Robert McNeel & Associates are in decline

Hmm, afaik open Subdiv is all about displaying heavy CG-meshes efficiently, and about improving
streamlining mesh + UV-texture appearance across various applications. I’ve not yet seen the
word Nurbs / Nurbs conversion mentioned in any description of open subdiv.

Am I missing something?

Edit :
The linked document Autodesk document states that Speedform does use Tsplines as well as open Subdiv.

A bird told me that when the model is plain subD is using opensubD code. When there are t-points presents, it uses Tsplines. Probably this is why this Audi mesh failed: It has t-points so T-Splines got involved and it did what it usually does.


Don’t they mean the Tsplines specific local subdivision scheme with T-Points?

Iirc one can only create them based on pre-existing regular (=quad based) Tsplines
topology as one adds more points to a face but wants it to retain its form –something
which doesn’t work in mesh based SubD modelling.

Your third party modeled Audi doesn’t contain T-Points but Ngons. A limited number of
them would likely convert somehow bobbly wobbly – but without the continuity benefits
of T-points.

What I understand is that Speedform uses openSubdiv for everything which has
plain quad topology. As soon as one adds irregular cuts Tsplines comes into play.

The main flaw (of NURBS) is inability to cope with singularities and extraordinary vertices. Singularity is a vertice where many isocurves converge into a single point, for example, the apex of a cone. Extraordinary vertice is a place where total number of converging isocurves is different than 4 and 6. Singularities and extraordinary vertices are common in objects shaped like animals. If the NURBS object has these vertices, commands manipulating the object may fail. T-splines and subdivision surfaces are not as mature as the NURBS, but they reduce the number of control points twofold in comparison with the NURBS when they describe organic surfaces (animals or plants).

example of singularity: (22:30):

example of extraordinary vertice (7:30):

VSR plugin was the best solution to the extraordinary vertice problems.

Yet AD is promoting a seamless workflow Speedflow-Alias-VRED, therefore what specifically is happening here @ 5:27 and 29:30…?

3 posts were split to a new topic: Nondestructive detailing of models

According to iDatalabs, Rhino had market share of 0.2% in 2017. source:

I thought Rhino was very widespread, but it would seem not.
Autocad is the master.
What does it mean? What McNeel is in difficulty? Or recovering (mild)?
I would like to understand…




Yes. Autodesk is a huge company… ~5,000 people.
We are less than 100 people. We don’t need to be masters of the universe to not be in difficulty.


By the way, I invented geometric modeling kernel (basic idea only, no patent yet) that is superior to T-splines.

So where is it?

McNeel is a small company, but Rhino is great software! I thought it was more widespread …
Rhino does not perform state-of-the-art fillet, or possesses the capabilities of a Parasolid kernel, but its performance, skills and speed of execution are the best I’ve ever seen!
When someone asks me: “Which software do you recommend for my work (architecture, design in general)?”, I always answer: “Rhinoceros!”… always…

Seeing is believing! and I’ve tried many software …

Oh I forgot: making users participate in software development is a great winning move. Software grows better if you use the intellectual resources of many and not the enlightened few. Every suggestion, wish, is well received …
You are a great little team! Beyond the criticisms that I often do to software (never destructive).


From a purely selfish vantage point, I’m glad Rhino isn’t as popular as some of the other fish in the pond. It means we can maintain our competitive advantage. I can honestly say that the success of this company over the last 17 years has a lot to do with our choice of software. We would not be doing a lot of the things we do if it wasn’t for Rhino.



I’m a highly experienced drafter and Rhino/GH is second to none. A stronger solution for BIM than Revit or Catia. I for one am never looking back.

„we use best scanning technics …“ . sounds indeed very reliable. I for myself would have asked the devellopers for statistical data. But even if numbers are realistic, what does it tell you? Seems to me that McNeel is a happy company with very enthusiastic employees and a great community. I don‘t get why some people (or software) always have to be the greatest of all. If you can life good from you passion, you did everything right. Greed is the evil of mankind.


Dassault - 13,974
PTC - 5,982
Bentley - 3000
Ansys - 2,800
Nemetschek - 1,925

Most likely the marketing departments for each of these companies is larger than McNeel.

1 Like

What would also be interesting is how many copies or seats each has sold. Is this info easily available anywhere?

Thought so as well.

As long as the software improves and still able to pay the employees to keep developing seems like a good company.

Also really appreciate the forum here. I learned everything from youtube, vimeo, and here on the forum.

Likely 20 times larger.

1 Like

What’s also interesting to note here is that if the initial post appeared on the forums of any of the other companies listed in the survey, the post would likely have been immediately removed and the user censured or banned… Yet here, this thread has been allowed to continue with 168 entries over more than a year and the original poster is still here.

That’s another sign of success - open mindedness, community building, and no fear.