All posts related to V2
User avatar
By Ernesto
#371427
Hi AlexP,
This is interesting since Minhea Balta told me this feature is not intended to work in any pluggin but only in Studio.
http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... 71#p371392
Anyway I cannot really believe that...

Here I explain what I am getting in Maya:
If the material tiled map is smaller than 1 meter:
For instance in my case it was only 0,40 meters, the materials show off 6.25 times bigger.
But in case the Tiled Map is bigger than 1 meter, it shows 2,5 times smaller.
It is not anything that could go unnoticed. If you do not see anything wrong in Rhino, it is probable because there is nothing wrong in it.

What really bothers me is that NL is trying to avoid the possibility of providing a solution, although it is really not fair.
It seems that the policy is that we will not get a solution, until paying for an upgrade. Even in such a case we will never know if a solution would be provided anytime. There will never be any guarantee.

Ernesto
User avatar
By Mihnea Balta
#371459
Ernesto wrote: What really bothers me is that NL is trying to avoid the possibility of providing a solution, although it is really not fair.
It seems that the policy is that we will not get a solution, until paying for an upgrade. Even in such a case we will never know if a solution would be provided anytime. There will never be any guarantee.
Now you're deep into conspiracy theory territory. Maxwell plugin updates have always been free and we've never withheld fixes which were feasible just to get users to pay for an upgrade. You've been getting free updates with hundreds of fixes and new features for the last 4 years, which is pretty much unheard of in 3D. That's not just plug-in updates, it's engine updates as well.

Aside from new features, Maxwell 3 will fix bugs which were present in 2. That's a natural consequence of development, it's not a conspiracy to get you to hand over your hard earned money. Every payed software upgrade in the history of software development has included bug fixes. However, to suggest that we don't fix bugs on purpose (or, who knows, maybe we introduce them on purpose?) is offensive.

We are busy working on v3, but we will still fix critical v2 bugs. Maybe we could fix this bug as well, if you actually provided a scene which reproduces it and/or some images explaining the failure.
User avatar
By Ernesto
#371504
There is no conspiracy theory!

The main thing I want to know, is why you are working in V3, before you finish the necesary refinement in V2?

The last version of a software before an upgrade is presented, should be the most stable of all the versions, the maximun level of that version. A really safe working tool. I do not understand why you prefer not to finish V2 to start V3. You did the same when starting V2, and I have pointed that same problem at that time. That was the reason I didn´t upgraded until you anounced that V2 was finished, and were going to start V3.
The consequences of this, is that users have never the opportunity to work with a stable tool free of unpredictable behaviour. Unless they buy a new version, that will bring new bugs (as it is obvious with every new version)
If I am wrong, tell me why you should prefer the opposite?

Ernesto
By feynman
#371947
Monsieur, if MR is so full of bugs and anomalies and not working for your workflow, which, judging by the flak of complaints it obviously isn't - why don't you just buy another renderer from the 57 currently available that does all those things you find well implemented elsewhere? It's a free world. The cost of MR is so reasonable that it is absorbed in about two days of work by a junior designer. So - just write the cost off, buy your dream renderer from your dream vendor, and be happy ever after.

I, for one, never had issues with realscale materials and found the personal attention provided by NL's support, once I had a serious issue, swift and most helpful. The support you receive at an Audi dealership's mech-desk for your $50k car is most likely below what NL provides. Mr. Winterkorn surely won't take my call and sort out a next day skype chat to resolve an issue.

Have a nice day.
Ernesto wrote:There is no conspiracy theory!

The main thing I want to know, is why you are working in V3, before you finish the necesary refinement in V2?

The last version of a software before an upgrade is presented, should be the most stable of all the versions, the maximun level of that version. A really safe working tool. I do not understand why you prefer not to finish V2 to start V3. You did the same when starting V2, and I have pointed that same problem at that time. That was the reason I didn´t upgraded until you anounced that V2 was finished, and were going to start V3.
The consequences of this, is that users have never the opportunity to work with a stable tool free of unpredictable behaviour. Unless they buy a new version, that will bring new bugs (as it is obvious with every new version)
If I am wrong, tell me why you should prefer the opposite?

Ernesto

A followup question Miguel, I think the following […]

Materials Library not working

Yeah. We have changed to a new website on a new se[…]

SketchUp 2021 Update

Hi CDRA, SketchUp 2021 have changed the sdk and mo[…]

Let's talk about Maxwell 5.2

Good news, thank you Jochen