You know you can always download older versions of Blender to check out, right? Might be something to consider if you ever want to get frustrated at something for some reason. 
2 Likes
If there’s one subject guaranteed to rile up computer geeks to the point it starts a fist fight, it’s opinions on UI design.
1 Like
lol… that was a fun quick skim. no, i would not want to see Blender look like Bryce… that’s more of a ground up design choice anyway, not something that can be ‘retrofitted’ to an existing software. Anymore than i’d want to see Blender go LW’s route, or any other software. Come up with something that works, and tweak it as you go, which since I’m mostly able to get around Blender, seems to be working fine (for me, anyway).
hehe, figuring out rotations and origin points in geometry nodes can give me a taste of that as is. >grins< i really need to take some time to work out in my head rotation/direction/euler/etc and how to apply in GN. 
1 Like
This side discussion is interesting and well-intentioned, but a bit off-topic, can we circle back to the topic? Thanks 
3 Likes
i knew you’d find me sooner or later … rofl
1 Like
This.
In fact, I was surprised they did it this late and dropped only the Game Engine. The VSE was and still is very - very light. But I guess they kept it because it was still serviceable to quickly assemble a sequence.
2 Likes
(Just a shower thought like that, imagine an episodic web-documentary on Blender’s development from NaN to 3.6)
3 Likes
A game engine is a different beast compared to a VSE.
The VSE kind of fits into some workflows as well. With the new viewport compositor, it feels like it might become usable for certain effects in the VSE as well.
3 Likes
Yeah, I went through that same thought process – I was at first thinking they might’ve jettisoned the VSE at the time as well, but it is light-weight, there is no need to add major stuff to it, and it is actually perfectly useful for putting together basic animation sequences, which is a much more common requirement for the average Blender user than a game engine (I use it myself for quick Sketchbook animations). So it made sense to keep it.
:chuckle: only in my dreams – fortunately for Kai I am not an ill-mannered fanboy. (Further musings on KK and his legacy suppressed so @joseph doesn’t start hating me.)
4 Likes
Oh, I forgot important one thing that is really annoying in Blender 2.8/2.9:
Undo system.
In Blender 2.7 I can do something like that:
- Add cube
- enter Edit mode
- delete one vertex
- exit edit mode
- move cube in object mode
- Enter edit mode again
- Undo is undoing Step 3 - deleting Vertex
In Blender 2.8 it just undoing this steps directly.
I know that Blender 2.7 undo system was strange compared to “standards”, but it is very useful.
1 Like
2.8 may have, but try the same thing in Blender 3.6.1 and Undo at Step 7 will exit Edit mode and then step back through each task. So will move the cube back, re-enter edit mode, un-delete the vertex, etc.
yeah, i had to increase my undo levels to take those ‘extra’ undo steps into account.
So… is there any working way to transfer data between from 3.6 to 2.79?
I just discovered that copy & paste works.
Unfortunately it copy only mesh without UV maps or Vertex groups. But it copy also material with some Cycles nodes.
Could it be possible for future Blender releases to add something like “save in compatibility mode”?
For example in Blender 2.79 there is option “Legacy mesh format” for older version.
I’m not writing about complex converter, but something that just make readable file for appending meshes (materials will be fixed manually)
You can try to use a compatible format like obj or fbx, but you’ll loose other data like modifiers or materials.
For many reasons this isn’t possible, some data are lost because these areas of blender have been rewritten therefore they are more powerful and more efficient.
To allow to save in a compatible mode would mean that blender would have to keep the old and new code around, and keeping the old part functional would add extra work to keep it bug free through the years. Needless to say that since a lot of these refactor append that would ultimately mean a lot of extra code for many things that are constantly evolving in blender.
All that, for really a little amount of users since I bet 99% of users are using 2.8, 2.9, 3.0 series at least.
You have to decide to either stay with 2.7* or to jump into recent versions, there isn’t other possibilities sadly !
I think blender development is going ok.
I am disappointed that a few thigs i’d like to see aren’t yet being worked on - mostly to do with cycles:
Glint rendering
Nested dielectrics
Procedural textures (particularly tiling)
SDF textures
I’m also disappointed that some previous features or capabilities appear to have been removed:
Subtraction of shaders is no longer possible
Generally I think, that changing something that works, is bad idea and changing something that works and works good is very bad idea. It’s way Microsoft is destroying their system
Staying the same when the rest of the industry is evolving = moving backwards. I disagree with you that Microsoft is destroying Windows. This OS has never been as good as it it right now. I think you’re just the kind of person who doesn’t like changes and opposes everything that’s new. I started using blender when it still had horizontally oriented interface but I remember 2.4x as the one I actually figured out how to use. When blender went through the recent rewrites, new shortcuts and left click to select were introduced, it took me maybe 2 weeks to get used to it, and now I would never want to go back. Give it a real chance and it’ll grow on you
1 Like
If it’s a 20 year old PC, Blender 2.79 is a good choice,
but if you use the latest system, I’ll tell you to use Blender 3.6.
But I’m still using Blender 2.79 together. 
People don’t like change that much, especially when it requires them to re-learn how to use the software they have been using for a long time, even though lots of UX/UI research has been done to increase the ease of use of the software.
For example: when Microsoft Office 2007 was released, a huge majority of users were reluctant to adopt this new version which came with a new ribbon (Fluent) interface, though it is much easier to find commands and options this way.
Software users just need to accept that they have to keep learning how to use the new features of their favorite software. 
1 Like
…and even the changes in Windows itself… but also people talk about not having to tiem to learn MaC OS X or any linux…
What do you do with it?
1 Like