Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Moonlight|3D 0.5.5 Released

michael posted about 12 years ago | from the reports-of-my-demise-etc.-etc. dept.

Graphics 180

oxygene2k2 writes "I just finished the release preparations for Moonlight|3D 0.5.5. "Moonlight?" you might think, taking a look at slashdot's nice search function and see that there are two articles from 2000 claiming that it's dead. It's alive again and this release was made to show this. We hope to attract both users and developers with this. Take a look at the Release Announcement for the Mailinglist, our development site and the press releases in english, german, french, italian and spanish."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first nipponese post (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455066)

sen shuumatsu dekakemashita
soshite anata o mimashita
anata wa tenisu ga joozu deshoo
machitaku nai desu, jaa ikimashoo

anata to watashi
anata to watashi

anata wa taitei
zuibun ogenki desu ne
tenisu no boifurendo
totemo ii desu yo

tenisu o shimasen ka?
watashi wa heta desu ga
mainichi watashi wa naraimasu
watashitachi wa tenisu o shimasu

anata to watashi
anata to watashi

anata wa taitei
zuibun ogenki desu ne
tenisu no boifurendo
totemo ii desu yo

demo kyoo ame ga furimasu
dakara uchi ni imasu
anata wa totemo kawaii desu
anata no heya e ikitai desu

anata wa taitei
zuibun ogenki desu ne
tenisu no boifurendo
totemo ii desu yo

what the hell is it? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455084)

It'd be nice if there was so info in the press release about WHAT THE HELL THIS THING IS

Re:what the hell is it? (2, Informative)

PinkX (607183) | about 12 years ago | (#4455156)

It isn't to hard to follow the given links [sf.net] and take a look at what is it about... anyways for the lazy Moonlight 3D is (as the last two letters from its name suggests) is a 3D modelling software.

Re:what the hell is it? (0)

Sabbath.sCm (542240) | about 12 years ago | (#4455215)

Yes, but... had this not been hosted on sf.net, the host would probably be slashdotted by now and ignorants like me would not know what Moonlight is.

Re:what the hell is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455249)

I read the press release, and it didn't tell me what it was. I kind of thought that the whole point of a press release was to spread word about your product. These guys failed to do that, and I was bitching about it. I didn't want to take the time to read the whole frigging article, so I wrongly assumed that the press release would tell me what I wanted to know.

Re:what the hell is it? (4, Informative)

quitcherbitchen (587409) | about 12 years ago | (#4455301)

From the development page [sourceforge.net] :

Moonlight|3D is a free software modeller and renderer for 3D scenes with an intuitive GUI and powerful editing capabilities.

That's a good one (-1, Redundant)

Faggot (614416) | about 12 years ago | (#4455088)

"Moonlight?" you might think, taking a look at slashdot's nice search function and see that there are two articles from 2000 claiming that it's dead.

HA HA HA HA HA!@

Re:That's a good one (-1, Offtopic)

Sabbath.sCm (542240) | about 12 years ago | (#4455110)

Does this mean it has been dead for 2 years and now its back to life?

slashdot's nice search function (1)

benjamindees (441808) | about 12 years ago | (#4455335)

It actually is nice now. They must have added a Google Search Appliance [google.com] . If you select "sort by score" you can find anything you need.

Re:slashdot's nice search function (1)

ThwartedEfforts (2976) | about 12 years ago | (#4455465)

You still can't tell what year an article is from on the search results page. No year is shown.

3D (0, Redundant)

Sabbath.sCm (542240) | about 12 years ago | (#4455091)

Is this another 3D suite?

Read the article... (0, Offtopic)

name_already_in_use (604991) | about 12 years ago | (#4455116)

...it might help

Re:Read the article... (0)

Sabbath.sCm (542240) | about 12 years ago | (#4455173)

I thought Slashdot would tell me what the article is about before I spend my time reading it. In this case I would be wasting my time since I have no interest in reading it. My time would have been saved if the news post had a definition of what Moonlight is.

Hmmm... (1)

Cytlid (95255) | about 12 years ago | (#4455093)

I might just reboot into linux when I get home and try my gf3 out with this ... looks pretty nifty. Episode 14, here I come...

Yea, right.

Re:Hmmm... (2, Funny)

GigsVT (208848) | about 12 years ago | (#4455367)

What happened to your first two girlfriends?

3D modelers (0, Troll)

PhysicsGenius (565228) | about 12 years ago | (#4455101)

3D modelers are nice to play with but any serious artist will tell you that the only way to get a photo-realistic rendering is to get a human artist to draw it by hand. Simple graph theory shows that handling all the data involved, edges, vertii, colors, etc is an O(2^n) task. Whereas a human can intuitively grasp the essential elements and pare the decision tree such that a scene can be drawn with minimal data.

Re:3D modelers (0)

Sabbath.sCm (542240) | about 12 years ago | (#4455136)

Sorry for my ignorance, but what is a "O(2^n) task"?

OT:move along now, nothing to see (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455165)

Please, do not feed the trolls.

Re:3D modelers (5, Informative)

aridhol (112307) | about 12 years ago | (#4455283)

This is somewhat simplified.

O(n) describes how the processing time of a problem increases when more elements are put into the input set. For example, O(n) means that when you add 1 to the input set, you add 1 to the number of loops at runtime.

O(2^n) means that for each element you put into the input set, the number of loops doubles. Thus, while an input set with 3 elements in it would loop 8 times, an input set with 4 elements would loop 16, etc. The number gets unmanageable fast - 10 elements = 1024 loops, 20 elements = 1048576 loops, 100 elements = 1267650600228229401496703205376 loops. Basically, it means that for any significant amount of data, don't expect it to be finished in your lifetime.

Yes (5, Funny)

ekrout (139379) | about 12 years ago | (#4455148)

I wanted live-action, photo-realistic rendering of my friend during his football game.

So, rather than using a digital camera, I made the smart (and obvious) choice to have an art student draw some scenes onto a 3'x6' cow carcass with a palette of 16 different paints.

In hindsight, seeing how she intuitively grasped the essential elements and pared the decision tree makes me glad that I left my Canon at home!

EricKrout.com [erickrout.com]

Re:3D modelers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455150)

You are such a troll. Nice work, though. I can think of a few people who might disagree with you, though.

Wrong. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455162)

The Perl language has a 3D modelling plugin (go to cpan.com) that removes the O(2^n) factor and makes it a O*1.5n task instead. I don't recall the name, but look under "graphics".

you braindead cumshitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455237)

wipe the spittle off your chin and listen up. every organism higher on the evolutionary chain than an aloe plant knows that O(1.5N) is synonymous with O(N). and even an aloe knows that you don't do 3D with Perl unless you are specifically seeking pain.

now go read the Sunday funnies for the eighth time.

Re:3D modelers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455177)

Which retard modded you up?

Moderation totals (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455445)

I see this post being modded up as insightful and interesting (which it is). I also see it being modded down by people who are apparently blind to the superior quality of hand-drawn scenes. These people are the visual equivalent of those who claim that CDs (a digital, artificial format) are superior to analog LPs--a claim which all thinking people realize is rubbish.

Of course these geeks that love technology better than good art are too cowardly to reply, preferring to mod anonymously.

KDE and Gnome all over again (1, Flamebait)

cioxx (456323) | about 12 years ago | (#4455103)

We got Blender3d now. Why revive old corpses and divide the community again?

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (5, Funny)

John_Booty (149925) | about 12 years ago | (#4455115)

We got Blender3d now. Why revive old corpses and divide the community again?

Yeah! Who needs choice? Screw that shit!

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455151)

A choice between a $1500 3D Studio and a Free Blender3D, not between two redundant blenders

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (5, Insightful)

Sabbath.sCm (542240) | about 12 years ago | (#4455190)

But the real point is, would KDE be so feature-rich and stable if GNOME wasn't there? Competition speeds up evolution, I think.

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455333)

But the real point is, would KDE be so feature-rich and stable if GNOME wasn't there? Competition speeds up evolution, I think.
Honestly, they both suck. I thought "less bloat" was the reason I switched from M$ Windows. Obviously, Gnome and KDE are both bloated beyond belief. Real power-users go for Fluxbox or IceWM nowdays.

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (1)

SubtleNuance (184325) | about 12 years ago | (#4455421)

I believe CoOperation is more efficient, but hey, i guess its a matter of opinion.

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455317)

So, you basically just want your software to cost nothing, and if it's good or not is unimportant.

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (3, Informative)

cioxx (456323) | about 12 years ago | (#4455236)

Yeah! Who needs choice? Screw that shit!

You misunderstood. Let me elaborate further.

Since developers allocate time out of their schedules and donate their skills (for free) to a project that powers the engine which essentially drives the open source movement. Blender3d was just freed. It's not a perfect 3d Modeling Suite by any means. It will be months, even years before it can reach the same playing field where discreet and Alias dominate the game.

Moonlight project was killed. Seems to me we got a negative charge within the OSS community where they try to counter each and every project with a similar initiative, and in turn it just divides the developers into two camps and never gives edge to a single one.

Suppose someone countered MS Exchange with an Open Source solution. I bet 3 days later there would be 2 different open source projects on freshmeat in a competition. Why? The first one isn't perfect yet!

To me the logical step would be to perfect something first, rather than have 2 half assed-solutions.

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (2)

Snafoo (38566) | about 12 years ago | (#4455375)


Yeah. And it's weird how, like, negative forces in politics cause all these different parties to emerge, dividing politicians into two camps and not giving an edge to either one. Obviously, the next logical step is to elect me as your SUPREME LEADER.

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455407)

"To me the logical step would be to perfect something first, rather than have 2 half assed-solutions."

You speak as if the "Open Source" community is a single governed entity. It's not. The Blender project exists, but what does that have to do with someone elses goal of creating a 3D program? Are you actually saying that the people working on Moonlight should have less freedom to do with their time and skills as they please, simply because someone else got there first (yeah, I know they didn't)?

"Suppose someone countered MS Exchange with an Open Source solution. I bet 3 days later there would be 2 different open source projects on freshmeat in a competition."

Yeah, and maybe they both forked from the same beginning, or end up contributing to each other, or even (God forbid) grow into something more than just another "free clone of x" because of the competition with each other.

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (1)

littleRedFriend (456491) | about 12 years ago | (#4455361)

I, like most people that would like to switch to a Linux desktop
but can't, don't need choice. We need something that works.

Dividing attention is not going to help is. However, I do understand
why it satisfies developers and software architecture techno-freaks.

If you just want to play, go ahead. If you want total world
domination, choice just reared its ugly head one more time.

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455502)

Was that supposed to be poetry or something?

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455179)

Having used both programs at various stages, I can say that while they may appear similar at first glance they do address slightly different audiences. If nothing else, M3D has a much shallower learning curve the last time I compared the two...

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455197)

I mean, God knows no one wants to have a choice.

because... (5, Informative)

Patoski (121455) | about 12 years ago | (#4455261)

Moonlight 3D is a ray tracer and Blender is a scan line renderer. Blender will likely never have/be a raytracer natively (although export scripts to a few ray tracers exist). These are two *very* different approaches to rendering so by no means would I say that Blender and Moonlight are cut from the same cloth.

Best of luck to the Moonlight 3d team! Its a spiffy little app with a nice interface and plenty of potential!

Re:because... (2)

littleRedFriend (456491) | about 12 years ago | (#4455468)

Yeah, I don't understand. In the end they both produce pretty
pictures of modelled objects, right?

Re:KDE and Gnome all over again (2)

symbolic (11752) | about 12 years ago | (#4455369)

Oh please. Blender has its own way of doing things, and I know from experience (at least mine), that it's not always the best or most effective way. I am very happy that the prospect for alternatives exists. I've not looked at M3d yet, but if you look at K3d, or Wings3D, for example, you'll see that they take a decidedly different approach to the workflow, offering different feature sets, and different methodologies. This kind of choice is needed, since there's no way that one app can be all things to all people.

Blender has potential, but nearly everything about it is non-standard. It certainly incorporates some nice ideas, but in an off-center sort of way. It would be great if the mojo in the modeling community at large could move it more toward the center. Whether or not that happens, choice and diversity of ideas is a good thing.

Too little too late (0, Redundant)

ekrout (139379) | about 12 years ago | (#4455107)

Should've been from the highly irrelevant-dept I think, especially considering that Blender [blender.org] has now been Open-Sourced! [U.S. Mirror [umn.edu] | Dutch Mirror [xs4all.nl] ]

Alive after two years (5, Funny)

jbarket (530468) | about 12 years ago | (#4455109)

And here in two seconds, the slashdot effect will make sure nobody on the internet can tell the difference.

Ow, I bruised my bandwidth!

Freshmeat (-1, Offtopic)

nogoodmonkey (614350) | about 12 years ago | (#4455113)

Since when did Slashdot become Freshmeat?

What. Is. It. (5, Insightful)

rschwa (89030) | about 12 years ago | (#4455128)

, taking a look at slashdot's nice search function

You're joking, right?

How hard is it to say "Moonlight, the window manager", or "Moonlight, the animated series", or "Moonlight, the new journalling file system" in these posts?

I don't even bother clicking these links because the server is going to be buried anyway.

..another waste of posting space

Re:What. Is. It. (-1, Flamebait)

jbarket (530468) | about 12 years ago | (#4455176)

I hate to be a dick here but uh.. Don't you see where it says 3D in the post? Moonlight|3D. People talking about modelers? I think the point of searching was just so they could laugh at CmdrTaco and be like 'oh, we're dead eh? eat new release silly man!'

Re:What. Is. It. (4, Insightful)

rschwa (89030) | about 12 years ago | (#4455321)

Don't you see where it says 3D in the post? Moonlight|3D. People talking about modelers?

Well, '3d' is a buzzword that can be applied to just about any craptacular thing to make it that much l33ter, and there were no replies posted when I began my post.

Anyways, I'm commenting on a general trend of slashdork news posts. A relatively high percentage of posts are like this, talking about something which I'm sure is obvious if you're on the mailing list (In which case you probably heard about it a week ago), but for lack of two extra words of description, means nothing to me.
Half the time, the link is to some cryptic page on Sourceforge where I'd still have to spend 5 minutes poking around to figure out wtf the thing is, and the other half it's a link to some poor unsuspecting server that's going to be crushed within 10 seconds of the post making the front page.

"Moonlight3D 0.3.21.5, a 3D modelling package for Linux" would have been so much clearer, and may have saved who knows how much bandwidth for people who would then say 'hm, not interested in that', and gone about their business rather than clicking the link to find out what the 'story' was about.

Re:What. Is. It. (1)

jbarket (530468) | about 12 years ago | (#4455363)

Yeah, and retrospect, I think you're right, especially about this post. While I guessed right by 3D, it could have been a fooking 3D crossword puzzle, heh.

Re:What. Is. It. (3, Funny)

BigZaphod (12942) | about 12 years ago | (#4455354)

Don't forget about "Moonlight, the flame thrower." (The kids love that one..)

Re:What. Is. It. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455390)

I am in much agreement with these posters in that something should have been added to say this is a 3D modeling package. I hesitated before clicking the link, because I am at work and you never know where a link might take you. For all I know it was a 3D game...or worse, one with sexual overtones. Either can get me in trouble at work from the IT (Internet Troupers) people at my company.

Description? (3, Insightful)

scott1853 (194884) | about 12 years ago | (#4455129)

I saw a post just the other day from somebody complaining about the lack of descriptive names in OSS projects. Here's a good example.

Moonlight 3D. It's obviously related to 3D in some way. Is it a modeller, raytracing engine, game, scientific 3D analysis, 3D star map maybe? Give one sentence at least. Don't make me go read the damn article to figure out if I'm even interested in reading about it.

Now I've gone an had to follow the link to find out it's a modeller/renderer. You couldn't say "Moonlight 3D modeller/renderer released"?

Re:Description? (5, Insightful)

Azghoul (25786) | about 12 years ago | (#4455207)

Just curious, aside from branding, what the hell does "Excel" have to do with anything?

Or "Mozilla"? Or "350Z" :-D

Don't whine about a lack of descriptive names in OSS. They're everywhere.

Re:Description? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455329)

240 centiiliter displacement. z just means cool. In Japan it was originally the Datsun Fairlady Z. Typically alpha numeric car names mean something. Like MR2. Midengine Rear wheel drive 2 seater. Jaguar names all have meanings too. Only Mercedes and BMW really use pointless names.

Re:Description? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455352)

Actually, if you've ever had to read their website, you'll notice the mind-numbing repetition of:

Microsoft Excel, the Office XP spreadsheet and analysis program

It's even in their logos. So I think that's already covered.

Re:Description? (2)

scott1853 (194884) | about 12 years ago | (#4455355)

I'm not going to endure a lengthy /. search, but I would think that the term "Mozilla Browser" was probably mentioned somehwere, and not just, "There's a new program called Mozilla, check it out".

Yes (0, Offtopic)

ekrout (139379) | about 12 years ago | (#4455279)

I hereby propose that Microsoft Excel be renamed "Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet Analysis Software Featuring Smart Tags & Task Panes To Simplify Common Tasks & Help You Create, Analyze, & Find Data While Utilizing Fast Floating Point Calculations Based On Traditional Block-Style Graph Paper Format".

Re:Yes (1)

seann (307009) | about 12 years ago | (#4455311)

I second

Re:Yes (2)

scott1853 (194884) | about 12 years ago | (#4455379)

What's with the stupid Excel examples? Ok, I disagree, because unless you live in a hole you know what Excel is. It's taught in high school. EVERYBODY knows what Excel is.

Do I need to say "Saturn the car, not the planet", if I'm talking about a new 4 door sedan? You can figure out the meaning based on the context.

Re:Yes (1)

agdv (457752) | about 12 years ago | (#4455402)

Do I need to say "Saturn the car, not the planet", if I'm talking about a new 4 door sedan?


You do, if you're in one of the (many) countries where such cars are not sold.

Re:Description? (3, Interesting)

Repugnant_Shit (263651) | about 12 years ago | (#4455285)

I agree, and here's some more good names:
Konqueror - those krazy KDE folKs.
Blender - about as descriptive as moonlight.
Mozilla - I don't understand this one at all.

And some closed-source weird names:
Excel - Maybe a spreadsheet has X number of cells?
Visio - almost as weird as Mozilla
Visual Studio...sounds like a paint program.

I think its all about what sounds good. For instance, my name is John, which is not as descriptive as "Overweight geek" but definitely sounds better.

Re:Description? (2)

scott1853 (194884) | about 12 years ago | (#4455398)

YES, an intelligent response. Thank you.

I agree, the names are chosen because they sound good. And MS names are no better in terms of describing what the product is.

What some people don't seem to understand if that when you decide to publish a piece about a software program that was declared dead 2 years ago, and never made it out of beta, maybe you should mention a little more than just the name of the package.

Re:Description? (1)

BeeShoo (42280) | about 12 years ago | (#4455510)

I agree. Why can't all program names be as descriptive and their uses obvious as those old stalwarts grep, emacs, and vi? (to name but a few)

Re:Description? (2)

Bastian (66383) | about 12 years ago | (#4455512)

Duh. Giving every software project a name that tells you directly what it does is really kinda lame. It'd be like renaming the Cadillac Escalade the "Cadillac SUV That Is Just Like A Certain Popular GMC SUV Only It Costs More Because It's A Caddie And You Don't Even Get All The Snazzy Features On Other Caddies Such As Northstar."

What would we call all the office suites?

The KDE Office Suite, the Gnome Office Suite, the Sun Office suite, with apps in them called KDE Word, Gnome Spreadsheet, and Sun Presentation Software?

No, we couldn't even do that, because we'd have to name the projects themselves with a name that makes sense, so KDE would be called the "Desktop Environment Project That's Based On A Library That Used To Be Called QT Only We Can't Call It That Anymore Because It's Not Descriptive Enough." Sun would suffer even worse.

Only Gnome and GTK+ would survive, since they are descriptive acronyms based on (somewhat) descriptive acronyms. We probably wouldn't be able to get away with using them in acronymic form, though. So GTK+ would suddenly become the "Gnu Image Manipulation Program ToolKit Plus"

God save us with Gnome - we couldn't call it the GNU Network Object Model Environment, because we'd have to unroll the GNU, so it would become the GNU's Not Unix Network OBject Model Environment, only suddenly we have another acronym to unroll, and everything goes to hell and it's like trying to debug C++ programs that use multiple inheritance using gdb.

I don't get people sometimes... (4, Interesting)

Quasar1999 (520073) | about 12 years ago | (#4455131)

Why oh why bring back something form 2 years ago, especially when there is the blender3d project already out there... why not add to blender3d? Why waste resources competing with an opensource project? You have nothing to gain, if you don't like it's functionality, re-write it... don't create a whole new software... that's just re-inventing the wheel (to the next level).

Re:I don't get people sometimes... (5, Insightful)

TitusC3v5 (608284) | about 12 years ago | (#4455231)

Because Confucius say "Choice is good."

Seriously, though, why not? Yes, we have Blender, but we also have over a dozen window managers. Open source is about choice - if you like something stick with it. People tend to get all up in arms about KDE and Gnome, but it's easy to see that without each other, neither would have pressed to reach the level of functionality that both have attained at this point.

Re:I don't get people sometimes... (2)

Tet (2721) | about 12 years ago | (#4455532)

why not add to blender3d? Why waste resources competing with an opensource project?

Because while Blender may be well endowed with features, its user interface sucks. Really, really sucks. Moonlight 3D (and I admit, I haven't used it in years) had a much better UI. To rework the blender UI would take a lot of work, almost a complete rewrite. Besides, as others have said, choice is *good*, and since they're both now GPL, they can cross polinate each other to improve both projects.

Re:I don't get people sometimes... (2, Interesting)

gfxguy (98788) | about 12 years ago | (#4455547)

Because the Moonlight interface is much more intuitive than Blender. Please don't respond with how great Blender is when you understand how to use it, because I wouldn't argue that - but if Moonlight can do modelling and rendering in a way that I find easier (because of my experience with, for example, Maya3D), then I'm all for it.

Blender! (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455135)

Blender http://www.blender.org is now open source. Doesn't it do what moonlight did but Blender is much better?

Yum!! (1)

PinkX (607183) | about 12 years ago | (#4455137)

With the recent release of Blender as opensource software, and now that Moonlight 3D is 'coming back to life', the offer of quality 3D modelling software is increasing in an intreasting manner. Not that I'm an expert 3D sculptor, but I've always admired the work created by the people that manages these pieces of software.

Re:Yum!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455423)

right - your not an expert 3d sculptor. blender and ml3d suck compared to commercial suites. honestly - its a business and if a business gets project X done faster in Y amount of time using software Z noone cares if it costs more. in the end the business needs some money to spend ( for tax at least )

Is this better than Blender? (2, Interesting)

g_bit (253703) | about 12 years ago | (#4455139)

If so, how?

If not...why does it exist? Why not just get the Blender sources and add what you want into it?

Re:Is this better than Blender? (5, Interesting)

oxygene2k2 (615758) | about 12 years ago | (#4455206)

well, in terms of features, Moonlight isn't as complete yet

why does it exist?
- because some stupid guy did not take the sources of blender in 1996 or so when he started moonlight
- because some other stupid guys liked moonlight and used it
- because it's easier to cope with without learning yet-another-GUI-paradigm
- because it's fun hacking it (blender doesn't even build yet afaik)
- because blender sources weren't free in january, when I started
- and finally, because I guess that the blender sources are much bigger and less understandable than source that was once meant to be open instead of some corporate beast that wasn't supposed to see the light

maybe some stuff like choice could be brought in to the discussion as well...

Do we really need another 3D suit? (1, Redundant)

Gyorg_Lavode (520114) | about 12 years ago | (#4455158)

Do we really need another 3D suit? For those who don't want to pay for their 3D suit or want to feel good about using an open source 3D suit there's Blender. For those who actually need to model professionally theres Softimage and Maya. While it is noble to undertake writing a 3D suit, is it prudent to attempt to rewrite something that had already been written by 1999? To work on a project that is leagues behind the professional suits and that for all intents and purposes will most likely never be used in a professional setting?

Re:Do we really need another 3D suit? (1)

jbarket (530468) | about 12 years ago | (#4455203)

I have to agree that in an opensource situation, it's kind of a waste of manpower to have people working on two identical projects.. but the more projects there are, the more competition there is. They've got somebody to be better than, steal ideas for features from, etc. I think the existence of other projects is a good thing.. as long as it actually exists, and isn't just vaporware.

Re:Do we really need another 3D suit? (1)

chris_mahan (256577) | about 12 years ago | (#4455452)

Something I learned about manpower:

Take a highly skilled engineer, an equally skilled architect, and a team of 60 well-trained construction specialists, and you can put together a bridge.

A million barefoot workers working 24/7 with a basketful of dirt and rocks, and you can manage a dam, perhaps.

It is better to have a small, highly skilled team that a large lumbering one for many projects.

Nothing wrong with my suit (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455274)


Nothing wrong with my suit, my tailor made it fit perfectly, even bought the waistcoat to finish it off :)

ok i gotta go back to my editing suite and get some work done

What the hell is a 3D Suit??? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455288)

hahahaha. He said it 6 times. What an idiot.

Re:Do we really need another 3D suit? (4, Insightful)

Patoski (121455) | about 12 years ago | (#4455392)

Do we really need another 3D suit?

The users of Moonlight 3D will decide the answer to that question. :-)

While it is noble to undertake writing a 3D suit, is it prudent to attempt to rewrite something that had already been written by 1999? To work on a project that is leagues behind the professional suits and that for all intents and purposes will most likely never be used in a professional setting?

Who's to say what will become of Moonlight 3d in the future? I'm sure people didn't think much would come of Linus' little side project either but look what happened. :-) I'm not saying this will happen for Moonlight, but anything is possible. Besides, choice is a good thing and to me the different focuses of Blender and Moonlight are signifigant enough to not pull out the "you're reinventing the wheel" card.

Blender is a scan line renderer w/a real time engine and animation capabilities w/an efficient but arcane UI.

Moonlight 3D is a ray tracer w/a nice interface and decent nurbs, curve functionality

Hopefully these two projects will be able to learn and feed off of one another's progress (esp since they're both GPL) and both projects will be better off in the end!

Re:Do we really need another 3D suit? (2)

fusiongyro (55524) | about 12 years ago | (#4455523)

It's "suite," asshole. You could at least make sure you got the word right before you use it 6 times.

No one asked you what was noble and what wasn't. If you know the slightest thing about programming you'd be aware that you don't start writing something beat what's already been made, you start by writing something, and then you add to it, and as your knowledge increases you can take on more and more complex or difficult tasks. At this moment, there is no open source 3D modeller/renderer/kitchen sink which these guys can go to and learn how to do these complex things. The algorithms used by these complicated applications are all but unknown to the community; the proprietary ones certainly aren't published in books, and even if they were it would take a great deal of skill to "get inside" them, figure out how they work, etc.

We have to start at the beginning.

Did you use the Gimp three years ago? I tell you it wasn't a "photoshop-alike" then. We have to start somewhere and then move up. There are programs we have in free software that are so advanced, there's no analog for them in closed-source. For example, the RADIANCE [lbl.gov] renderer is the only one that does light accurately, and it has been free for ages and will become open source in December. Aspell [aspell.net] uses a new algorithm that beats every other spell checker. At its inception, would you have said we shouldn't invest this time and effort into another spell checker?

The problem is that people like you look at open source development like closed source development. As though when a project is formed, some segment of the total number of developers have to be allocated to it. Fortunately, the way it really works is developers work on whatever they are attracted to. Even huge projects like Mozilla have at the core less than 20 developers. I haven't checked, but I would guess that these 3D projects will have 2-4 core developers. Everyone else will contribute from time to time, or possibly even just once. But the people who work on Moonlight are not people who necessarily would have worked on Blender. They are not even necessarily people who would have developed for anything at all.

What does a professional setting have to do with whether or not something should be developed? Take enlightenment for example. I bet many people said, this is a window manager which will never be used in a professional setting. And yet I know several sysadmins who have used enlightenment as their window manager! It's like science, we don't research the things we think are going to bring about "useful" discoveries, because that's counter-productive and we never know which research will result in useful discoveries. Instead, we just generate all of the software we'd like to generate, and some of it will get used, and some will not. AWK is a good counter example; it was developed for a particular purpose for which it is extremely useful (parsing text files with very uniform structure). And yet, it has fallen by the wayside because Perl can do essentially the same things, but is a more powerful programming language in general.

To summarize:

  1. Yes, we do need another <insert software-type here>.
  2. No, it doesn't matter what the software is. You think every window manager should be like TWM?
  3. People will develop what they want to develop, regardless of whether or not YOU think it is prudent or a good use of "resources" (ie. people besides you).
  4. Start at the beginning, and work your way up. RMS stated that the GNU system would encompass everything from a shell to a spreadsheet. Linus just wanted a kernel. Which one has been useful the longest? Don't bite off more than you can chew.
  5. Professional != Better (necessarily).


--
Daniel

newsworthy? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455180)

Blender being GPL'd was aboslutely newsworthy. Why is Moonlight's resurrection newsworthy? A program sits around a long time, it gets an update, front page news on slashdot. Aside from the possibility that the author/team has a friend in the slashdot editors, this just doesn't seem to belong on the front page at all. Many, many programs are inactive for a long time, then someone (sometimes the original author) comes along and updates it.

Next stop .. game development (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455194)


Seeing as its based on code that is 4 years old, maybe the doom users could use it for new levels,
Hell Quake 1 modders might find a use for it too !, but for more serious [discreet.com] 3D use i think they have a long way to go.

Maya, 3DMax users, i think you can assume your job is still safe :)

Ps. If you want Open source then please donate your time to something more worthwhile [blender3d.com] , after all no point in re-inventing the wheel again.

Re:Next stop .. game development (1)

jbarket (530468) | about 12 years ago | (#4455226)

Sounds like it's destined to be an invaluable tool for the makers of Duke Nukem Forever.

Linux isn't gay (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455196)

It just doesn't have a preference.

Bad movie plot (1)

Powercntrl (458442) | about 12 years ago | (#4455211)

Did we resurrect this software because it's the only thing bad assed enough to fight Blender and prevent its dark army from destroying the world?

Will we get to see two chicks do battle with sharp objects?

No? Yawn.

Sheesh (4, Funny)

back_pages (600753) | about 12 years ago | (#4455256)

I have no idea what the article is about...

I read the comments... everything is either off-topic or refers to the article negatively...

I'm puzzled. What's up? Could it be that I--!! QUICK! Scroll to the top again! YES! I foolishly turned off my "michael" filter!

A quick trip to my preferences prevents this mishap in the future. Now.. must turn off third person narrative... ...

This is SWEET!!! (5, Informative)

cnelzie (451984) | about 12 years ago | (#4455273)

I played about with Moonlight 3D some time ago and found it far easier to use then Blender 3D.

To me, the user interface was quite simply far more user friendly then Blender is. (Of course, that is a matter of opinion and that is my opinion.)

A nice example (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455281)

I've rendered some nice images with moonlight. You can check one of the realistic samples here. Note how impressive is the deep illusion this image has.

Some examples (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455312)

I've rendered some nice images with moonlight. You can check one of the realistic samples here [tinyurl.com] . Note how impressive is the deep illusion this image has.

Documentation (5, Insightful)

Screaming Lunatic (526975) | about 12 years ago | (#4455316)

For some constructive criticism. We can bitch and complain about Blender vs Moonlight and how it's KDE vs. Gnome (pick your favorite religous battle) all over again. The bottom line is that Linux needs an OpenSource 3D modelling package.

I have downloaded the source to both Blender and Moonlight. And I'm still banging my head to figure out how to compile and run the darn things. What these projects need is some good documentation and developers jumping on board working out features.

So who's with me? Here I go to join the dev maillist [studentenbude.ath.cx]

I'm not dead yet... (3, Funny)

tonysee (416247) | about 12 years ago | (#4455326)

Moonlight|3D isn't dead, it just smells funny.

must.. avoid.. lameness.. filter...

Ad Banner (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455356)

What's up with the microsoft small office ad?
Sell out?

romantic walks under the moonlight (3, Funny)

master_p (608214) | about 12 years ago | (#4455368)

Moonlight 3D is a 3D animation program which simulates a romantic walk of a geek(that's you and me) with a beautiful woman under the moonlight.

It provides:

1) pond simulation(for breaking the ice commenting on that frog you stepped on)
2) real star maps(so you can count stars while she fells asleep)
3) nice seats for sitting romantically holding hands(not to say that you're broke, of course)
4) no dangers from people with green hair(of course you have not been in the gym lately, due to that school project)

The 3d suite's previous name was 'geekdream', but the author changed it for political reasons.

Description: (2, Informative)

Palos (527071) | about 12 years ago | (#4455372)

from http://ml3d.sourceforge.net/ What is Moonlight|3D? 2002-10-12 Moonlight|3D is a free software modeller and renderer for 3D scenes with an intuitive GUI and powerful editing capabilities. This effort is based on the Moonlight Atelier sources (version 0.5.3) from 1998, which - unfortunately - was the last sourcecode release. Early 1999 the original author released a newer version (0.9.2) which has texture mapping and other important features, but he never released the source (he didn't need to). The development of Moonlight|3D aims for the features of 0.9.2 but also wants to go beyond that: the goal is to have a powerful 3d editing tool with animation capabilities which is still easy to handle for someone new to 3d modelling.

I need this (1, Redundant)

kenp2002 (545495) | about 12 years ago | (#4455378)

I simply need a modelling tool that lets me build counter-stike and quake 3 maps that is as easy to use as the old Duke Nukem 3D mapping tool. Why do we need yet another Lightwave/3DSMax/Maya/Bryce/Blender/Easy3D/blah/bl ah God bless the open source comunity to reinvent the wheel... again... Good luck! Now if someone could just make these apps easier to use then I'd care...

hmm this tool looks really (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4455389)

linux - like.
honestly - wings3d is far more powerfull as a modeller. the interface of ml3d is worse than blender imho

Whadya mean, "why do we need it??" (2, Insightful)

The Kryptonian (617472) | about 12 years ago | (#4455432)

Shame on you guys! You think one tool is all anyone would ever need? Look at mainstream computer graphics market. How many 3D modeling and animation applications are there? ONE?!? I don't THINK so. Last time I checked, there were five or six major animation packages, and about a dozen more minor ones. Cut it down to modeling only, and you've got another half dozen or so. Diversity is what we're all about, whether it's open source or not.

I am really amazed... (1, Offtopic)

teamhasnoi (554944) | about 12 years ago | (#4455455)

that you managed to find *anything* with 'Slashdot's nice search function'.

That should be a front page story, right there.

Nice to see its alive again. (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 12 years ago | (#4455491)

But at this stage of the game, can it catch up with what is already out there? It showed promise before it dropped off the map so long ago...

more confusion (1)

avandesande (143899) | about 12 years ago | (#4455546)

Another bit to add to the Moonlight confusion is the name of a rendering package called 'Blue Moon Rendering Tools' which is a pixar-type rendering engine that was built by Larry Gritz.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?