I think they are trying to deliver a better product in V6 .—Mark
There have been 13 Service Releases over past 4 years of Rhino 5 existence. For free. Seems rather obvious that RMA needs to work towards a new version and charge upgrade fees.
“Keep calm and carry on modeling”.
Abandoned is the wrong term. We have closed the book on further development for V5.
Since V5 was first released in September of 2012, we have been working on new tools for V6 as well as working on bug fixes for V5. Over time, as the bugs become less critical, we are able to shift more development resources over to Rhino WIP which spins off the next version of Rhino with new tools and features.
We are now at a point where continued fixes to V5 have very diminished value.
Our current efforts are focused on getting Rhino V6 for Windows finished and released.
When that happens, we will work on fixes for V6 as they come to our attention, and start working on tools in Rhino WIP that will eventually spin off Rhino V7.
Does this process make sense?
I would rather pay for fully debugged Rhino 5 than for buggy Rhino 6.
There are bugs in Command-Line Calculator of Rhino 5. If the bugs are fixed in Rhino 6, and the Command-Line Calculator is not changed dramatically in Rhino 6, it would be easy copy the fixed code from Rhino 6 to Rhino 5.
Probably the most practicable policy is replacing all buggy commands in Rhino 5 with their Rhino 6 versions and charging $100 to $200 for the update of Rhino 5.
Darn! Why didn’t someone here think of that?
Don’t you dare suggest paid updates for Rhino! The best thing about Rhino compared with all other CAD programs is the free updates…and that Rhino is great in general.
That’s of course, statistically, given how software development works today, impossible. The open issue list for Rhino–which might be bugs, might be requests, how do you even differentiate sometimes?–is I believe into 5 figures.
That’s an extremely wild assumption.
Isn’t that basically what the Rhino 6 upgrade is, for a bit more money?
We have genuine difference of opinions. Young computer users do not mind living on the bleeding edge of technology. When something does not work, they don’t ask questions and don’t report bugs. They abandon the ship and use another bootleg software. Old computer users prefer stability because they have invested lots of time in mastering the software.
sounds like you are giving yourself the idea of your solution. flexibility is always good to have in an ever demanding growing surrounding. where i come from we have a saying, who rests - rusts but i have to agree with this point i also dont understand this ever buggy world of never having anything complete and stable and already the next version ships into deep seas, when i look at adobe software which is a parade example for those matter i kinda get nightmares
I’m as old a Rhino user as just about anybody. As a rule–and I am aware of the exceptions, again, been around since V1–the most “bleeding edge” version of Rhino we can get our hands on usually IS the most stable one. The official ‘releases’ have never been relevant to what I’m actually using, they just represent dates from which upgrade fees are collected.
Well, this stuff is just so exponentially complex that except for really simple stuff, perfect is impossible, unless you want to pay exponentially more for it and not be allowed to run it on just any old PC you happen to have lying around.
I agree. A perfect world would be dead world because any change would make it less perfect. We need moderate perfection - no new bugs reported for a week. We may also need new legislation mandating software warranty.
Computer programmers work slowly because all programming languages have primitive text interface. The programmers need graphical user interface resembling CAD interface. (This graphical user interface may look like Bongo plugin interface. The programmer would drag timeline slider forward and backward to visualize data flow between functions/subroutines.)
Like Grasshopper ?
Yes, but with timeline slider, and maybe in 3D. When you zoom out, several functions/subroutines merge into one function/subroutine.
Let’s hear what the programmers think - maybe they cope ok in abstract dimensions - I certainly prefer visual structures and feedback, or I lack the discipline to force myself into abstraction.
Dear lord, when we start remembering Jon Wanker through rose colored glasses…
There’s always one or two hanging around here to provide comic relief…
I think the ‘keep calm’ part is Andrew’s biggest bug…
I nearly spat out a mouthful of coke on that one - Oh Lord, I had all but forgotten about dear Mr. Banquer!
Thanks for reminding me!
Same here, I even did a quick search to see if there was any relation.
In all seriousness, it’s good to have someone or something going rogue every now and than.