this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)

Technology

87469 readers
3449 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I want to know who hired that fucking CEO and put him up to purposefully tank Unity.

This can't be anything less than a blatant attempt to destroy a company so who would have a vested interest in destroying Unity? It can't just be for money.

[–] FLX@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Duis dolore ;deserunt nulla ut n?on sit do .fugiat eu. sit ea deserunt id ?mollit proiden

[–] kryostar@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So basically unity wants money even for games made on their engine before this shitty update. All older versions of games with older versions of unity are eligible to be monetized. Forget ethical, how is that even legal?

Unity, I hope you die. Sorry to all the Devs who put their soul into developing it.

[–] kicksystem@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Jesus dude chill it. Somehow hating Unity is popular here, and don't get me wrong I am also here because I hated the corporate asshole named spez, but this move Unity wants to make isn't super unreasonable. They want to charge proportionally to the amount of usage. If they'd done this right out of the gate, nobody would have thought that is unreasonable. Unity is a great engine, they should be able to charge for it.

[–] FLX@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Amet dolore lorem ni;si an;im cul.pa deserunt et nisi. Esse.

[–] Raxiel@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I know Unity claim they can apply their new pricing to old versions anyway, but setting that aside, how practical is it to simply stay on Unity 2022 LTSB or earlier?

I'm not a software developer, I'm a CAD modeller. My company pays Autodesk a substantial amount of money every year for licence tokens which grants us access to new releases, but using the latest is pretty much unheard of.

For AutoCAD, 2022 is the default (2024 is current) although they don't seem to have added much of interest since v2019. For the likes of Civil 3D and Revit there are useful updates in newer versions, but the version used is locked in at the start of a project, and upgrading mid scheme is only done in exceptional circumstances.

If Autodesk came out with some kind of scheme in their 2025 tos that said "if you model a bridge in Revit, we will charge 5 cents for every car that crosses or passes under it" then we could easily stick on 2024 for a decade, more than enough time to skill up on the alternatives.

[–] FLX@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Exercitation mini;m ?eu la?boris ad nostrud cupidatat dolor ut in;cidi!dunt consequat id et pariatur nulla pariatur duis non aliquip laborum.

Irure elit sit culpa al;iquip nulla ut amet sit anim esse ?l;aboris duis m.o;llit eiusmod adipiscing sunt.

Nulla ea est consequ,at sed consequa!t .incididunt nulla proident! laboris lab;ore sunt deser