makes Blender good (enough to use) as well. >>> >>> So please feel welcome to hangout, help developers with their work or >>> contribute code. >>> >>> I often get mails from professionals who say "nice job on Blender, but..." >>> and then come with a list of favourite Maya or Max f
Re: [Bf-committers] Current state of Blender's user experience (Ton Roosendaal) (Sybren A. St?vel) (Ton Roosendaal)
It's Ton, not Tom. ;) Am 26.04.2016 um 15:23 schrieb David Ballesteros: > Hi Sybren, > > It's simply crossed to me as a too much white & black answer, nothing else. > I just read Tom new answer and I understand his original answer. > So all is good. > >> You don't appear like an avid hater, so why do you feel he is addressing > you? >> Cheers, >> -- >> Sybren A. St?vel > - > Hi Tom, > > Thanks for the welcome and the answer. > Now I understand much better your points. > > I'm very glad to read you're open to suggestions form "commercial" software > users. > > A simple argument can be used to those users that want feature X in Blender > is asking them how many features suggested by them got implemented on their > commercial X software. ;) I know several of mine were completly ignored in > LW and Modo :D > >> My expectation was that we could use the dynamics of the 2.8 project to > include that target. >> But I'm still not convinced we are ready for it now. The project is too > complicated, with too >> many inactive stakeholders and not enough active contributors. But we > make progress here... > > I read the document you attached yesterday, and I'm very glad to see where > is going, and I guess you mean it was for the 2.8 branch and still under > disscusion if it oges or not?. > > I liked the consolidation explained area by area, that will really > streamline Blender and make it even better. > > I still have a lot to read on Blender internals to even know where to start > to touch without breaking anything :) I'll try to do my best. > > To the OP (Daniel): > I read that reddit thread, and I think better ignore it. Too much energy > spent in a discussion that doesn't take anywhere. > > Cheers > David. > > Message: 6 >> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:17:51 +0200 >> From: Ton Roosendaal >> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Current state of Blender's user >> experience (Ton Roosendaal) >> To: bf-blender developers >> Message-ID: <667e96f1-d629-4e04-9389-774609ed1...@blender.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> Hi David, >> >> Thanks for sharing, I just addressed the Blender haters out there, not >> users of other 3d tools. >> >> It is great that there are so many people involved with our projects who >> used (or still use) commercial 3d software as well. We can learn from them, >> especially because they were curious enough to invest time to figure out >> how to use Blender, or what makes Blender good (enough to use) as well. >> >> So please feel welcome to hangout, help developers with their work or >> contribute code. >> >> I often get mails from professionals who say "nice job on Blender, but..." >> and then come with a list of favourite Maya or Max features. This might be >> an acceptable consumer attitude towards commercial software, but it's very >> not helpful for a public open source project. Dynamics here work >> differently, it's not based on market shares or consumer satisfaction, it's >> based one time and energy - contributions. >> >> It's also a misconception to think we didn't code awesome feature X or Y >> because we didn't know it existed, or didn't know it was so important. >> There's just not enough developers to contribute. >> >> So: how do we get studios or professionals organise Blender projects to >> handle their favourite topics? I always tell them they're welcome, with >> limited success. I learned that getting involved with FLOSS is not in their >> DNA really. First of all it takes (a lot of) time, which is expensive for >> pros. Second we cannot give a hard guarantee in advance that things will >> work as planned or get accepted in releases. And third: corporate practices >> is still based on secrecy and non-disclosure, participating in a public >> project is regarded as a loss of competitive advantage. That is changing >> (ILM, Pixar, etc), but hardly in small/medium sized companies. >> >> Because it could be so easy. If just 20 Maya/Max subscribers would decide >> to invest in Blender what they'd give to Autodesk, they could hire a >> developer to work for them full time - to fix mouse/keyboard input mapping >> and configurability for example, snapping tools, and other very useful >> projects. >> >> My expectation was that we could use the dynamics of the 2.8 project to >> include that target. But I'm still not convinced we are ready for it now. >> The project is too complicated, with too many inactive stakeholders and not >> enough active contributors. But we make progress here... >> >> -Ton- >> >> > ___ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Current state of Blender's user experience (Ton Roosendaal) (Sybren A. St?vel) (Ton Roosendaal)
Hi Sybren, It's simply crossed to me as a too much white & black answer, nothing else. I just read Tom new answer and I understand his original answer. So all is good. > You don't appear like an avid hater, so why do you feel he is addressing you? > Cheers, > -- > Sybren A. St?vel - Hi Tom, Thanks for the welcome and the answer. Now I understand much better your points. I'm very glad to read you're open to suggestions form "commercial" software users. A simple argument can be used to those users that want feature X in Blender is asking them how many features suggested by them got implemented on their commercial X software. ;) I know several of mine were completly ignored in LW and Modo :D > My expectation was that we could use the dynamics of the 2.8 project to include that target. > But I'm still not convinced we are ready for it now. The project is too complicated, with too > many inactive stakeholders and not enough active contributors. But we make progress here... I read the document you attached yesterday, and I'm very glad to see where is going, and I guess you mean it was for the 2.8 branch and still under disscusion if it oges or not?. I liked the consolidation explained area by area, that will really streamline Blender and make it even better. I still have a lot to read on Blender internals to even know where to start to touch without breaking anything :) I'll try to do my best. To the OP (Daniel): I read that reddit thread, and I think better ignore it. Too much energy spent in a discussion that doesn't take anywhere. Cheers David. Message: 6 > Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:17:51 +0200 > From: Ton Roosendaal > Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Current state of Blender's user > experience (Ton Roosendaal) > To: bf-blender developers > Message-ID: <667e96f1-d629-4e04-9389-774609ed1...@blender.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Hi David, > > Thanks for sharing, I just addressed the Blender haters out there, not > users of other 3d tools. > > It is great that there are so many people involved with our projects who > used (or still use) commercial 3d software as well. We can learn from them, > especially because they were curious enough to invest time to figure out > how to use Blender, or what makes Blender good (enough to use) as well. > > So please feel welcome to hangout, help developers with their work or > contribute code. > > I often get mails from professionals who say "nice job on Blender, but..." > and then come with a list of favourite Maya or Max features. This might be > an acceptable consumer attitude towards commercial software, but it's very > not helpful for a public open source project. Dynamics here work > differently, it's not based on market shares or consumer satisfaction, it's > based one time and energy - contributions. > > It's also a misconception to think we didn't code awesome feature X or Y > because we didn't know it existed, or didn't know it was so important. > There's just not enough developers to contribute. > > So: how do we get studios or professionals organise Blender projects to > handle their favourite topics? I always tell them they're welcome, with > limited success. I learned that getting involved with FLOSS is not in their > DNA really. First of all it takes (a lot of) time, which is expensive for > pros. Second we cannot give a hard guarantee in advance that things will > work as planned or get accepted in releases. And third: corporate practices > is still based on secrecy and non-disclosure, participating in a public > project is regarded as a loss of competitive advantage. That is changing > (ILM, Pixar, etc), but hardly in small/medium sized companies. > > Because it could be so easy. If just 20 Maya/Max subscribers would decide > to invest in Blender what they'd give to Autodesk, they could hire a > developer to work for them full time - to fix mouse/keyboard input mapping > and configurability for example, snapping tools, and other very useful > projects. > > My expectation was that we could use the dynamics of the 2.8 project to > include that target. But I'm still not convinced we are ready for it now. > The project is too complicated, with too many inactive stakeholders and not > enough active contributors. But we make progress here... > > -Ton- > > ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
