Re: OT Maya: ncache hell

[Jason S]

Perhaps also this lingering/remaining  end-of-sales date (also pointless and forceful) isnt' exactly helping... On 02/20/15 10:38, Jason S wrote: On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Adrian Graham <adrian.gra...@autodesk.com> wrote: Wow, this thread went off the rails quickly. Sorry, I guess I'm still perplexed, On Si-Community, Mauricio commented about why shake went-on while really not as much for soft, saying that the difference was mostly around available jobs as there was still many jobs for Shake after it's Eol Fair enough, and I agree. But that doesn't explain why if not users, why studios themselves decided to "bend themselves in 4" (Change adapt to entire new pipelines, ways of doing doings.. sometimes employees, accept sometimes much longer turn-around times)   and migrate "before time".  (or before a 3D equivalent of a "Foundry Nuke" came) ... What (the heck) was the pressure? At first glance, I would think that might have to do with how at the beginning, all migration paths immediately led to Maya/Max, while advising the largest studios in advance of that, thus perhaps making them migrate first (before any backlash) and while these biggest studios often heavily influence others.   I don't know but it's pretty obvious that it isn't the Lack of artists willing to work in Soft. (not just from all the Maya bitching) Which I guess is my point. Hasn't been a year... :-/ On 02/19/15 19:10, Steven Caron wrote: not uncommon but especially common when maya is involved... the bitterness lingers :) On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Adrian Graham <adrian.gra...@autodesk.com> wrote: Wow, this thread went off the rails quickly.