Leaderboard

Hm? Actually I prefer not be drawn into (as Cairyn would say) "one of these threads". Also I'm not sure, which insights I'm supposed to share. I assume, I'm being asked as developer and not as a former Maxon employee. So I will keep it more general. From my point of view onboarding new developers is (or at least can be) a difficult task. It almost always takes quite a bit of resources (aka time of already experienced developers) for a significant time. Every developer is different. And like all humans every developer learns differently. Can bug fixing be a good learning path? Yes, I think so. If you have a tenacious and masochistic type of a developer, this can work out great. I do not mean this in any bad way. Maybe in other words, you need somebody with a lot of will to reach the goal. If you have someone with such characteristics, then the result can be awesome, because the knowledge collected on the go is immense. On the other hand there the "this baby has to run as quickly as possible" type of developers. For those a smaller or simpler starter project can offer a better learning curve, as they have better chances to reach the needed feeling of success to keep them going. Also bugs are pretty human in this regard. Every one is different (I hope, now I do not get drawn into a discussion, how theoretically many bugs are identical) and like with humans you can't really judge it by looking at its cover. So it can already take quite a lot of work from an experienced developer to judge, if a bug is suited to be worked on by a beginner (usually you want "isolated" bugs, where the fix has little potential to influence or break other stuff). And afterwards you need an experienced developer to check and verify the fix of the newbie. This can lead to a situation, where it costs more resources than would have been needed if the experienced developer worked on the bug in the first place. I think, comparing Blender and C4D in this regard is misleading and probably also a bit unfair. Open source in a way is way better suited for onboarding new developers. Of course a) the code base is open, so chances to get somebody, who already has some experience, are better. And b) there's a kind of playful flavor in the process, which you usually do not have in closed environments. I do not want to say either way is superior. It's different and the difficulties are different. I don't think, it's a good idea to transfer the paradigm of either to the other. And of course either side can also learn from the other, but chances are the result of such learning process or evolution will not be identical to the other side you started to learn from in the beginning. The constraints are too different to end up with an identical result. I could go on talking for hours about this, but as I said in the beginning, I'm not even sure, what I have been asked for. For example the topic, how many interesting ways there are to make even the best developer have merely no output at all. Although I tend to like the view from the other side a bit more, the many ways you can get productive output from bad developers (or as I would put it, there are no unproductive employees, only employees used in wrong ways). Or the topic of team mindedness of developers, something my breed is probably not really the best in (which on the other hand is most likely the reason, they got developers in the first place...). Just to be not completely off topic: I see nothing wrong in a service pack focusing on bug fixing. And I'm a bit irritated, about certain views for example about the number of bugs in "UI change" release. To me it's pretty obvious, even if there were no features to present, there is way more work going on than visible at the surface. Please, do not misunderstand this, I'm not interested in another discussion if R25 is a release worth its money. Or if the communication strategy is right or wrong. Or Maxon's business strategies. In my view Maxon tries nothing less but rebuilding a skyscraper from scratch without scratching the old facade during the process (better: with as little scratches as possible). Or trying a heart surgery on a living walking human without any support machinery. Not many companies have even dared to try this. For this alone they have my fullest respect. It's even worse for them. Their customers grew used to one of the most stable and backward compatible software products (not talking about DCCs but software in general) out there. And for such an endeavor this luxury turns into an immense burden. Whatever you do, somebody will always be pissed (even worse, most likely rightly so). And I doubt, many can imagine how different, how much more complicated and how much more time consuming this is compared to building something new from scratch. Maybe not even all developers at Maxon did foresee the complexity to its full extend (which is no critique). I mean, hell, I live in a country, where we are not even able to build an airport from scratch anymore. Something which has been done thousands of times all over the globe. Complexity is a bi... and forums can be a bad place to discuss complex topics. Most humans are not interested in understanding complexity. We usually prefer the simple, black/white answers. And, again an example from the country I live in, people can get pretty angry and even violent, if the answers to questions which frighten them are neither black or white (yep, talking pandemic here). I think, same patterns can be seen in the C4D discussions since a few years. Understandable. Inevitable. Certainly not constructive or helpful for anybody. Sorry for being carried away. Probably another reason, why I shouldn't be pulled into threads...

Excellent points. If you want examples of how bad core rewrite can go, just look a Lightwave. But with that said, customers do have a right to certain expectations on quality given what they are paying. I think that is where most of the angst comes from because when you do peel the surface on what Maxon has actually accomplished (a complete core rewrite while not tanking the company) then there is a lot to admire. But what happened was that before anyone could really see the benefits of the new core (now fully showing itself with capsules). they flipped to subscriptions. That was kind of a thumb in the eye to all the Studio owners who stood by and supported Maxon by paying a higher MSA premium price for upgrades that were mostly non-Studio impacting. Everyone seems to forget that, but I feel that is the source of angst when you strip everything away and get to the heart of the matter. But let's not go there again please! So you are not the first ex-Maxon employee to be referenced or show up on the forum. I do get the sense of an increase in turn-over since R20 and you have to wonder how fast new people can pick up an unfamiliar code base to the same level of proficiency held by the original developer(s). Per Anders was a huge loss (how did they allow that to happen?) and I would imagine his shoes have yet to be filled. So does increased turn-over also lead to more bugs particularly as you trying to fit a new core into an old skin? Is that happening as well?

You do bring up an interesting point. How does the steady decline in C4D stability impact subscribers? Do you still have access to previous releases or is your only option to use the latest release? Plus, even if you can use a previous version, paying annually to use the same version will definitely make you wonder why you are in the subscription program to begin with. So many people have quoted Maxon talking points concerning Maxon One subscription rate rising and that this strategy is working. It is almost being made as a counter point by the Maxon acolytes to tell those who are upset with the direction of C4D to stop complaining. Sorry, but I don't like being gas lighted by propaganda from anyone so relative to increasing subscription rates I also want to see data on how many are REPEAT subscribers! What is the rate of growth for people who have been staying in the subscription program for two and three years (e.g., going back to 2019)? I would like to see those rates for Maxon One, C4D, Redshift and Red Giant subscriptions. Is that number thinning out? If it is, then what you are seeing is people trying a subscription for one year ONLY. Yes, that number can grow from year to year but if they are then dropping out, eventually (after everyone has had a taste of Maxon's products and left) it will start to drop. That is NOT a good thing for long term growth. The true financial benefit of SaaS to a company is the re-occurring revenue it provides for REPEAT customers. This may explain Maxon's acquisition strategy and buying Z-Brush. Add more to the basket of goods to keep people in one of their subscription plans. R25 was definitely a mortal wound to people's attraction to C4D subscriptions. Increasing instability since R20 does not help either. Fixing 352 bugs helped but creating a few more in the process is just another black eye. So Maxon's mojo in the marketplace used to be based on C4D's stability and that confidence has been shaken. Now, Maxon is building a new mojo through acquisition, and I am sure that trend will continue. In essence, all this points to one conclusion: Maxon cares more about Maxon One than it does about C4D.

I did not want to imply, comparing Blender and C4D would be unfair. Both are DCCs and can of course be compared. I only meant to try to compare the manpower or number of developers directly is in my opinion not possible in a fair way. Or at least be very difficult. Especially when trying to do so based on some chart about Blender or hearsay about Maxon internals.

Thanks you so much for your thoughts on this. It's nice to get a detailed assessment from someone who has obviously put some thought into this, or had to 🙂 I really wish that the customer communication would be as open and clear as your statement. Blender clearly shows how far people are willing to carry a project if they feel they are being taken seriously. But equally they are adamant when they feel screwed. The discussions about Zbrush have surprised me. That so many people outside this forum have the same impression about the development of Maxon and communicate it so harshly shocked me. Even if I knew it in principle. Many of these harsh statements here and elsewhere are the expression of disappointment. And for many it is not about the speed of development (which, if properly communicated, is not a problem for a long time, see star citizen) but about the simultaneous hard, almost boldly displayed business decisions. I don't think this incredibly expensive loss in customer satisfaction would have been necessary. However, you didn't want to be drawn into the communication discussion. Nevertheless, thank you very much for this contribution! p.s. I also would prefer to live in a country that can count vaccinations 😄

Some people may say that even that can make a lot of difference...

This Blender credit list includes all the "Contributors", not the "Programmers" . A Contributor can be someone who just created an interface icon, provided a shader, worked on the documentation, etc... The Blender programming team is actually quite small, approx. 20 people. 10 in the HQ in Amsterdam, and 10 other spread over the world. Besides these permanent coders there are also dozens of Blender "volunteers", part time developers doing it as a hobby or to get coding experience.

There is no r22, only s22. That means 22 was a subscription release and therefor there unfortunately is no perpetual version of it that you could buy.

This is the 2019 annual economic report of Blender, https://download.blender.org/institute/2019_financial_report_v05.pdf As they say And these are the people working the magic behind it: https://www.blender.org/about/credits/ 151 programmers (for the 3.0). How many programmers does C4D have ? I don't think more than 20 (need citation). And there are still 14 open positions. By acquiring more assets from other companies Maxon gets experienced programmers something that is not easy at all. Add the pandemic to the equation and it's like searching for a needle in the hay. Even an junior programmer can save a senior a lot of time on fixing bugs so the senior can develop a new feature. Currently the main advantage of Blender is manpower.

"Saved" would imply that Maxon is better than Autodesk or the Foundry. That isn't the case.

Building a new Velour shader in Corona. WIP.

It will be of little use to users. C4D and Zbrush simply have too few connection points. Also, Maxon is primarily interested in growing, so it is not practical for them to integrate features from one program into the other. Sure a little bridge here a little bridge there, but no real integration. They haven't even integrated redshift yet. So it's about increasing the portfolio to become a big player. That means owning as many tools as possible and getting money from as many people as possible, even from the people who only use a small part of the tools.

Jesus Christ, ICM... I've never used ZBrush, never had an interest in using it, never sculpted anything, never had an interest in sculpting anything, and never had a need to. Was this ambiguous from my earlier questions? I also never used InDesign, Illustrator, and probably three or four other programs in the Adobe sub I had, but Premiere and (to a lesser extent) AE received some use. I'll be skipping both for Resolve as it can cut, colour and comp all I need for my needs. Having heard that Maxon are picking ZBrush up, I'm assuming they'll be letting paying customers of Maxon One have access to it at some point. I'm getting that sub with my next iMac, so will have a look when it comes out. But I'm not in a burning hurry to have a look at it, hence me stating earlier in this thread exactly that. But if it's there as part of the sub I'll likely have a look. I have heard the UI is annoying though, and watched a training video on the app a handful of years ago where the instructor spent the first five minutes warning people that the UI was annoying. Go figure. If you're going to 'indulge' my questions, great, but maybe change your tone while you're at it. If not, don't bother. Even better - a possible future path to avoid pointless clashes in this thread, and on this forum - I'll avoid commenting on your C4D posts in future on these threads if you avoid commenting on mine. Conversations on these topics are generally fine but I strongly suspect if we were face to face in a pub or bar we'd find common ground on something within about 60 seconds and would go from there. But being grilled in bold type over something I've never claimed to use seems typical of the hostility that probably lies in the future in these conversations if we keep going back and forth. I'm beginning to question the worth of threads here on Maxon topics where 80% of the posts seem to come from ex-C4D users who have no interest in the app currently, and where people who express an interest are viewed with repeated hostility and suspicion.

Haha.. this seems a tad harsh. Maybe some people can afford to pay for both? Also the slave rhetoric seems mildly uncalled for, but perhaps the Christmas season has led you to celebrate early. Nothing wrong with this if you have - unless you tell us otherwise. Anyway, don't want to derail the thread with an argument. I notice though the camps seem to be dividing along the lines of - ZBrush owners who are unhappy they'll likely have to start paying more for the software they used to get every year for free. Blender owners happy they no longer have to pay every year for their software. and C4D owners present and future who don't give a shit that the alternate software is free and are happy to pay for C4D. Shrug. Again, I get that this might seem like the apocalypse in some quarters, but now that ZBrush is being folded into Maxon One (presumably) I'll likely check it out. Hopefully the Maxon guys can work some of their UI magic on it. Yeah, I gather some icons are missing in R25. I don't really care and am not that bothered. If it was up to me the Maxon guys should just fold ZBrush into C4D, the same way that Blackmagic brought Fusion and Fairlight into DaVinci Resolve, everything in the one app with different tabs at the top to shift between screens and anything you do in one automatically translates to the other. This would probably involve someone somewhere doing a fair bit of work though. If ZBrush ends up in C4D maybe Beeple can sculpt a Mount Rushmore made up of famous C4D figures like Noseman and Rick Barrett.

We can only hope for Zbrush inside C4D! And Redshift inside Zbrush! And a new Gui with OM in Zbursh! 😉