Why not to rename xsi.exe to maya.exe and change the starting screen? that could be very easy implemented, and voila! all softimage tools and ui in maya :)))))
2014-03-07 16:50 GMT-03:00 Raffaele Fragapane <raffsxsil...@googlemail.com>: > I think the core issue here isn't as much whether Maya can be patched or > not, it surely can, the core is still functional and respectably open, if > not without issues (and stability has been degrading compared to the past > IME). > > The problem for a lot of people used to Soft is how much scavenging and > patching they will HAVE TO do before they are even remotely close to having > previous functionality. > > For the small scale Maya user, so leave us engineers and big shops out, > having to scavenge for scripts and tools and hacking together horrible > copy'n'paste MEL macros is part of the day to day routine, even for things > such as opening more than one outliner. That's why it's perceived as > inferior by a lot of Soft users. > We can discuss potential all day, and there are certainly things I can do > in Maya that Soft will simply not allow me to do, but in terms of OOTB > experience it is pretty F'in disgraceful with all the missing bits. > > Rabbit's Shapes plugin and ngSkinTools are bare minimum additions to even > be able to use it, along side a handful of shelves (Maya's layout is > another disgrace that requires a lot of old school hacking) that you'll > have to scavenge from all over the place. > > You also have to toe the line between what you can rely on and what you > can't. > Maya has a binary lock on versions, so any new major release, and in two > recorded cases even the .5s, it breaks binary compatibility. > Soft users take for granted that most C++ plugins and nodes written four > years ago and never touched again will still work. There was some pretty > major upset when for the first time a version or two ago some ICE fixes > "broke" the majority of nodes into requiring recompilation. This is par for > the course in Maya, compiled anything will NOT work on any major version > other than the one it was compiled for. > > > > On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 6:36 AM, Meng-Yang Lu <ntmon...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I've always felt Maya's core performance has been relatively good >> compared to others. It is incredibly extensible and can maintain some >> really good performance. The problem that Maya has is having the various >> components exchange data between each other. Essentially, every node in >> the scene is holding each other's hand always. These no easy way to hold >> up data to prevent all the nodes from updating when you make a change. >> >> It boils down to how cleanly you can implement these features. There are >> some legacy things that could go, obviously some complete reworks, but >> development for Maya is a lot more straight forward than Softimage. >> >> My only gripe is that as you build tools for Maya, the plug-in manager >> gets incredibly messy. Looks like a vomit of ideas over the past 10 years >> and no search function. And it kinda needs all this garbage to function. >> >> House cleaning is definitely in order. >> >> -Lu >> >>
