02-02-2014, 02:03 AM
Hey y'all..
Since I stopped doing graphics for a living (some years ago), I ALSO stopped contributing to wings (some of you may remember me).. But I still ocassionally lurk the forums and I OF COURSE download and test drive new versions, just for fun.
This subject has kept on coming up, from time to time since the beginning, when Bjorng first made wings3d public..
The shape that the requests come in is almost always the same too; "wouldn't it be great if wings copied these functions from this software over here?". Most often, the requestor can't code in ANY language, and/or hasn't a clue about coding in Erlang in particular. More often than that, the requestor doesn't know WHAT Winged Edge geometry is and why it's differnet than other methods.. Last but certainly not least, more often than not the requestor doesn't attempt to understand the workflow philosophy built into the program and attempts to argue for a completely different method, never understanding that some choices were designed in from the very beginning.
This last one, has always been my personal pet peve since the early days. Everytime someone even mentions widgets, my head want's to explode.. Think carefully people!! Wings is NOT built around widgets, WAS NOT from the beginning and in fact works in REVERSE ORDER of operation. Once you "get" wings, it very quickly becomes the fastest workflow of any program you might own. The reasons for this are: Winged Edge geometry and NO WIDGETS!!
If I got back into the 3D biz and picked up wings again for real, my feature requests would revolve around taking things OUT!! Removing possible redundant features, removing or making smaller GUI elements, things like that. I would push for breaking the UV tools off of the base package and making it a stand alone, though it would use Erlang's power to run concurrently, across networks(s) WITH the base package. I would advocate for a lighter set of tools, with as little screen clutter as possible for each, all with the ability to run concurrently with the others either on the same desk or across desks and down the hall, or halfway 'round the world. "Just the model and the mouse" is what wings has been, what it should remain, and I'd advocate for that model on steroids.
More polygons would be nice, freeform re-organization of all graphs would be nice but bottom line for me would be fewer, streamlined tools that run smoking fast and stay out of the way when they're not in use.
Since I stopped doing graphics for a living (some years ago), I ALSO stopped contributing to wings (some of you may remember me).. But I still ocassionally lurk the forums and I OF COURSE download and test drive new versions, just for fun.
This subject has kept on coming up, from time to time since the beginning, when Bjorng first made wings3d public..
The shape that the requests come in is almost always the same too; "wouldn't it be great if wings copied these functions from this software over here?". Most often, the requestor can't code in ANY language, and/or hasn't a clue about coding in Erlang in particular. More often than that, the requestor doesn't know WHAT Winged Edge geometry is and why it's differnet than other methods.. Last but certainly not least, more often than not the requestor doesn't attempt to understand the workflow philosophy built into the program and attempts to argue for a completely different method, never understanding that some choices were designed in from the very beginning.
This last one, has always been my personal pet peve since the early days. Everytime someone even mentions widgets, my head want's to explode.. Think carefully people!! Wings is NOT built around widgets, WAS NOT from the beginning and in fact works in REVERSE ORDER of operation. Once you "get" wings, it very quickly becomes the fastest workflow of any program you might own. The reasons for this are: Winged Edge geometry and NO WIDGETS!!
If I got back into the 3D biz and picked up wings again for real, my feature requests would revolve around taking things OUT!! Removing possible redundant features, removing or making smaller GUI elements, things like that. I would push for breaking the UV tools off of the base package and making it a stand alone, though it would use Erlang's power to run concurrently, across networks(s) WITH the base package. I would advocate for a lighter set of tools, with as little screen clutter as possible for each, all with the ability to run concurrently with the others either on the same desk or across desks and down the hall, or halfway 'round the world. "Just the model and the mouse" is what wings has been, what it should remain, and I'd advocate for that model on steroids.
More polygons would be nice, freeform re-organization of all graphs would be nice but bottom line for me would be fewer, streamlined tools that run smoking fast and stay out of the way when they're not in use.