Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

training.perforce.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 92 posts

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#41

Post by dijit »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #17
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #10

If you are using Perforce as an enterprise system, $500 is peanuts. Perforce can get pricey. 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 no…

> However, I continue to be amazed that Perforce survived Git. 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 does…

not sure why this is flagged, the accidental omission of “game” devs can’t be it. it’s extremely true that game devs either use perforce, or they’re trying to use SVN because their company is cheap… perforce is strictly superior to SVN and miles better than GitLFS- and they’ve been sitting on that fact for over a decade.

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.

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#42

Post by Hendrikto »

momocowcow wrote: post #35
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #10

If you are using Perforce as an enterprise system, $500 is peanuts. Perforce can get pricey. 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 no…

Im amazed git survived at all. Such a mess of complexity and exotic jargon to abstract away something that should be inherently simple. After 20 years I can use it with ease thanks to llms.

That just means you did not really try for 20 years.

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#43

Post by tjpnz »

nubg wrote: post #3

The problem being? If the content is good enough and the narration fine (it took you a while to even notice), why does it matter? > 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).

It's a strong signal that the person or organization "creating" said video views the person consuming it with open contempt.

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#44

Post by traceroute66 »

dijit wrote: post #41
forrestthewoods wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, I continue to be amazed that Perforce survived Git. 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 does…

not sure why this is flagged, the accidental omission of “game” devs can’t be it. it’s extremely true that game devs either use perforce, or they’re trying to use SVN because their company is cheap… perforce is strictly superior to SVN and miles better than GitLFS- and they’ve been sitting on that fact for over a decade. I think they must have some kind of patent protection because their software is buggy too.. i hav…

> 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…

Some might say you could say that about Microsoft too. :)

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#45

Post by a-dub »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #10

If you are using Perforce as an enterprise system, $500 is peanuts. Perforce can get pricey. 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 no…

> If you are using Perforce as an enterprise system, $500 is peanuts. Perforce can get pricey.

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)

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#46

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

rtpg wrote: post #32
pjmlp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which would have failed had it been developed by someone else, without being a requirement for Linux kernel development.

Maybe? But this is an argument you can make about most technology adoption (silly recent example: USB-C adoption obviously buffetted by Apple showing up and saying "it's all this now" and having a bunch of people willing to swap everything out for it)

Agreed.

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.

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#47

Post by cataphract »

zorked wrote: post #38
pjmlp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which would have failed had it been developed by someone else, without being a requirement for Linux kernel development.

The Linux kernel adopted Bitkeeper before git and it never spread out from there. It's not that many people working on the kernel. 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.

Yeah, for a while it was not clear that git would win over mercurial. GitHub was decisive.

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#48

Post by aitchnyu »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #10

If you are using Perforce as an enterprise system, $500 is peanuts. Perforce can get pricey. 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 no…

Feels like a captive audience. My tiny company paid a buggy Github competitor even in 2019 and they hiked prices like crazy. They did have a brand new project that deployed multiple projects to our own VPS with zero downtime.

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#49

Post by pjmlp »

zorked wrote: post #38
pjmlp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which would have failed had it been developed by someone else, without being a requirement for Linux kernel development.

The Linux kernel adopted Bitkeeper before git and it never spread out from there. It's not that many people working on the kernel. 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.

Sure, if we ignore Bit keeper was commercial, always a hot topic, and not developed by Linus.

Re: Perforce charges $500 for training training videos.. and it's AI narrated

#50

Post by pjmlp »

rtpg wrote: post #32
pjmlp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which would have failed had it been developed by someone else, without being a requirement for Linux kernel development.

Maybe? But this is an argument you can make about most technology adoption (silly recent example: USB-C adoption obviously buffetted by Apple showing up and saying "it's all this now" and having a bunch of people willing to swap everything out for it)

The same Apple that was forced by EU regulators to actually adopt it across their devices?
Post reply on HN