Re: Replacing the shadertree? Possible?

[Nick <nick.petit(at)gmail.com>]

Sorry, I was being a bit cheeky, I guess because after 5 years of griping and having to deal with the XSI particles (and it's not like the arguments for a new particle system have been lodged only on obscure web pages somewhere with no dialogue with any soft employees, much to the contrary) and since we have no official reply from Soft as to what their plans are with particles, it's already been 3-4 releases that wild rumours (some originating from Soft employees themselves, 
a.k.a Dave's new improved particle shader promise) of new and improved particle systems are going around and it's been at least 1 or 2 releases since Brad's particle thread on the Base etc... but nothing, not a peep. It wouldn't hurt for us to know what Soft's stand is on this, especially if they aren't going to do anything about it so as to maybe motivate some third party vendors into developping something for XSI as in that case it might well make financial sense...
It's not because you've talked about it a lot already that it's not a discussion worth having and keep having again and again, even once something has been implemented... I understand that to be able to have a unified and scalable system takes time, and certain big decisions need to be made but it's not like this has been a fresh new request by a handful of users...
Anyway, end of rant, back to setting key frames...

On 6/16/06, Luc-Eric Rousseau <lucer(at)softimage.com> wrote:

From: Nick

 and aren't we just tired of talking about that topic.

I guess if the particles were fixed then you probably wouldn't have to hear anything about it... the problem is nothing's been done about them for what, 4 major version releases now at least? You can't just expect the customers to give up on them and shut up, if anything, the more you don't do anything about them, the more you'll hear noise about it, until finally you don't hear jack and that's bad news because it means all your customers have gone elsewhere...

[LER] you're quoting that comment out of context.  No one's telling clients to not discuss the subject, I was saying the engineers that post on the message boards and lists aren't motivated to jump in every thread and repeat the same things. "We" stood for the engineers on this side of the mail server.