Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated(training.perforce.com) |
Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated(training.perforce.com) |
We used to be a Perforce shop, in my last job.
However, I continue to be amazed that Perforce survived Git. I assume its ability to handle large binaries has been what saved it.
I seem to remember an HN posting, some time ago, about a new system, aimed at creatives, and that handles big binaries. It looked fairly good, but not sure how it’s doing.
i think it was $600/seat back when i paid attention (20+ years ago). don't remember if it was perpetual or annual.
> However, I continue to be amazed that Perforce survived Git. I assume its ability to handle large binaries has been what saved it.
yeah i think it lives on in games probably mostly through inertia. last i looked the company itself had shifted away from p4 classic to some git wrapper stuff.
i've never actually seen it but my understanding is that google's custom internal system (piper) basically is a reimplemented scalable p4+g4 wrapper.
i always thought the workspace mapping and workspace template model in p4 was pretty elegant, especially for things like embedded platforms where you could opt in and out various subtrees which made very large device trees/bsps more manageable.
also they were the first widely deployed vcs system that attempted to be efficient (server side indices for local tree state and communication with the server in deltas rather than forcing complete rescans for every operation that often involved talking to the server as each file was scanned)
Was 31 days ago... and it's Epic backed rather than a sole indie dev so likely to mature.
I remember when one of the engines (either Unreal or Unity), shipped with Perforce included.
Curiously enough, the git data model is ideal for handling large binaries. The place it crashes-and-burns is the user space.
Virtually 100% of non-indie devs use Perforce.
Is Perforce good? Ehhh not really. It’s been stagnant for 15 years.
Is Git capable of meeting game dev needs? It’s not enough close. No Git LFS does not count.
Personally I think even Git is mediocre at best. But it’s all modern devs know. So there’s been very little progress towards version control that doesn’t suck. Very sad.
Hopefully Epic’s Lore is good. Low odds. But not zero! And hey at least they’re trying.
Not really. There are better products out there.
When I worked at Triple-A studio, we used Alienbrain, which is specifically tailored for huge binary versioning with previews and stuff. We had terabytes of assets, and Alienbrain handled it well, including seamless integration into pipelines - something a stock git or Perforce would never achieve.
I think they must have some kind of patent protection because their software is buggy too.. i have no idea how this company can survive with what is, honestly, an unfinished product and a directionless, soulless and bloated organisation attached to it…
… but it is the industry standard in game dev and automotive …
what a lucky position to be in.
FTFY. Git is likely the system used by almost every non game pro shop out there. Paranoid ones self-host.
Linus changed the world twice, and Git may have more impact, overall, than Linux (arguably).
Not bad, for a 10-day yak-shave project.
If you mentions reflogs, i'm yelling bingo.
Bonus points: You have 3 new commits and in one there is a change in file.stupid, how many git bs things does it take to revert file.stupid to previous version while keeping the rest of the change set.
https://training.perforce.com/learn/courses/536/p4-helix-cor...
1- The voice is not consistent across different videos. 2- Once in a while it does that thing where it sounds like a demon and changes the voice profile to a completely different person for a little while. 3- There's weird... pauses... that in some cases make sense, but in some cases it's just completely non-sensical "this is a very useful... feature" or "looking at your issue that you are... raising to them", it sounds like someone reading a Charles Bukowski poem. This happens the most often, once you see it it's like those optical illusion things where you can't unsee it.
One cannot spend too much time evaluating products, and I feel that I have seen all that I needed to see, how good can a product of a company that does this be? And to charge 500$ for the complete course?
I don't quite get it. Like is it really easier to generate a video with fake AI narration than just narrating it yourself? I think it would even be harder, only to make your reputation and brand 1000% worse? And the act of showcasing a free version of the course to 'get a taste of it', when in reality I'm guessing most would see the red flags and back away, thanks I guess.
I just don't get it.
> Like is it really easier to generate a video with fake AI narration than just narrating it yourself?
Yes?
Also, they can iterate quicker (don't have to rerecord if content changes).
I tend to assume that the production has been cheaper but they aren't passing any of the saving on to me. They are pushing the human out of the loop for the bottom line, and there is no benefit to anyone but the company.
ML/AI is a bonus for society in many things like medical scanning, helping the blind interact with the world, etc, but nobody is using AI voiceovers like this example for anything other than helping the company's bottom line by avoiding paying people.
The great displacement isn't just coming, it is here and happening all around us. I for one am doing what (very little) I can to avoid helping it along and that includes refusing AI generated content wherever practical. I'll accept it from a small local business that possibly has little other choice ATM, because of they pay for someone to do the job they'll probably use generative AI anyway, but not from a larger company.
Some might say you could say that about Microsoft too. :)
It's open source: https://github.com/oxen-AI/oxen
Most users are building their own interface on top, but we also have a nice experience in our web ui: https://oxen.ai
Would love people to try it out and give us feedback!
Git solves a problem that we immediately unsolve constantly, and so we end up with the warts of both.
Its so ubiquitous though that people literally can’t even step back and realise this fact unless they are forcefully exposed to other paradigms (which they fight against the whole time).
Theres a lot of psychology to be learned here, its not sunk cost fallacy, its something deeper than that. Like rewiring the brain, even for a simpler paradigm, is almost painful for people.
How can you even know whats better if your brain is wired to know Git and distributed version control (yet not distributed)? It’s like imagining what it would feel like to smell electrical currents, the brain isn’t wired to know it.
I think it's fine for scope to exist.
because if its human narrated, the likelihood of it being up-to-date drops because _updating it after changes costs actual money_, whereas the ai naratted likely only needs to have its script adjusted to kick of the generation pipeline.
it really depends on how well its actually implemented imo - and i have no idea how well this particular case is in parctice, as i've never worked with perforce.
nonetheless, charging for such a video is kinda incredible. i was just adressing the difference between human anrrated and ai narrated.
Almost any other version control tool I have used in my life make more sense that git.
There are many reason for why git won, being able to use it without having to look up commands is not one of them.
How many esoteric tools are needed for proper development?
“save my file” should not need a phd level awareness of the save model, yet it seems to because its so easy to fall off the happy path.
MINE | MERGED | THEIRS
Or the p4 merge way of:
MINE | THEIRS
-------------
MERGED
Merging should not be a major issue, it should be a trivial annoyance.
It shouldn't drop you into an interactive rebase that invalidates every object after it (necessarily).
git growth was very symbiotic with GitHub growth. I don't remember why GitHub became popular in the first place. I think it was the Ruby community? GitHub was one of their own during an explosion of Ruby on Rails and successful startups using it.
The thing about an SCM, though, is that it needs to be rock-solid reliable and trustworthy. No "YOLO, Bro!" or "Move Fast and Break Things."
Git is that. I believe that this is exactly because of who wrote it.
Torvalds has plenty of detractors (and they aren't necessarily wrong), but he is one hell of a C programmer.
I'd trust stuff he wrote, over about 95% of what modern devs, do, these days.
Feels to me you're just saying things.
Pijul.
Darcs.
and.. Perforce is free for 5 users too. ;)
That kind of thing has happened before. When HP adopted IEE-488, it became the standard test equipment interface for a couple of decades.
USBC has arrived.
Its actually worse than interactive rebase.
“detached head” and “rebase” aren’t meaningful verbs to normal people… when all you want is to save a working version
The special command is just `git add` to stage your changes followed by `git commit` (or do it all in one command as `git commit - a`), same as any other changes.
Rebase is something else. It's something you do on purpose because you specifically want to rewrite the history. Personally I use it a lot and expect everyone on my team to, but you can use git just fine without ever rebasing or even knowing it's there.
Like I actually have no idea what you're talking about. Is your criticism actually targeted at some specific UI tool that's not git?