3d space shuttle

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

gandoza - 23 Sep 2008 12:52 GMT

Hi
Here is my new collection of high detailed 3d models available for all
file formats.
welcome,
http://gandoza.net/3D_Models/3D_Models.html

Reply to this Message

Jeff Findley - 23 Sep 2008 16:10 GMT

> Hi
> Here is my new collection of high detailed 3d models available for all
> file formats.
> welcome,
> http://gandoza.net/3D_Models/3D_Models.html

He wants $39 for a copy of the space shuttle model in several formats. I
personally wouldn't buy it. It's not an engineering model, even though
he'll give you copies in several CAD formats.

The web page claims it's "Modeled by blueprint of Real dimentions", but I
don't believe that. If you look at the model, it's obviously grossly
incorrect, especially at the aft of the space shuttle. The OMS pods aren't
shaped right, the OMS engines are wrong and incorrectly placed. Same for
the SSME's.

Jeff

Signature

A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein

Reply to this Message

OM - 24 Sep 2008 06:12 GMT

>He wants $39 for a copy of the space shuttle model in several formats. I
>personally wouldn't buy it. It's not an engineering model, even though
>he'll give you copies in several CAD formats.

...Personally, I think most CAD models are grossly overpriced. True,
you can argue that it took 300+ hours to gen up a mesh, but 90% of the
people who frack around with Lightwave, Maya or 3D Studio don't do it
professionally. They do it for the fun of it. Make a mesh available
for $2-$3 and with good quality and they'll make money up on volume.

However, in *this* spamming asswipe's case...

>The web page claims it's "Modeled by blueprint of Real dimentions", but I
>don't believe that. If you look at the model, it's obviously grossly
>incorrect, especially at the aft of the space shuttle. The OMS pods aren't
>shaped right, the OMS engines are wrong and incorrectly placed. Same for
>the SSME's.

...And quite a few of those other meshs are similarly inaccurate. And
they look an awful lot like some other ones I've seen around. I
suspect he downloaded some, made a few tweaks, changed the poly count
here and there, and then rearchived them for sale.

OM

Signature

]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

Reply to this Message

Ralph Edwards - 24 Sep 2008 06:17 GMT

>>He wants $39 for a copy of the space shuttle model in several formats. I
>>personally wouldn't buy it. It's not an engineering model, even though
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> professionally. They do it for the fun of it. Make a mesh available
> for $2-$3 and with good quality and they'll make money up on volume.

I wonder if the same would be true for software? Could Microsoft make enough
money selling Windows or Office for $25 a copy? I know, it's off topic, but
I've been wondering about this for years.

Reply to this Message

OM - 24 Sep 2008 06:51 GMT

>Could Microsoft make enough
>money selling Windows or Office for $25 a copy? I know, it's off topic, but
>I've been wondering about this for years.

...Do you know why applications like AutoCad, 3DS, Lightwave and any
other high-dollar app costs so much? Two reasons:

1) The "We're the only game in town, and you have to *PAY* for it.
Extortion? Of course.

2) If you can't afford it, then you're not a professional user and we
don't want our tech support lines clogged by Ma and Paw G00berz from
Ooopsaloosa TN trying to make donut holes in Lightwave and not being
able to read the manual.

OM

Signature

Reply to this Message

Jeff Findley - 24 Sep 2008 19:30 GMT

>>Could Microsoft make enough
>>money selling Windows or Office for $25 a copy? I know, it's off topic,
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> 1) The "We're the only game in town, and you have to *PAY* for it.
> Extortion? Of course.

You're ignoring the obvious reason. These sorts of software packages are
non-trivial to code up and require a large number of developers to build and
maintain them. Plus their market is relatively small compared to a
similarly complex product like MS Office. Since you have to recoup your
investment over a much smaller market than MS Office, you have to have
higher prices.

> 2) If you can't afford it, then you're not a professional user and we
> don't want our tech support lines clogged by Ma and Paw G00berz from
> Ooopsaloosa TN trying to make donut holes in Lightwave and not being
> able to read the manual.

That's why such companies typically charge a yearly maintenance fee which
includes support. You're not so much buying the software as you are leasing
it. If you don't pay your support fees, you don't get upgrades and you
don't get tech support.

Jeff

Signature

A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein

Reply to this Message

nmp - 24 Sep 2008 15:24 GMT

> Could Microsoft make enough money selling Windows or Office for $25 a
> copy?

Only if you could teach them the meaning of the word "enough".

Reply to this Message

Ralph Edwards - 24 Sep 2008 19:59 GMT

>> Could Microsoft make enough money selling Windows or Office for $25 a
>> copy?
>
> Only if you could teach them the meaning of the word "enough".

If I remember correctly, Windows XP Professional cost around $200 full
retail. Lots of people bought it, but far more downloaded it with P2P
programs.

I believe more people would buy it if it were priced around $25 to $50.
They'd probably make more than they do with their current pricing structure.

Reply to this Message

Space Forum / Shuttle / September 2008

3d space shuttle