In article <8RXlh.4454$hr3.1237@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Lawson English <LawsonE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> ZnU wrote:
> > In article <pXTlh.80561$V34.76314@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> > Lawson English <LawsonE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >> ZnU wrote:
> >>> In article <pQBlh.4329$hr3.4315@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> >>> Lawson English <LawsonE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> ZnU wrote:
> >> [...].
> >>>>>> Eh. Even within EQ and WoW, there's a huge amount of content
> >>>>>> that is continually being updated: the locations of all the MOBs
> >>>>>> and players.
> >>>>> Sure, but this stuff is comparatively tiny, compared with all the
> >>>>> geometry and textures..
> >>>> Sure, but its not constantly changing as is the case with 100+
> >>>> mobile objects and/or avatars.
> >>> It is constantly changing if you're moving around.
> >> All the arbitrary objects are moving around constantly? The buildings
> >> never stand still?
> >
> > Position data is really pretty trivial to send.
> >
> >>>> As the tools become cheaper and easier to use, you will see more
> >>>> stuff made using them.
> >>> Which might be really interesting if I'd been saying there was no
> >>> large market for 3D animation software or computer-generated
> >>> animation. But of course I haven't been saying that. I've been
> >>> saying there's no large market for distributing 3D content *as* 3D
> >>> content[1]. This has nothing to do with the market for things like,
> >>> say, Pixar movies, which happen to be creating using 3D animation
> >>> tools.
> >>>
> >>> [1] Except the video game market, of course.
> >> My point is that there was no large market for distributed 3D
> >> animation until the price of the tools came down.
> >
> > Uh. But there was.
> >
>
> Made by home users? I must have missed that.
Sometimes made by home users. More often made by e.g. Pixar. This is how
these things often work -- the guys with the deep pockets and the
technical know-how pioneer things, and then everyone gets on board later.
Notably, we're not seeing the guys with the deep pockets and the
technical know-how caring much about creating X3D content.
> >> Right now, I can't even PLAY MPEG-4 content letalone create it,
> >> because none of the experimental tools are available on the Mac save
> >> as relatively complex open source distributions that I have to get
> >> working. If the tools were widely available, and reasonably easy to
> >> use, AND there were widely available and easy-to-use MPEG-4 players
> >> (beyond the Extended Simple profile that QuickTime implements), you
> >> would obviously see more MPEG-4 content. How much more, who can say?
> >> But right now, you don't see ANY, unless you go to the trouble of
> >> downloading GPAC or purchase some pretty darned expensive commercial
> >> solution.
> >
> > We're going in circles here. As I've pointed out several times, during
> > the time VRML and similar have been stagnating, other technologies
have
> > got from non-existent to industry-standard. These things do actually
> > happen. But only if there's demand.
> >
>
> 3D technology is actually changing far faster than 2D. What seemed
> potentially useful 10 years ago has been completely superseded since
> then. 3D tools 10 years ago were even more primitive than they are now.
Etc.
>
> You may be correct that there is not and will possibly never be a demand
> for x3d/MPEG-4 VR-streaming, but you can't base that assumption on
> recent history. Things have changed far too much, far too fast in the
> field. Moore's Law for CPUs works out to a doubling of speed every 18
> months. Moore's Law for GPU's works out to a doubling of speed every 6
> months. Video cards 10 years ago were barely beyond simple
> frame-buffers. Video cards now are, in many ways, more powerful than the
> CPUs that sup****t them.
The VRML use cases don't become any more compelling when you add higher
resolution textures and more polygons, though.
--
"That's George Wa****ngton, the first president, of course. The interesting
thing
about him is that I read three‹three or four books about him last year.
Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to re****ter Kai Diekmann, May 5,
2006
|
