Mark and Joe, this is aimed more at you but the obviousdirect comparison for this software is Hypershot in terms offunctionality and interface. Do you guys want us to comment onpositioning of this product or just to focus on functionality andissues?
I find myself think as I use it that the two kind of go hand inhand though.
If I understood correctly, the current plan is to push this outwith SW2009 Office Professional as a kind of alternative renderingoption to PhotoWorks. I can kind of see the logic in that as I knowlots of Office Pro users who never use PhotoWorks but who would usethis.
On the other hand I know a lot more Standard users who use thirdparty rendering solutions - myself included - where the additionalcost or buying Professional is hard to justify for whateverreasons. So the question is are there plans to introduce somethingfor these users?
You mentioned that this product will be available on Mac and PC sothis assumes it will be a standalone product as well (unless thereare some real surprises in store!)?
In which case it is directly up against Hypershot. So this assumesthat it has to offer something extra based upon price, features orintegration with SolidWorks.
On that basis Luxology (who presumably develop this for SolidWorks)sell Modo for \$895 - and that is modelling/rendering and animation.I'm not taking any bets that Luxology will introduce a SolidWorksfile import option for Modo sometime soon or that this realtimecapability will make its way into Modo.
In which case why would a Standard SolidWorks user buy PhotoViewover Hypershot or a Modo offspring?
I think there is a case for putting PhotoView into Standard, evenif it has features stripped out or resolution restrictions, withthe full system in Professional. Rob R and myself discussed asimilar issue on the main beta forum a week or two back and thisintegration with RealView does kind of lend itself to that logic,well in my head anyway - which is not saying much
SolidworksPhotoview 360
I find myself think as I use it that the two kind of go hand inhand though.
If I understood correctly, the current plan is to push this outwith SW2009 Office Professional as a kind of alternative renderingoption to PhotoWorks. I can kind of see the logic in that as I knowlots of Office Pro users who never use PhotoWorks but who would usethis.
On the other hand I know a lot more Standard users who use thirdparty rendering solutions - myself included - where the additionalcost or buying Professional is hard to justify for whateverreasons. So the question is are there plans to introduce somethingfor these users?
You mentioned that this product will be available on Mac and PC sothis assumes it will be a standalone product as well (unless thereare some real surprises in store!)?
In which case it is directly up against Hypershot. So this assumesthat it has to offer something extra based upon price, features orintegration with SolidWorks.
On that basis Luxology (who presumably develop this for SolidWorks)sell Modo for \$895 - and that is modelling/rendering and animation.I'm not taking any bets that Luxology will introduce a SolidWorksfile import option for Modo sometime soon or that this realtimecapability will make its way into Modo.
In which case why would a Standard SolidWorks user buy PhotoViewover Hypershot or a Modo offspring?
I think there is a case for putting PhotoView into Standard, evenif it has features stripped out or resolution restrictions, withthe full system in Professional. Rob R and myself discussed asimilar issue on the main beta forum a week or two back and thisintegration with RealView does kind of lend itself to that logic,well in my head anyway - which is not saying much
SolidworksPhotoview 360
