Does anyone imagine what NaN is thinking about Blender right now ?
You think they are impress on all the work that had been done so far ?
umm to my knowledge TON was the founder of NaN and is also leading the development of blender.
do you even know what you are talking about???
Alltaken
I was refering tour others in the foundation, I know Ton was in it.
haha…beats me too 
NaN is just a piece of paper nowdays LOL
i assume they are still close at hand.
but i wouldn’t know.
and also you need to watch using tour instead of “to”, and “your”. LOL just somthing that bugs me
Alltaken
Ton still hangs out helping the coders, and is still pulling most of the strings when it comes to releases and all. He’s like, online 24/7 and I talk to him now and then to bug him about stupid coding questions 
Roel
Forgive me if I’m wrong but I think what Al_Capone means this:
What must the people, from whom we purchased Blender’s source code,
think of Blender now?
Do we think they are impressed by its success as an open source project?
I think once they received the 100,000 Euros they knew we were serious!
They’er probably glad for us and impressed.
The people who sold the source code probably couldn’t care less about Blender. They got their hundred grand, and that’s all it’s about to them. The entire situation sickens me, really. I doubt they would have done anything with it themselves, but they still expected money for it.
hehe, Right 
A hundred grand isn’t that much for a developer, wasn’t it for debt ?
dwmich
i think the investors actually lost money on it but i am not sure.
however if they did lose money on their inverstments in NaN i think thats a pretty nasty remark!!
i don’t think it was a profit thing selling Blender, i think it was a recovery of lost investments.
Alltaken
p.s. i am no expert of the NaN situation as i came to blender mid way through the whole thing.
Probably “What’s bad about Blender, and how can we improve that?”
I mean, they probably aren’t thinking, “100 grand! Let’s retire!” or “Hmm, how can we kill Blender?” If so, they’re quite evil.
I agree with Alltaken, I believe they were a little more in debt then 100 gram. I thinks it’s a very fare deal, open the source and we relieve some finecial stress.
So what would have happened if the 100K was not reached?
d52477001
Have a read here: http://www.blender3d.org/Foundation/?sub=History
(this is all my outsider’s understanding of the situation - not necessarily 100% correct)
The EUR100K was not paid to NaN. As part of NaN’s deal with the investors that financed it for the last couple of years of its operation, the investors gained ownership (or at least majority ownership) of the Blender source code intellectual property. After NaN was unsuccessful in operating as a profitable business, the investors decided to close down the operation to prevent losing any more money than they had already. However NaN and the investors still had a bunch of assets, including the Blender source code, which was owned by the investors.
Often when a company goes under, they will sell off all the assets, to try and pay off debts etc. What’s unusual about what happened to Blender, is that rather than (for example) cutting a deal to sell the Blender source to another company or something, Ton (and I think some of the other ex-NaN-ers?) managed to negotiate to buy the rights to the Blender source code back from the investors if he could raise EUR100K. And as we all know, the rest is history 
From what I can tell, many of the old NaN employees have gone their own separate ways, but quite a few are still keeping track of how Blender is proceeding, and a few have decided to stay working on open source Blender as volunteers like the other developers.
Is this the first time in history that the public bought the right for the source ?
I can see why they would of loose money, they missing alot of things that other molders can do. Plus the limited amount of virtual memory and the awfull lighting, texturing, plug in and rendering.
Just what are you trying to say there?
The rest is comprehensible, albeit in a lot of gibberish and not really right, but still comprehensible…
Martin
Al:
People who say Blender’s lighting and rendering is crap are probably those who never bothered to learn Blender.
I deal alot with blender texture, blender texture is all I use, but there could be some more texture setting too as well as easer to use interface in materal area. I’m sure in most application, reflection is built in as an option. I also notice that there’s no refraction even if I use transperency.
I use the lighting all the time, but you have to use so many of them to get the right elumination.
You would have to do your own test, like at virtualight website, they compare there render image with 3ds max, maya and brazil.
Blender is also limited in the amount of mesh in can load, I found this out when I try to import one of my cad models in blender.
The differculty of plug ins and using them is also to consider, because like most modeling programs you load more then one in at a time, this is importent because they need to get the job done quickly. The fact that the plug ins don’t take advantage of Blender fuction is also a down fall if this could of been done then the possability could have been endless.
I believe the most contributing factor tour Blender down fall is the lack of fuctions that most model applications come standerd in, Blender should of been able to do all the fuction that 3ds 2, 3 and 4 was able to do as well as most cad programs.
Ya, if you want to spend 8,000 to 10,000 bucks on a program go ahead. At least with blender, you can do things without having to spend five minutes looking and clicking for an extrude button. I don’t want to get into a drawn out argument. I like blender. It doesn’t have everything, but I don’t use everything anyways. I have softimage xsi exp here, but it has so many functions and menus, that I just get completely lost trying to do something simple.