I have used Rhino almost since the beginning as I preferred its modeling to AutoCad. Then I dropped AutoCad almost entirely when Rhino's 2d drafting and dimensioning were sufficiently developed.

Now I do most of my model making in MoI and use Rhino for 2d stuff and dimensioning as well as the program to work with the rendering program I use (Flamingo).

MoI is very easy to use and a great modeling tool.

my 2 cents.

eric

> I'm currently evaluating Rhino and find it so easy to use that I'm thinking MOI (being by the same author) will be similar.

If you think Rhino is easy, you will love, Love, LOVE MoI. I think of MoI as Rhino's 'Usability Plugin'. But, Rhino has a boat load of tools. Good luck!

Hi Michael, in my opinion one of missing link in moi is unable to create 2d drawing for ready to print. I hope you can give us 2d drafting in v3 even very basic. I know you have said to focus on 3d features. But 2d drafting is must. Thanks for your nice work michel.

Hello,

If v3 has hidden line removal and keeps the exceptional vector output it has the capability to become a standard app for the 2D illustration toolbox. I havent found another application that gives this level of clean output in 2D.

Hi Anis, well there are lots of missing things in MoI... It's just not possible for all features to come into existence all at the same time! ;)

I definitely want to improve 2D output in the future though.

Probably the first step in this area will be to generate hidden-line vector output though, because once that is done it would be pretty easy to use one of many 2D drafting programs to add annotations.

I do want to add some kind of basic annotation ability directly in MoI as well but that will probably be some step after that.

- Michael

I wish you can put 2d detailing as one of your priority for future development. It will eliminate to use addional software to complete our job. I am not progammer, but it should be more easy to create 2d feature compare to 3d feature :).

Hi Anis, adding features in requires a lot more planning and design time than you might think....

Yes, sometimes the features themselves are not too difficult. But just adding in a whole lot of features to MoI without carefully planning how they go together in the UI will result in what is called "bloating" where the program gets loaded down with a lot of stuff and becomes complex and difficult to use.

It's a major priority for MoI to not become complex and difficult to use, so that's why it can take a while for features that involve new chunks of UI to be created. Unfortunately it takes a lot of careful planning to do a really good job with UI.

It would certainly be easier and faster for me to churn out a lot of features if I didn't care so much about the UI, but I think having a very refined and carefully developed UI is one of the most valuable things about MoI.

- Michael

Thanks for all the replies. Nice to find such a helpful community.

Just one other question. Does MOI work better under Parallels 5 given that it now includes some DirectX support (or so I seem to recall reading)?

Sean

Hi Sean,

> Does MOI work better under Parallels 5 given that it now
> includes some DirectX support (or so I seem to recall reading)?

Yes, I believe it is working much better under Parallels now, they have improved their Direct3D support quite a bit in their recent version and I have heard from several people running MoI under Parallels successfully.

- Michael

Does Bootcamp not more speedy than Parallal Desktop?

Hi Pilou,

> Does Bootcamp not more speedy than Parallal Desktop?

It depends - Bootcamp requires you to reboot your whole machine in order to use it.

If you want to just do something for a short time in MoI and then return to other work, it can be a lot more convenient to use Parallels because it runs inside the regular Mac desktop.

Running it under Parallels is less efficient than running it directly with Bootcamp, but if you have a new enough machine you should still be fine.


If you're going to be working in MoI for an extended time and on larger sized models, then Bootcamp would be good to consider though too.

- Michael

I have seen sketchup PC running on Parallal Desktop for MAc : that was a disaster!
Rotate and copy 10 objects *6 were more than slow !!!
(you can ask why run pc version on a Mac? (as version Mac exist) :) for the beauty of the try :)

Hi Pilou, probably in the case that you saw, Sketchup was ending up using the OpenGL "software" rendering mode, where the video card's 3D capabilities were not being used at all.

There has been a lot of progress in Parallels since then and it allows better access to the video card's 3D hardware.

- Michael

Surely something like that :)

It's running really sweet in Parallels 5 under Windows 7

I run Moi on my Mac under Parallels 4. Works 100% all the time. I prefer Parallels since you don't have to reboot the machine. You can work in WinXP and OS X at the same time. Pure goodness.

Once you learn the UI, the program makes good sense.

C.

Hi All,

Trying out moi. I am on a mac running it via parallels. Is the sound on the tutorials from from the first link?

Just wondering.

KJ

Hi Kevin, there is sound on the video tutorials here:
http://moi3d.com/2.0/docs/moi_help.htm

but it turns out that I used a sound codec (Windows Media _voice_ codec) that many Mac WMV players do not support.

But if you download the .wmv file, and then play it with the Windows Media Player from within Parallels, I think that should give you audio.

- Michael