Microsoft Reaches Out To Blender

dmbasso writes "Continuing its strategy to support FOSS application on the Windows platform, Microsoft mailed the Blender developers asking how they could help improve the experience of Blender users on Windows. Groklaw puts it in perspective using Steve Ballmer's own words."

How to improve the user experience on Windows?

That's easy, release the source.

For once, this is actually on-topic

Will it Blend?

I'm gonna fucking...

I'm gonna fucking kill yo... err... how can I help your project?

My first thought ....

Does Microsoft blend?

Irony, much?

FTA:

Specifically, Microsoft is slowly shifting toward a more open standards based approach to its file formats. The ISO standard Office Open XML is an example of the direction we are moving towards.

That pretty much says it all, here.

Re:Irony, much?

What was parent marked as troll? I think the quote pulled is spot-on; MS wants to redefine "open," and will not stop at pretty obvious bribery and underhanded tactics to do it, such as the OOXML debacle. "The ISO standard Office Open XML is an example of the direction we[Microsoft] are moving towards."

Thanks for your battle plan, MS! It's too bad the Blender folks didn't pull a reverse-409 style scam and draw out a new round of Halloween-style Documents.

And he tells Microsoft...

"Bite my shiny, metal ass."

FOSS on Windows

This has been said before but it's in Microsoft's best interest to support FOSS primarily on the Windows platform rather than watch FOSS grow anyway on other OSes.

Interesting example

I dont know if it is sad or funny that when speaking about open source they were talking about if file systems had any problem.... lets not talk about API or anything trivial like that but hey this file system seems to be really meddling with creating a better UI and experience in Windows.

And OOXML.. seriously! Like how about they just release the stndards of OOXML to begin with!

And so it begins

"Microsoft is slowly shifting toward a more open standards based approach to its file formats. The ISO standard Office Open XML is an example of the direction we are moving towards."

So you're moving towards bribery and pollution of international standards bodies and open mockery of the idea of open and standard formats?

Sorry, but after that I would have told him where he could shove it.

It is not going to happen.

From what I have read of the original posts on the Blender site, it looks like the Blender project will tell Microsoft to go away.

After the OOXML fiasco — Microsoft must truly be deluded to think this is a good example of their openness policy — it is only right that the Blender project, knowing what would happen to them in the end, should reject Microsoft.

Natural progression

1. Get your "Open" standard recognised
2. Get other companies to use your standard
3. ????
4. Profit

But in all seriousness, this is the next logical progression for the OOXML beast. They wouldn't have gone to the trouble of ramrodding OOXML through the standards process if they weren't going to try and leverage it somehow outside of being able to say they have an open standard. Using OOXML would cripple a multi-platform application, but that's not their problem. They've -always- tried to force people into their rut and they've been quite successful at it in the past. I just don't think they "get" that developers aren't going to shoot themselves in the foot by using OOXML.

Have about opening the MS formats

The thing that gets to me is how can a *proprietary* company ask an *open source* community to help make the *open source* work better on the *proprietary platform*. I mean doesn't that strike people as... stupid? Why not the proprietary company just... *read* the source code for themselves? Don't they have enough money to *hire* developers to work on blender? Why do they think that people who provide their own free time should work to support their *proprietary* platform, which by their own business model is built on charging people for the privilege of using their OS?

What, it's ok for MS to charge people to use their software, but it's not ok to expect MS to shell out some money for other people's software? MS wants the software for free?!?!

mod parent up

Exactly so. If Microsoft really wants to improve the software... then commit your own programmers to the project and put your improvements back into the community.

Does MS understand what Blender is?

Based on the snip that Ton posted, I get the impression that MS doesn't comprehend what Blender is, or how it works. File formats? That's low on the list of Blender's issues with Windows. Never mind that OOXML's status as an ISO standard is debatable.

If MS wants to support Blender (and lots of other FOSS software) on Windows, they need to put real effort into supporting OpenGL. FOSS developers don't generally bother with supporting DirectX and OpenGL, and most of the time supporting Windows at all is an afterthought.

But, MS won't do it because that would make it easier for games to be developed for Windows and anything else.

how i look at it

you can dress a pig up in fine clothes and jewelry but underneath it all is still a stinking filthy pig...

Re:Message to people who gripe about interfaces

"Blender's interface is actually quite intuitive" ... that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

here's the thing:

If you can't figure out what stuff does without a video tutorial, then it is *by definition* not intuitive.

I've used 3D application since the late 80's (started with Sculpt-Animate 4D, and have used *many* applications since), and Blender's interface is one of the worst I've ever seen. I'd say it's worse than ever Caligari (the first version) in that at least with Caligari I could actually navigate.

I tried learning Blender recently, and downloaded a video tutorial. The guy presenting it repeatedly used the word "intuitive" - even going so far as to say something like this:

"The buttons don't work the way you'd expect, but once you get used to it, it's really intuitive."

If you don't get how hilarious this is, then you don't know the meaning of the word "intuitive".

Re:Message to people who gripe about interfaces

Ok, you know what. I doubt there is any convincing you because like so many other people, you've already made up your mind based on what you've heard.

So don't use the word intuitive then because its probably the wrong word to use when talking about 3d software. Let's say this instead, once you've really spent some time learning Blender's interface, you will start to think that a lot of other 3d user interfaces have it wrong. At least I did. I used Imagine for years and I thought Imagine made a lot of sense, but after using Blender for 3 months and actually spending time to learn it, I'm so much faster at creating objects in Blender than I ever was in Imagine.

I think what has happened, is that the myth that it is hard to use has preceded the application. Blender is not the only software with this problem.

Re:Message to people who gripe about interfaces

I just don't think most of the people here understand the difference between 'easy to use' and 'easy to learn'. Blender looks like a really interesting tool, but a lot of people have unrealistic expectations for making complex tasks simple. Having used 3ds Max in a production environment for four years, what's 'intuitive' now is far different from what it was when I started.

Re:Message to people who gripe about interfaces

B.S. With the exception of your mother's nipple, you have never ever used an intuitive interface. There is no such thing. Have you ever seen someone try to "intuit" how to use a mouse without even having seen it being used? "Hello computer?" When you say "intuitive", you merely mean "similar to whatever I'm used to". Frankly, efficiency and discoverability are what you should focus on.

Re:Message to people who gripe about interfaces

First of all, I realize that this e-mail was not necessarily about the interface, but I'm going to prelude these comments with a comment about them anyways.

This is a message directed towards all people who are not familiar with 3d applications. Most 3d applications have historically had interfaces that deviate from the standard application interface. Get over it.

As someone who has been toying with various 3d applications since 1990 and having taken some time to learn Blender recently I can say this. Blender's interface is actually quite intuitive and effcient.

I'm sure it helps that you can access all the functions from the GUI now instead of having to memorize hotkeys.

Keyboard shortcuts often make for a more efficient workflow, but *having* to use them makes for a much steeper learning curve.

Re:"support FOSS application"?????

I think most of your post is tongue and cheek but...

Back in the day when 3d applications were on Digital, Mac, and Irix machines microsoft focused on getting them ported to NT. This did a good job of killing Digital, Irix, and Apple. Getting Blender, IMHO the 3d tool with the most rapidly growing community, to run "best" on Windows would help thwart adoption of Linux. Not just adoption by users but adoption by hardware makers. If you can keep hardware makers focused on building for your platform, users will not leave.

Re:"support FOSS application"?????

Balmer's play may backfire. Read the Groklaw post. It is about trying to outsmart Linux by making sure that "open sores" runs wonderfully on Windows, so nobody needs Linux.

The problem is that, once people start using OO, Firefox, etc., they will eventually realize that they can run that exact same software on a free OS.

The shock of changing the OS and the office suite is a lot. However, if you can transition one little piece at a time, Windows is in trouble.

Re:Dumb corporation directive

"contact all large opensource projects and find out what file formats they use and persuade them to use our new *open* file format."

Well it may just be the other way around: provide better support for (3rd party!) closed formats on a Windows version of Blender (and if possible, only there). How? Let me guess - cut a deal with such a 3rd party and have them provide detailed format specs (privately to Microsoft), and code up a closed-source binary blob only useable by a Windows version of Blender?

Result: people might have better experience working with those formats when they use Blender on Windows. -> That would make it more attractive to use Windows as underlying platform (if support for those file formats matter to you).

In other words: give a competitive advantage to using Windows, make it less attractive to move to a FOSS operating system.

MS philosophy towards "openess" in a nutshell

Transcribed from the Iowa State anti-trust lawsuit against Microsoft.
http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03020.pdf [slated.org]

From: Bill Gates
Sent: Sunday, January 24, 1999 8:41 AM
To: Jeff Weslorinon, Ben Fatbi
Cc: Carl Stork (Exchange); Nathan Myhrvold; Eric Rudder
Subject: ACPI extensions

One thing I find myself wondering about is whether we shouldn't try and make the "ACPI" extensions somehow Window specific.

It seem unfortunate if we do this work and get our partners to do the work and the result is that Linux works great without having to do the work.

Maybe there is no way to avoid this problem but it does bother me.

Maybe we could define the APIs so that they work well with NT and not the others even if they are open .

Or maybe we could patent something related to this.

That's MS's philosopy about "open" standards in 1999, and it's their philosphy in 2008.