Re: Mesh vs Poly vs Patch

So Mikhail, there isn't any difference it's just what you're used to? 
There's no situation where you should use one rather than the other?

This seems a bit odd to me. Usually software venders combine things like 
this into one modeling approach to avoid the hassle (and expense) of 
sup****ting all three. There's something tickling my mind about this... I 
feel like there's a simple basic idea that I'm not getting. It's like when

someone tells a joke and everyone laughs but you don't get it. You have to

laugh too just so you don't look like the stupid one. Yeah, it's like
that. 
I'm you're stupid friend and once again you need to explain the joke to
me!

Ok, maybe these can be used interchangeably but when it comes to im****ting

or ex****ting models into other programs that's where you need a certain 
format? Is that it? Sure, I can see that. Maybe poly meshes ex****t better
in 
the .dfx file type than editable meshes?

I do see the difference between NURBS and these three mesh types. I was 
thinking that there were similar philosophical differences between the 
meshes as well. There are fundamental differences in surfaces and 
methodology between NURBS and meshes as well as striking pros and cons. I 
can imagine a heated debate over consolidating to all NURBS vs all meshes
at 
Autodesk. But if they said we're just going to have only editable polys
from 
now on would anyone even notice? Or care?

What do you usually use for modeling, what do you generally model and is 
their a reason for your choice of mesh? Speaking for myself, I use
editable 
mesh most for general use because that's what I learned first and never
saw 
a big need to switch to one of the others. I did try editable poly but it 
seemed buggy to me.

Michael