if i play around with current 2.8 builds i also find changing drawing modes a bit cumbersome compared to how it works in 2.7x. but i am not really concerned. everything is still unfinished, i don’t know how it’s supposed to work and i am sure it will be awesome in the end. 
Just have to look to the Lightwave community – how that is dying a slow death due to non-change and sameness. Software that doesn’t take risks with somewhat big changes will suffer the same fate.
This is what I am really hoping for. I hope that the current versions become just testing, and that the end result will be usable. I love Blender as a tool (so much that I moved from paid for C4D, and price wasn’t the reason) because it worked well. I hope that it continues to work well, but the current 2.80 worries me.
well layers in Blender are handy fast to use true - but blender is not like Photoshop that uses layers
so collections make more sense to be quite honest.
Many other programs also let go of layers and went rather to groups / collections.
the only thing I will miss is the move to layer and a number menu
and how tiny the layer UI was - least amount of screen space used.
What is it that you are worried about?
Agreed.
So far that I’ve followed this it seems that the developers have the right ideas already in mind, so I’m not so worried about this TBH.
Huh, good to know - I’m surprised it had been up for as long as it was(a good decade+ at least).
you are right, I aggre.
I think that devs could attach collections to numbers and we can hide and show collections like old layers.
What they have in mind?
Then, perfect.
That’s a nice title, you should work at Buzzfeed. 
Nothing’s wrong with the old way?
Well that’s good for you but, everyone else has to disagree on that.
When you work in a team, having a nice way to organize scenes to make life easier for the next guy is a big deal.
You can’t do that with the current layers system.
1 Like
Who needs Ngons anyway? They’ll ruin Blender!
2.49 / 2.62 forever!
Like other have said; Things change, whether you thing it’s good or bad you just have to learn to roll with it.
1 Like
Back in the day, we had to deal with the “GI is for lazy lighters” argument by those who were viciously against having the feature in Blender (despite nearly all third-party render engines and even other FOSS apps. having it).
Believe it or not, there were people who took it even further and tried to make a case against raytracing (in their minds, environmental maps and other legacy/scanline techniques for things like reflections were the only thing they’d accept). Yes, people were against Ngons too and accused people of wanting to be “lazy modelers”, those arguments disappeared real fast when Bmesh was committed and people saw what Ngons could do (the same way the anti-GI crowd faded out when Cycles was brought in).
2.8. Hugely looking forward to it. Big workflow changes which will make Blender far more effective for team based use. Actual … real and effective … real time rendering and even real time 3D compositing on top. New particle system and Deps graph. Code Sprint crowd funding stretch goal has been exceeded and is still going up.
Onwards and upwards.
And it’s always going to be possibly to manage a gradual measured transition over anyway.
The 2.7’s won’t be going anywhere for awhile.
I think those comments also mainly come from theoretical people and not those who created work on a daily basis.
Man those anti GI threads - so brain free. It was such a chore to fake it. Knowing to take shortcuts also helps obviously.
Thats also why I find eeVee so funny because it reminds me a lot about those techniques I learned before GI came accessible.
just imagine how soft shadows were done with an array of lights instead of just one area light now lol
Clement tried to implement soft shadows using several different methods, the conclusion was that it’s nearly impossible to implement in a way that would maintain a high frame rate for working (though there’s been talk of using more costly methods for final rendering due to it not needing to be real-time).
Ah I was making a reference to Blender before version 2.0 when you employed light rigs for faking GI
eeVees irradiance volume is quite a stunning idea while being realtime now 
I don’t think it is big changes that are needed. Even Ton admits that making large leaps is usually frowned upon my experienced developers. And both 2.5 and 2.8 are/were just that. Although 2.5 worked. But it is not usual to expect that. Anyway it makes sense to me.
I think if there is anything that goes wrong is when 1) users expect some drastic change. 2) developers are foolish/inexperienced enough to think they can.
The best practice is to have long range goals in place, make those goals clear and known, stick to them, extend deadlines as needed, but overall make steady progress and try and not allow drastic dramatic personnel changes that also mark drastic changes in direction and plans. Companies that know their business operate this way. Those that don’t fail. And they fail after a long duration of fantastic unrealistic goals never met and a product that never reaches anywhere near stated goals.
It has been a good 8+ years since 2.5. A lot has happened. There is a lot that needs to happen. But even though 2.8 is a fairly large leap, at least there is a track record with this development team of staying on course and not giving up.