I wouldn’t go as far as to say it is anyone’s responsibility. I’m just saying what I would like as a customer and user of Rhino.
I would say that my responsibility as a user is to communicate what I want.
If each app provided exactly the same features it would be very annoying and boring. The point is that different apps have different strengths and weaknesses.
Rhino is especially well suited to architecture because it is precise and accurate. It is also very poor at handling scenes with lots of meshes, at least if you compare performance with say Maya etc.
But those mesh based apps are very poor for architectural design. Fine for the viz end of things if you can get a workflow for importing geometry successfully. But what I’m after is Rhino becoming a one stop shop.
Raytrace went a long way to making this possible because finally rhino has a half decent rendering engine built in and with v7 seems to be fast and good enough to use. I’d still welcome vray / octane being available. Options are good.
Having support for proxies in rhino render (raytrace) would be excellent. I’ve tried using blocks of grass and even at a density that is far too low to be acceptable the model becomes unusable.
Perhaps we just have to rely on plugins such as yours, and at $100 or whatever would be very good value. But the disconnect between it and rhino render is problematic, especially as alternative render systems are not available yet on the Mac as native plugins.