This is me at the supermarket deli:
“Can I get .6 pounds of turkey?”
“OK, you want six ounces?”
“No, .6 pounds”
“Hmm”
This exchange continues for a long time.
First off: thank you for staying on the subject and not going about the Imperial system 
Now:
If your program is destined to be used within an operating system, if you don’t follow said system’s conventions, you are forcing the user to handle things differently in order to do the same thing in and out of the program. It’s not very difficult, but it DOES add some mental load (maybe small, but it will add to the other ‘loads’ we’ll see bellow)
Each .blend file is a material library itself: True! but it just means that you must remember in which scene you had ‘that’ material, navigate to it, open 3 or 4 folder levels, select it by name (no previews here, buster) and import it. As opposed to " expand library/select material (with preview mind you!) its a lot!
“the world just didn’t adopt it yet. yet…”
So what is our objective here? create a useful and productive tool or changing the way the entire world uses a pc? I can assure you, the second is not going to happen for a 3D program. And I’m afraid that it is exactly this mentality that sentences blender to stay on the fringe.
I believe that until it becomes a tool that has an easy learning curve, with scalability for bigger teams, it will remain a lone man’s program. I honestly cannot see a 20 people studio working with just blender. It just doesn’t have the tools for it. yet.
1 Like
Blender is not different for difference sake. It’s different because it evolved that way over 25 years and change is difficult for software that old. No one set out from the beginning thinking “Yeah we’re mind readers, let’s make this different than future software just to annoy everyone.”
Your argument needs to evolve too, as it’s cast in the light of 2.79 and before. 2.8 has been released and the Blender Foundation has made great strides in updating Blender with this version. Cast aside your previous notions because they are outdated and look at it with fresh eyes.
2 Likes
actually, I have only ever worked -seriously- with 2.8.
I do recognize that the right click was a great advance in the right direction AND the ui remake.
But on the other hand, there are areas were it treads backwards.
- Groups are gone! (Why are the groups gone? * missteps * Oh! that’s why!)
- material libraries still not there
- no left->right / right->left selection.
- No render presets
- contextual instead of object-oriented tabs
- No batch rendering
- No scene presets
- etc etc
??? What’s the relations between the French, the language war? What war? and the measurement … war? Did I miss something during the time I was living in California? Doing CGI, FX and the likes?
Seriously have you spend time with Blender 2.8? … and checked out the web for solutions on specific topics like the ones you mention?
please, please please!
tell me a way to achieve right->left/left->right selection! forget the rest! just that!
(oh, and btw if you’re french, thanks for the metric system! hehehe)
We, the world, are in the 21st Century! no return to steam or fire… Just read and learn the documentation and google on specific questions you would have. Self learning is today’s motto.
It was a rhetoric question… there is none.
Blender does nothing related to desktops except handling files in the file browser, if you are talking about input methods, my opition is: blender’s system is better, harder to learn but better.
there are many add-ons that implement this missing feature and allow you to save and load your materials and preview them.
As I said, I think blender is better, so much better that it was worth experiencing the hassle of learning it. Its fine to be different and there’s nothing wrong with not following the standards.I can very much use blender and other softwares without being lost, human brains are plastic enough to hold on more than one way of thinking.
You cannot expect any software to do everything anyways, blender does a pretty good job at modeling and rigging, animation too, although sculpting and painting needs a bit more time, video sequencer is more like a hack than a tool.
1 Like
… sorry … You were very rhetorical in your post… Sorry if my reply did upset you.
I like how people neglect to consider how old blender actually is. But this is a good troll post, I do give it that.
3 Likes
- Collections
- File->Append. Need a better UI? Use Simple Asset Manager or Asset Manager. Built-in will happen eventually too.
- “no left->right / right->left selection”: Don’t understand what you mean
- Save your startup file, File->Append (Not sure if asset managers cover these but they probably do)
- This is an archaic idea that I’m glad is not present, if I understand correctly, use /
- Command line is still your friend
- Save your startup file, File->Append or asset manager
what I’m saying is that there is no way of right-left/left right selection.
(edit: I’m not talking about the right/left click. I’m talking about selecting objects partially vs fully within the selection rectangle depending on the direction of the cursor movement)
1 Like
I never felt the need for it tbh.
some you misunderstood, most are true but require file navigation and typing for operations that should be one click.
I can see this thread growing with 200+ posts 
Question to everyone:
Independently of singular examples -we could go on about these for years- Do you guys think that it is going in the right direction?
Measurement is not just about maths. That’s why we still have Light Years not Light Kilometers, we still have pints, quarts.
The US System is not the imperial system anyway, it is called the US Customary System. The Imperial system was not used in the UK until 50 years after US Independence from the UK.
Metric is good for scientific and maths things, however in everyday life it has little benefits.
Powers of 10 are great for scientific calculations in base 10, but they are mostly terrible for visualisation or approximation in everyday life. A centimetre is often too small and a meter often too big, and no one uses decimetre, so it doesn’t matter that it exists.
Because of the factor of 10, these units aren’t conveniently divisible into thirds or fourths, which is again not conducive to everyday use. Think of recipes, for example. The cup, tea-spoon, table-spoon, fl. oz. system provides an easy, small-whole-number system for converting quantities. It is true that the non-standardisation of what a cup or spoon is leads to inexactness, but in most cases, you can still scale recipes by using relative units.
You ought to choose units based on what you are measuring. Height, for example is mostly measured in feet and inches even in India, and I find it more convenient than using the meters scale where most people would be between 1.5 and 2. Another example is temperature–the boiling point of water, no matter how important it is to Science, is of little consequence in every day life, especially since even temperatures lower than that are dangerous for humans. The freezing point calibration is more meaningful for people living in cold areas, but like another answer suggested, having a scale which uses the lowest and highest ambient temperatures you will experience as 0° and 100° anchors is pretty meaningful. So, there is nothing inherently ‘practical’ about the Celsius scale, and it could be argued that the Fahrenheit scale is more ‘natural’ for daily use.
It is easy to visualise a quantity double or triple of a given amount; it’s not easy to reliably visualise 10x of a quantity. For instance, you can see how big a centimetre is, but it doesn’t instantly give you intuition for how big a meter would be. And visualising 1000 such meters is again not trivial. So it’s not like the 10x multiplier helps a lot in everyday life.
If you are measuring driving distance, the fact that a centimetre is one ten-thousandth of a kilometre is largely useless. So a mile is equally well suited for expressing such distances, since both are arbitrary units anyway.
2 Likes