Alias In Acquisition Talks With Private Equity Firm 156
TeachingMachines writes "Alias, the makers of the venerable Maya 3D animation and effects software, have announced their possible sale to an unnamed 3rd party, described as a 'leading private equity investment firm'. Alias is currently owned by SGI, and the transaction is still considered to be tentative. I, for one, hope that SGI holds onto Alias, as in its current state it is arguably the best 3D modelling and animation suite available, and it is available for Linux. Cross your fingers..."
History.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:History.... (Score:1)
What about Quark? They tried to buy Adobe a few years ago. Last I heard they were still privately held with very deep pockets.
In a word,... (Score:4, Insightful)
There is one problem with this. Jobs has been upfront with his buys. With the hiding and slinking going on, I would suspect that it is Gates doing it to make sure that Apple does not control a market.
Re:In a word,... (Score:3, Funny)
so you're saying we're either going to see iMaya or Maya.NET?
Re:In a word,... (Score:5, Insightful)
I doubt the "private equity firm" is actually a major existing vendor in disguise, despite all the intrigue people can theorize on if it were. It's more likely to be a group like Vector Capital, the folks who bought Corel last year--in other words, a group that's, well, a private equity firm.
Re:In a word,... (Score:3, Interesting)
SoftImage still has its hardcore fans, their c
Adobe? Apple? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Adobe? Apple? (Score:2)
My source is that "SGI's interest in selling was motivated by Alias's user base's shift away from SGI hardware"
Re:Adobe? Apple? (Score:2)
I am an Logic Audio user, but now Emagic has been bought out by Apple, there is hardly any chance of another Windows version being released.
Not just great software, but a great business too (Score:5, Informative)
To curb piracy of their full value product, they released a Personal Learn Edition [alias.com] that made all the features of the full product available, but put on a watermark that made the output useless for commercial use and encrypted the saved files so that the commerical version would not open them. Those who designed something and then sold it, however, could send their encrypted file in when they purchase their license to get it converted to a file their full version could open and output without the watermark. They also offered a $20 how-to DVD for those who wanted to learn the program with a minimal outlay of money.
They also made what could be the most dramatic price cut in software history [alias.com], knocking their entry-level product's price from $7,500 to $1,999 and taking their high-level product from $16,000 to $7000. Clearly, they made it up on volume.
So, not only was this a great technical program, but it became priced so that even moderately-funded producers could afford the program, and therefore made it accessable to the people who needed it. I just hope these unnamed investors don't raise the prices back to where they were...
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:5, Interesting)
To curb piracy of their full value product, they released a Personal Learn Edition that made all the features of the full product available
While I think the reasoning behing the Personal Learning Edition was great, they implemented it poorly.
I developed an interest in 3D during uni, and explored 3Dsmax, lightwave, etc.
I was excited when I saw the PLE, so I grabbed it with the intention of learning.
No such luck.
The watermark on any finished product is a fine idea, but they place a huge watermark (and not exactly a subtle, transparent one) across the entire modelling view, which makes using the product for longer than about 20 minutes impossible unless you want a spliting headache.
This actually steered me away from Maya, so I ended up sticking with 3dsmax for my uni subjects.
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly. The watermark makes the LEARNING edition completely worthless. I can't even play with lighting or get a feel of how to use the textures cause the renders are so ruined by the watermark. I've been stupid enough to buy it tw
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:2)
"There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says: Fool me once, shame on ... shame on you. Fool me ... you can't get fooled again."
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:2)
Both times they offered it weeks or months earlier if you pay the $20 for the media and shipping.
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:1)
Being that Maya Complete is THOUSANDS less than any non-academic version of 3D Studio MAX, and about the same as the academic version, what made you choose 3dsmax?
Is it the fact that 3dsmax is one of the most widely pirated 3D applications, and therefore more available (and cheaper)?
The personal learning edition is intended for kids who want to make models for Quake and Half-Life. Anyone who will consi
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:2)
If your file format is encrypted and you have a big, fat watermark on everything else, why on earth do you have to shove it in your (potential) customer's face that they have not, in fact, plunke
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:2, Insightful)
maya unlimited - $7000
3ds max - $3500
character studio - $1000
maya complete doesn't have all of the features of 3ds max. in order to get it all, you need to get maya unlimited, which is thousands more than max, even if you add in character studio. also, they have different strengths, weaknesses and workflows. people should get whatever suits them. any person who prefers one program can point out the feature their package has or what's lacking in another.
if someone's going to pirate
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:2)
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:4, Interesting)
As someone who uses xsi professionally I can vouch for the sheer speed of the "subdivision surfaces" in xsi. However, it should be clarified that the subdees in xsi are polygons that are rounded with the either the catmull-clark, or the doo-sabin algorithms. Maya has both poly rounding and "real" heirarchial subdees, which are kinda neat. Unfortunately for maya, they're unbelieveably slow when interacting. In xsi I can take a 30k triangle base mesh and increase the subdiv count by 2 steps, which generates roughly 450k highres. Moving points around is quite quick, whereas the same mesh loaded up in maya is quite slow to interact with.
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:2)
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:2, Interesting)
While it seems ridiculous in light of the more recent pricing, the big price drop for Maya was around 1999, when it dropped from $10,000 a module to $2000. It has/had five modules for a total of $50,000 for one seat of the full Maya software. Support contracts were around $4000 a year. When it dropped to a grand total of $10K for the whole deal, we thought the world had come to an end. I know people who paid the $50,000. Now it's $7000. Oi.
I do find it funny that everyone starts assuming that Apple is
Re:Not just great software, but a great business t (Score:1)
Alias's revenue in 2003 was more than in the previous two years combined. And profits in 2003 were equal to the previous two years combined.
So in spite of their revenue stream being "just about tapped out", they seem to be raking in more money than ever.
Maya ain't free (Score:1)
I'd rather some "private investment firm" put the whole thing under a straightforward license instead of pussyfooting around the whole OSS issue.
Re:Maya ain't free (Score:3, Insightful)
their free version (as in cost) is closed, but free (as in cost).
their commercial version is closed, but it will cost you.
the only difference is that the free version places a watermark on the finished product.
noone's "pussyfooting around the whole oss issue". this clearly has nothing to do with open source software.
Re:Maya ain't free (Score:2)
I don't know where you got the impression that Maya is, or will ever be, remotely open source. It is thoroughly proprietary, right down to the FlexLM node locking. Your choice of subject line certainly befits your handle.
Maya (along with LightWave) has dropped in price tremendously, bringing industrial strength software within the reach of so-called prosumers. At the very low end, Maya PLE appeals to th
Re:Maya ain't free (Score:4, Insightful)
Better Apart from the Sinking SGI Ship (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Better Apart from the Sinking SGI Ship (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Better Apart from the Sinking SGI Ship (Score:2, Interesting)
They have beautiful workstations. Admittedly my only use of IRIX has been on Computones or NAS* boxes.
They did not have prices on the site. That means i cannot afford it if i have to ask. Maybe the Saudi Arabia linux club can, I cannot.
They obviously cater to a niche of people I never get to meet. I see more people with a need to run SUN machines than SGI.
Re:Better Apart from the Sinking SGI Ship (Score:3, Insightful)
I actually replaced a $40k SGI Octane with a loaded dual G5 for $4500. The service contract on the SGI alone would allow me to purchase a Powerbook every year for what that was running me. Yeah, I switched.
An apple a day... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:An apple a day... (Score:2)
Re:An apple a day... (Score:1, Troll)
Second, it is utterly absurd the notion of Apple being interested in max given that it would be pretty close to impossible to port. The fact Autodesk is bigger (or not) is of little relevance. In one swoop, they discarded the en
Re:An apple a day... (Score:1)
They only got rid of the Discreet combustion team, and put a new team in its place.
Re:An apple a day... (Score:1)
Re:An apple a day... (Score:2)
Please provide a credible source.
This is from serious sources
No, it's hearsay from a Slashdot poster. If the sources are truly "serious" and not just, "a friend overheard a guy in the latte line last week talking about a discussion he had in a noisy bar with this random guy that sat down next to him", then please cite the sources.
(I was laid off a short while back as well...)
Were you laid off from Discreet? If so, what was your job capacity there? Were you in any position, or worki
So in short ... (Score:3, Informative)
buy sgi (Score:3, Interesting)
no, i don't work for them, but i used to use their computers in 1998 and 1999. when i left that job, i borrowed the manual to the O2.
i bought some of their stock. when i tell people about it, i say that it is was an emotional buy.
andrew
Re:buy sgi (Score:2, Insightful)
I realized they were going down some time in 1998. This realization came when a spokesman for DeVry came to my high school. Apparently, SGI had partnered with them. The people in their introductional video were clearly idiots... These were the people that wanted to work in I
The time to do it was when they were (Score:5, Interesting)
I would be inclined to buy some anyway today. Bishop has a keen eye on SGIs core market:
Technical computing
IRIX is very good for this, MIPS is holding it back though. Their efforts on Linux will pay off, in my opinion. Linux is reaching the point where it will be possible to build an IRIX like system. Heck, you can today --it is only going to get easier.
SGI is one of the few companies to make a deal with Microsoft while still around to tell about it. (Legal won't, but many SGI folks will, if you catch them in the right mood.)
If that deal hadn't been the death of their 320 / 540 series machines, we would have great Linux technical workstations right now. I am not saying you cannot get a nice Linux workstation, but the SGI plan combined their engineering with custom Linux tweaks that would have made for nice boxes.
320/540 machines could support up to about 800Mb texture memory in a UMA design. Heavy texture models perform best in this configuration, because of the low latency bandwidth it provides to the graphics sub-system.
The Linux drivers were shown at Siggraph '99, I think. Microsoft and SGI had a little tiff shortly after that. Farenheit project --it seemed at the time, win32 was poised to take over that market since it had already made quite a dent. Gates knew about all the UNIX code that had to be rewritten. Direct X got good, thanks to SGI, but not good enough to justify all that work porting to a closed, hard to administer, expensive to cluster system with little ability to script or perform multi-user.
SGI legal scuttled the Linux drivers over win32 contract terms involving the ARC boot loader. It seems Microsoft has an interest in this that prevented SGI from providing machines with choices other than win32, or something like that. (Could never get the entire story.)
The series was canned. Generic PC machines running tweaked nVidia hardware replaced them to keep existing customers trying to leverage Linux happy. Their hardware had considerable advantages over the general purpose PC, so it only made sense for SGI to move away from the whole thing.
Today we see the Altix series machines along with high end SGI hardware on the desktop. The Altix, and high-end IRIX hardware is well positioned, while IRIX struggles at the workstation level. Linux is capturing applications far better than IRIX ever did.
(Which shows just how hard they got fucked over the Microsoft deal.)
Recovering from that and other blunders has taken a while. The new products are hitting their targets nicely. It is tough for them now, being late in the game. An SGI Linux workstation likely will not happen right away because of this. (We would have had them in '01, otherwise.)
SGI systems engineering is top notch, I hope they continue to improve and continue to develop their high bandwidth, single image designs. (They are the best, if you want a single OS image instead of a cluster.)
As for Alias, the organization beats to a different drum. The Maya side of things has been handled well. Can't say the same for their Studio product. Still high priced and no Linux --yet.
Maya is a hit in the entertainment business for obvious reasons. Their other product, Studio struggles in a niche status. Good for high end product design and styling, but poor at more mainstream applications. Traditional MCAD packages continue to consume many new potential Studio sales, while also chipping away at the established base of users.
I would not count the Linux version of Maya out. Alias knows better than that. There is no way the Studios are going to be pried back to win32. Going down that road proved expensive and problematic. Linux is the perfect fit. Alias would not be where they are today without having done that port.
OSS lets them (the studios) keep control of their tools an
Re:The time to do it was when they were (Score:2, Interesting)
The O2 had the same UMA design, and could address up to 1GB of texture memory, less what the OS and the apps were currently using. In 1996.
I mean, it was hardly revolutionary in 1999. Add to that the fact that an R10k O2 (operating in 32bit mode, mind you) of the period would readily trounce the pathetic 450-550Mhz PIII that came with the 320's and 540's, while still costing less.
No arguement about mips (Score:2)
The O2 design is good even today. For texture related tasks, the machine still performs. I own one.
Also own a 320 series machine. To say the O2 would blow the 320 series machine away is not correct. Price / performance on the 320 machines was better than just about every other PC of the time.
At the time the 320 series machines were released, lots of folks had the same thoughts you did regarding SGI and profit margins. Many of them wanted to continue with SGI, the 320 let
RE: Fill rate (Score:2)
Fill rates aside, these machines both have big texture attributes hard to match today with any video card. Having an 800Mb image local to, even a dated graphics engine, makes quite a difference in frame rate.
SGI has a demo where the image is mapped to a plane in OpenGL. Moving scaling, filtering happens realtime in hardware. You can move, rotate, scale very large imag
Re:The time to do it was when they were (Score:1)
About maya on linux, i have one wor.. letter to say: X
Re: win32 / Mac (Score:2)
Smaller operations do not see the economy of scale, so win32 / Mac makes perfect sense. Alias knows this, which is exactly why there are three ports of Maya.
Two things (Score:2)
First, the write-up meant Maya. Alias is the company. Back in the days, some people referred to PA as Alias.
Second, Hello!!!! Softimage XSI?????
Re:Two things (Score:2)
XSI 3.5 beats Maya 5.
XSI pre-2.0 sucked ass.
Re:Two things (Score:2)
Maya, XSI or Extreme, and Houdini, but 3DSMax tells me that you have not done any serious 3D modelling work. LOL!
Apple is doing this! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Apple is doing this! (Score:2, Insightful)
I hope not! (Score:2)
This means Linux Maya goes in the trash... as does Windows and SGI Maya.
Re:I hope not! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I hope not! (Score:2)
There's some logic (excuse the pun) behind apple's decision there however, as Logic 6's dependance on the low-latency CoreAudio would make a feature equal windows version difficult.
Re:I hope not! (Score:3, Insightful)
Hah! Apple already did this with Logic. The windows version of Logic was selling more copies than the Mac version, that didn't stop Apple from cutting sales in more than HALF by dropping the windows version completely.
I have no doubt that Apple would drop Linux and Windows support for Maya in a heartbeat if they ever bought it.
Re:I hope not! (Score:4, Informative)
I hope they do buy it. They've done amazing things with Final Cut Pro, and if they halved the price of Maya, I just might buy it even just to dabble with it.
D
Re:Apple is doing this! (Score:4, Interesting)
that made the OS X port of Maya happen. He's now Apple's Senior Director of Pro Applications.
Re:Apple is doing this! (Score:2)
It's obvious who wants to buy Maya (Score:5, Funny)
Great Move if it happens! (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the best thing that could happen is to seperate themselves away from SGI as much as possible. This has been happenning to some degree already. If you recall a few years back, the URL used to be www.aw.sgi.com , now its www.alias.com... odd that
As to the unnamed suitor, thats a bit hard to guess. Number 1... its most likely not Microsoft... they tried this game once. When NT 4 was new, they were the proud owners of SoftImage... it didnt work too well for them then... cant see them trying again. I cant picture it being Avid or Discreet, as they both already have a vested interest in a direct competitor ( SoftImage and 3d Studios Max respectively ). I cant see it being any linux company as suggested before... it just is to far from the core business of any of them, to make any sense. Their isnt a linux company I can think of, with the money to buy Alias, that has a focus on multimedia.
In my mind, if its a big name company, that leaves just one company that it makes sense to be. Apple. Maya was recently ported to both Mac and Linux... apple is losing its luster as a media empire... and they have the money. I say if its a big name company behind the buyout, it makes the most sense to be Apple. I just pray they keep the wintel ports going, or I will be very pissed off.
For those of you that dont know, Maya is one sweet piece of software, and a shining example of how to pioneer a user interface.
If its apple, windows and linux user will be SOL.. (Score:2)
Re:Great Move if it happens! (Score:2)
To the contrary, it worked great. Up until that point nobody would take 3D rendering on PCs seriously. Between licensing OpenGL and buying SoftImage, they were able to move a huge portion of the market to NT-- a market which was owned exclusively by SGI. At the time, 3D graphics cards were virtually unheard
Re:Great Move if it happens! (Score:3, Interesting)
SoftImage - Montreal
Alias Wavefront - Toronto
Discreet - Montreal
Re:Great Move if it happens! (Score:2)
Akin to MS engineering Corel's takeover? (Score:3, Interesting)
Although this "potential" sale wouldn't be as criminal as stealing a public company from the shareholders through inside dealings and voting fraud, the end results could be the same for end users if this is indeed another attempt by an MS-affiliated investment firm to prevent an ISV from supporting Linux. I hope I'm totally wrong here and Microsoft's business practises are not an issue here, although their success with neutralizing Corel might have encouraged them to take on companies and products that dare to support competing platforms, in this current climate of total lack of monopoly controls by US Department of (John Ashcroft's) Justice. MS did strike a deal with Disney just recently though...
Apple or Microsoft? (Score:2, Informative)
It really pissed me off that Apple bought out Emagic and dropped the Windows version of Logic Audio that I've been using and have invested heavily in for years.
Microsoft did a similar thing with SourceSafe when they purchased it from One Tree Software years ago and then dropped all but the Windows version. I believe they may have Unix clients available these days but I've swtiched to CV
Re:Apple or Microsoft? (Score:3, Insightful)
They owned SoftImage for a while (Alias' main competition at the time) and it didn't work out.
oh, it worked out! (Score:2)
Actually, Microsoft got exactly what they wanted out of that deal. You see, at the time NOBODY did 3d in windows. That world was still dominated by SGI. Microsoft bought SoftImage and forced them to port to windows. For a long time SoftImage did nothing but porting. This has set them back by a lot, and cost them a lot of market share. But Microsoft didn't care. They proved that 3d
Maya on Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
The big studios want it too much. Using Maya on OS X is as sweet, or sweeter than either win32 or Linux, but I think Linux will scale farther for back end tasks, at a lower cost, than OS X ever will.
Scaling is one of the top drivers for the big boys in this game. Linux has both win32 and OS X beat in the price / performance area cold.
Besides a lot of what the studios want is custom. SGI used to offer this under NDA, but it cost a lot. With Linux, they can do it far cheaper, on their time schedule, and share the bits that benefit everyone without having to repurchase and pay support on their own tech!
new overlords... (Score:3, Funny)
I, for one, will welcome Alias' new overlords....
Re: Alias In Acquisition Talks With Private Equity (Score:1)
sounds like the Maya anti-piracy campaign failed (Score:1)
Why no free version for Linux? (Score:2, Interesting)
What's up with that?
Bah (Score:1)
Too bad the free personal version isn't. I was really hoping to try it out without having to dish out a few thousand bucks.
.....and? (Score:1)
Re:.....and? (Score:2)
Re:.....and? (Score:2)
Umm, StudioTools people (Score:4, Informative)
see here [alias.com]
I think that with Apple's 64bit systems, they can give the likes of Sun and SGI a run for their money, hardware wise. StudioTools does run on windows x86, just not as well. Both Maya (then Power Animator) and StudioTools started life in IRIX, which is what made Maya such an easy port to OSX (i think it only took 2 months). Apple would love to enter the 3D workstation market and id love to see them, because StudioTools is the only program that i need to keep a wintel box around for.
there were rumors at the end of summer that Alias was working on a StudioTools port to OSX, but i havent heard anything since.
Re:Umm, StudioTools people (Score:1)
Re:Umm, StudioTools people (Score:1)
If Apple IS the unnamed party, I hope they keep the PC version of Alias alive. BTW, my Windows box runs Studio faster than the IRIX boxes at
Re:Umm, StudioTools people (Score:2)
True, so does mine, but its not nearly as stable, even in 11 all of the bugs arent ironed out.
I doubt... (Score:2, Insightful)
it on Linux... ILM - Weta and others, the pressure would be somewhat intense....
(Unless of course it is M$ Attempting more rool da world tactics)
I'm going to vote Adobe (Score:5, Interesting)
As far as Alias goes, I used to sell Maya and Studio for 3 years. I have / had (layoffs) many friends that worked with and for Alias.
I'm really unsure how to classify this announcement. Doug Walker and James Christopher are probably (In my opinion) some of the worst people out there. It was a real shame to see these two take the helm as president and senior VP of customer support. I saw the attitude of the people go from "happy to come in" to "OMG I hate my job" once they moved in. After many Reseller and other private Alias events, I decided that these guys only cared about one thing, the bottom line. I knew this meant that the company was becoming just like the rest. Shortly before the price drop that I knew was coming, I left.
Also, keep in mind that when Maya 1.0 (with all the plug-ins, before unlimited) came out, it was around $100,000. The sales price of Maya dropped 93% over the past 5 years. Now that's AMAZING!
In summary, I think SGI is selling Alias because they know that it isn't going to keep making them money due to the drop in price. Also, I think that it's pretty clear that SGI either needs to get back to their core business or they are going to lose what little they have left.
Or... I'll go out on a limb here and say that ATI is going to purchase them.
Either way, this is going to be interesting.
After more research... (Score:2)
But for some reason, having Maya on SGI NT equipment was l
I'm worried about personell changes (Score:2, Funny)
She makes me feel kinda funny. Like when we used to climb the rope in gym class. * [moviequotequiz.com]
Alias is being acquired? (Score:2)
Oh wait. We're not talking about the tv show?
ALIAS?! (Score:2, Funny)
Oh, *that* Alias. Heh.
P.S. Wasn't it Alias|Wavefront?
The Maya success story (Score:4, Interesting)
At the time, Microsoft owned Softimage. Microsoft, having achieved their goal of moving 3D graphics onto Windows, sold off Softimage to Avid. Avid was the leader in 2D editing, but was starting to feel price pressure from below and was threatened by Softimage's move into that area. So they really bought Softimage to get the Softimage 2D editing package, and didn't really know what to do with the 3D product. Avid also had the problem that they were a high-end hardware vendor in a market where the high end was about to be eaten by the low end. As a result, the new Softimage 3D product, XSI, was years late.
So Maya took over. But it didn't help SGI sell expensive hardware. The low-end graphics boards were gaining on SGI. Maya was a software-only product, and didn't require SGI hardware. Maya is still available for Irix, but nobody buys SGI workstations to run it anymore. In fact, nobody buys SGI workstations for much of anything any more.
So it makes sense for SGI to sell off Maya. Of course, SGI doesn't have much of a core business left ("We're a graphics company! No, we're a workstation company! No, we're a server company! No, we're a Linux company!"). Their core business is selling expensive hardware, and that's not a good business to be in.
It's a Management-ish Buyout (Score:4, Interesting)
An Alias rep made a post regarding the sale on the Highend3D Buzz Board [highend3d.com], second post down.
It looks like some of the Alias folks are working a deal where the investment firm will purchase the assets from SGI and then the Alias person(s) will then purchase those assets from the investment firm. The Alias folks break free of SGI and SGI gets some badly-needed cash.
I've since confirmed this via a party who Knows Things. So no black helicopters from Cuptertino or Redmond, you conspiracy theorists :)
Either way, they still have to figure out how to pay for R&D (or not) with a fully saturated market. We'll see.
It's not Apple or Adobe (Score:1)
Linux alternatives (Score:4, Informative)
Another interesting commercial 3D suite available for Linux is Realsoft 3D [realsoft.com], and it's a lot cheaper than Maya or the programs mentioned before.
Not just Maya, and my vote is Apple. (Score:2)
From that standpoint, much as Apple's purchase of Logic made sense in that Apple could have a presence in pro Audio, this being Apple would really make sense.
BUt there is somet
I have to wonder (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Yeah right. (Score:2)
Re:Canopy group could pay (Score:2)
Re:Make it open source! (Score:3, Insightful)
Probably few could build it. Or even download it. Although you would like a free copy,
open source isn't the answer to everything, especially large mission critical, highly complex applications.
Re:Make it open source! (Score:2)
Re:Make it open source! (Score:1)
Bigger than all the source code for all the programs in a Linux distro put together ? I sincerely doupt that.
You can build and download pretty much anything on any modern machine. It might simply take some time.
Such as t
Re:Make it open source! (Score:2)
The biggest difficulty was getting the compiler and linker to handle its size and changes were
made to the tools to handle it. Remember that there's lots of legacy code in there and
it was added to being only concerned with making IRIX happy. Portability was not a
primary concern. They said GCC was overcome at the time. That delayed release and
also caused a great deal of tension at the time between the old school SGI guys a
Re:If anyone says 'Blender'... (Score:2)
Re:sales on Linux (Score:2)
Plus, i believe quite a few major houses have switched over to linux workstations, what do you think they use, Blender?
No offense to the blender guys btw.