The Transcendental GUI

Chipp Walters chipp at
Sun Oct 13 15:49:00 EDT 2002

Troy, you make some good points.

The Bryce interface was a difficult one for new users to master.
users were it's intended audience.

> Bryce has any level of success because it is powerful - and despite its
> interface. The same can be said for Poser and its ilk. None of those
> programs are recognized very well within the professional
> graphics community
> - even though they have technology and horsepower that says they
> could have
> been. Those professionals who do use them... generally do so "on the sly",
> because they are considered "consumer software" - due entirely to the
> non-standard interfaces they have. The interface itself presents an
> inhibitor to professional workflow.

2 points I might add,

Bryce was *never* intended to be marketed towards professionals. I asked Kai
during the early betas why this was and he rightly pointed out the extreme
marketing and niche-application issues they would have to overcome to do so.
In fact, Bryce didn't have many of the more powerful features, such as
motion blur, adaptive sampling anti-aliasing, or even support of industry
standard models.

I don't know of any 'professional' 3D package which doesn't take a
significant of time to learn -- one could say a 'non-standard' interface.
Most 3D professionals I've worked with rebuke Bryce *because* of it's
technology and horsepower -- not the interface... these guys can work with
just about *any* interface (have you seen SoftImage or Lightwave lately??)


More information about the use-livecode mailing list