Three 3D Web Browsers Reviewed 237
mikemuch writes "Use that graphics card for something besides games. ExtremeTech has a group review of three browsers that use some aspect of 3D to display the Web. While none of them are going to put Firefox or IE out of business any time soon, they're fun to play with and give a new slant to the Web." From the article: "Whatever."
Not dead (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not dead (Score:2, Insightful)
About the only use I can see is for maps. So, for instance, you have a handheld device that could sense your position, and draw you an arrow in a 3D environment that looks identical to your physical environment, this would make map reading extremely easy. This would be e
Re:Not dead (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Not dead (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not dead (Score:3, Insightful)
Throw in Feel-A-Round and I think you've got a killer ap.
KFG
Re:Not dead (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not dead (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not dead (Score:2, Interesting)
Yet what formats are adult content published in online ?: Still images, Video*, and Text.
Yes there are Console, PC games, and online attempts to create virtual adult content, but typically they are hampered by technological limitations and general scarcity. Or they are hidden (due to politics, morality police, etc.) and require
Re:Not dead (Score:5, Interesting)
*Notice I avoided (yet another) car reference*
Correction! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Correction! (Score:2)
Picture a cube, then remove a side panel and look in.
You have a 'main' panel in front of you, which can be tiled into 4/8/16 (maybe 32) mini-panels, each with a seperate web page or java applet.
The other four sides are somewhat squished, but still present.
Everything was accellerated by the graphics card and ideally, you'd use multiple monitors to display the panels around you.
I'm not sure if t
Re:Not dead (Score:5, Insightful)
The main problem is that people have this nifty tool, but they keep applying it to bolt it onto an existing interface instead of really trying to create a new one. (And when they do try to create a new one, the drawbacks outweigh the advantages. I swear, these "airport/city" metaphors and the like remind me of nothing so much as Microsoft Bob.) It's like using advanced 3D graphics to render a console app -- in a hard-to-read font.
Someone needs to figure out what a 3D display brings to the table, and build on that. Texture-mapping the 2D web onto the walls doesn't accomplish much.
The 3D Web state-of-the-union in a soundbite: (Score:4, Insightful)
Texture-mapping the 2D web onto the walls doesn't accomplish much.
That's the problem with ALL of the 3D web-browsing/user-interface implementations right now. You use markup and controls that are designed to render onto a flat 2D raster surface. It seems logical to bundle an existing renderer (an IE/gecko control, or a UI toolkit window rendering) and point it at a texture, and then schlep that into a 3D framework... but that's just so completely wrong.
At least for web browsing... if you want to make it 3D then you first need to WRITE a 3d renderer for XHTML. You need to figure out some way of interpreting the tags and markup and using 3d (or 3d accelerated algorithms) to do something intelligent with all that CSS and hints.
You are going to need to at least have an antialiased glyph renderer for text. Either using real polygons or dynamically created texture maps (maybe a single mip-mapped texture for each character).
Because on the web the most important thing to be able to have is LEGIBLY RENDERED TEXT.
Maybe for the sake of keeping polycounts low you reserve the shape-defined text for h1/h2 tags and render the rest as rasters. But do something useful with them.
Don't start putting textures containing text at oblique angles unless you've got it at least 2x oversampled. Instead, render it to a surface in a bounding box and "float" it where you want but keep it's normal pointed straight at the view frustrum. Or use a particle or sprite primitive.
Come on people!
Have a look at some demoscene demostrations and how they integrate text and 3d. I guarantee you can always read the text clearly (as it is often used to convey jokes or greetz). And that stuff is just for fun.
Re:Not dead (Score:3, Interesting)
And by the time a full 3D display comes out which is large enough to use more effectively than a standard 2D display, I personally would wager that we will have direct neural links to information anyways. Although wor
Useless and unneeded... (Score:2)
>But still completely useless and unneeded
I recall that being the MS-DOS/PC response to all of those other systems that could display more than four colors.
Re:Not dead (Score:2)
Re:Not dead (Score:2)
Imagine 3d Porn (Score:2)
a true 3d browser would be 3d in the real world.
I remember data storage and presentation systems that performed exactly in this way. They were called "offices"
Of course, if they was a practical way to do this, the porn industry would have done it a long time ago. then we would have 3d porn.
3d Porn? yes, exactly like the real world, without any of those troublesome things
Re:Not dead (Score:2)
Re:I completely disagree (Score:2)
Obligatory Movie reference (Score:4, Funny)
Not the first time... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not the first time... (Score:4, Funny)
This missed opportunity to employ 3D web browsing technology has been brought to you by...
Breasts!
Re:Not the first time... (Score:2, Insightful)
It was painfully slow; a real gimmick. I can't see any benefit beyond the gimmick for then, and now.
These are probably, like many sites these days, counting on you having DSL, because any thing less to access these sites is going to crawl. One reason I despise Flash splash-pages is my dial-up access. It's so enjoyable twiddling your thumbs or playing a quick game of Minesweeper while waiting for crap to download which doesn't tell you anything Text couldn't.
Then like now, the difference between gimm
Re:Not the first time... (Score:2)
Re:Not the first time... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not the first time... (Score:2)
But, speaking of ways of 3D navigation people are really accustomed with... WSAD anyone?).
No matter whether it's a pretty web browser with bells and whistles or a crude tool for viewing a protein
Re:Not the first time... (Score:2)).
I made something similar for browsing code, showing functions as spheres and function calls as pipes between them. It was not useful in the end, but I did spend a lot of ti
Re:Not the first time... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Not the first time... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Not the first time... (Score:2)
Smells Like Hype (Score:3, Interesting)
My first thought was VRML and what a clunky thing that was before it all but vanished. I've still got books and CD's for doing stuff in it, in a box somewhere, probably in the car-port.
Not really what I had in mind when I thought about what would make for decent 3D browsing. This looks like something you could knock off in a plug-in, like Flash. Probably has some decent uses, like creating a game on your own website or a Realtor giving you a VR tour of a house (which i think someone nearby already has.) Handy for exploring a Mall, to see where a shop is rather than looking at those little hand-bills which are sometimes so artsy-fartsy you just try to go in the general direction and hope you find it. Hope people keep these sites updated. More content==more overhead for maintenance.
Re:Smells Like Hype (Score:2)
I want to learn it. I think the technology is alot like Java. It sucked in the 90's for anything besides simple chat apps but now with more ram and fast processors its not a big deal.
vrml should fly and be smooth with any decent graphics card. Hell google maps with 3d buildings turned on runs fine with my semi 3d intel integrated graphics chip on my laptop. The same should be true with my desktop with my geforce 6600.
Second Life (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Second Life (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not the size, but what you do with it. (Score:2, Insightful)
And yet people interact with full functionality every time they play a multiplayer (FPS,RTS,etc) game. The main difference between the web and games is the size of the world.
Re:It's not the size, but what you do with it. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's not the size, but what you do with it. (Score:2)
Actually, I'd say the main difference between the web and games is the type of interaction.
Most of the web is like a simulated library. It's generally about obtaining, providing, or exchanging information, whether it's reading an encyclopedia article, sending an order to a store, or watching your friend's latest video post on MySpace.
Games are generally about simulating a type of activity -- sports, combat, puzzle-solving, etc.
You can gr
Re:It's not the size, but what you do with it. (Score:2)
Re:Second Life (Score:3, Funny)
So is first life.
-Grey [wellingtongrey.net]
Re:Second Life (Score:2)
I suspect it's just poor implementation - the 3d in something like WoW or FFXI is *far* more immersive than second life because it renders at full frame rate and has lots of detail (and there's more to do - nothing much to do in second life but walk/fly around and chat to people). The engine looks like something done 5-6 years ago,
Re:Second Life (Score:2)
Re:Second Life (Score:2)
I wandered around in there for 1 week straight, everything you do costs you money. IRC has much more soul and fun in it than second life does. Hell if you weant to buy your own IRC
Re:Second Life (Score:2)
There is an advantage to second life.... Less kiddies and trolls
That and the average age in 2ndlife is 35, iirc. And around half the users are actually chicks, like my wife, into the whole socializing & dress-up thing (but didn't latch on to The Sims for reason). Heard these stats from some Google/2ndlife podcast event a couple months back.
I agree that 2ndlife sucks - not really because of the crappy graphics, but mostly because of the perverse "virtual economy" where almost everything costs you,
You know what happened to VRML? (Score:2)
(Ok, maybe its not ubiquitous, and its a proprietary app, but still....)
Some things are better in 3D, some not (Score:3, Insightful)
We don't need a browser to show us a 3D representation of the web, because that is too much information. Hyperbolic mappings are not somehow more intuitive than simple lists. In fact, they are less so.
When we get common 3D displays and controllers, then my position will change.
Re:Some things are better in 3D, some not (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Some things are better in 3D, some not (Score:2)
Lacks an application (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, 3D graphics on a 2D display is the opposite. Instead of presenting information in an easier understandable way, it obscures it. Basically, what we lack now is suitable interfaces. Input as well as output. The mouse is not the best way to navigate in a three dimensional world, neither is a non-stereo view the best display for it.
My guess would be the new interface for Vista will face a similar fate.
3D (Score:3, Interesting)
As long as the screen on my computer is 2D I don't think the 3D web will really take off. Now, if you can get me some cheap VR glasses and gloves, that's another matter.
-Grey [wellingtongrey.net]
Re:3D (Score:2)
the best 3d web thingy ever (Score:5, Interesting)
I find this incredible because a) it's an amazing practical use of 3d and b) it's not at all flashy or trying to create a 'new 3d browsing paradigm' or some such silliness. Instead, Apple has used the graphics tools available to them and once again, made a fantastic advance in user interfaces.
Before you call me an Apple fanboy, you should know that I don't even own a Mac, I just think they're neat is all.
Re:the best 3d web thingy ever (Score:2, Insightful)
So rather than making something more fuctional or doing something in a new, better way, you would instead just make things look like they are being done in a better way.
Re:the best 3d web thingy ever (Score:2)
Nonono it's not about the asthetic value (although it does look nice). What I mean is simply that flipping a card-like thing over is a concept that anyone can understand. Start talking about preference panels and property sheets and you'll make some peoples eyes cross. Flipping something over is a pretty universally understood concept. That's what makes a great user interface - intuitiveness.
It is hi
Re:the best 3d web thingy ever (Score:2)
it
... uh, it's function is to display the property sheet for a widget. The property sheet's gotta be somewhere on the screen, on the 'back' of the window you're setting the properties for seems about as good a place as any other.
Re:the best 3d web thingy ever (Score:2)
Well, yeah, it doesn't have any "functional purpose", neither to almost all other interface things. Interfaces are not about adding functions, but about allowing you easier access to functions already there and adding preferences panels to the backside of a window seems like a good improvment, not earth shattering, but definitvly a good thing. Thats because it gives the preferences dialog a fixed posit
Re:the best 3d web thingy ever (Score:2)
A bigger problem is the goal of having the same way to access settings etc. in a program. If the flipping technique is not possible with all application types, then it would be causing the user to learn two ways of accessing settings instead of one.
I don't mean to sound critical, Insightful)
Re:the best 3d web thingy ever (Score:2)
Sigh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sigh (Score:2)
Then you can turn the screwdriver around, grasp the handle, and stab people who make bad analogies.
BadAnalogyGuy, [slashdot.org] where are you?
Wii? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wii? (Score:2)
Opera (which is Wii's wee browser) has support for 3d canvas [opera.com] in internal builds.
Terrifying Vision (Score:3, Funny)
The extreme annoying-ness is too much for my feeble brain to handle.
Imagine the most hyperactive ADD person you know.
Now imagine them when they go into hyperactive mode that happens right before they need a nap.
Now give them lots and lots of soda and candy.
Now give them some crystal meth.
This is half the annoying-ness of a 3d flash ad.
Re:Terrifying Vision (Score:2)
Already tried (Score:3, Insightful)
3D can be useful (Score:2)
What happened to 3D (Score:2)
It required proprietary plugins that could just display crude 3D objects and pretty much nothing else. People abused 3D in the VRML days just like noobs abuse Java applets to make lake applets. Hence it died.
Proprietary plugins like flash still thrive since among the crap (like annoying flash intros and ads) they offer plenty of useful applications not-outside-this-world, easy to implement, and the plugin is tiny, multiplatform.
VRML never had a d
No 3D browsers before flying cars, dammit! (Score:5, Funny)
It's time that we draw a line in the sand: no further development on the 3D browser until a commercially viable flying car hits the market.
Re:No 3D browsers before flying cars, dammit! (Score:2)
Re:No 3D browsers before flying cars, dammit! (Score:2)
The same goes for web. Half of the web is bad enough (adverts, your average geocities site); do you really want to give the amateur web developer access to 3D tools?
(Shit. I think I just unwittingly made a car analogy.)
3D lives on... (Score:2)
lacking (Score:2)
But as these are, they are no better than a poor imitation of Second Life. They have focused on a such a narrow vision that by looking completely beyond them, other software such as Second Life has already moved far beyond.
But, like I originally said, I would love to play around with something that displayed the normal internet in a 3D metaphor.
Useless (Score:2)
All these do right now, is look like a weird marriage of 3d FPS and webbrowser screenshots used to texture billboards. So pretty. But that's about it. Navigation can be done much more efficiently with a 2d plug-in for firefox that would concentrate on such a thing.
I can imagine a 3D web. But it probably be more useful to have one when 3d holographic displays are the norm and I can
What a PITA (Score:2)
I can see a need for 3D on the web, VRML and QTVR objects giving you walk-throughs and views of real world products for example, but is there actually a need for a 3D Web?
If I'm looking for something on the web then I usually want to find it quickly. How does this help me find what I need? It seems to be an obstructive use of 3D technology, all because someone said "3D's cool, let's make a 3D web browser."
Looking for something? Use Google. Want 3D? Play WoW, Quake, Doom, NFS, etc.
3D + Internet, not 3D + Web (Score:4, Interesting)
No visitor would wait to "Navigate" around shit (Score:2)
Too much waste of precious time.
Best is the way we have it now ; click, click and voila.
Re:No visitor would wait to "Navigate" around shit (Score:2)
slow = (dimensions * complexity);p (Score:2, Insightful)
Lets take for example the task of taking all
In one dimension (command line), we have a simple python script:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import os
list = os.listdir('.')
for item in list:
os.system('mp32ogg "' + item)
Nice and easy, and scales line
so many questions. (Score:2)
There is no reasn why someone couldn't write an encoding app the looked for an extension, and then reencoded into a diffrent format.
It takes one click for me to open a browser, how many keystrokes does it take you?
Why are you too lazy to learn the hot keys in your GUI?
We've had sculpture for a long, long time... (Score:2, Insightful)
data visualization (Score:2)
But 3D on the web is not completely pointless as some would suggest. I have been poking around X3D and VRML lately because I am trying to figure out, in this post VRML world, what is the easiest way to show off some 3D scatter plot data v
Best 3D Browser? Google Earth! (Score:2)
Yes, that's right! I look at Google Earth as a geospatial browser, where I can click on KML links to web pages based on location, and now get dynamic web based geospatial content based on KML servers [for example: this [diyhappy.com]]!
Is this still around? (Score:2)
I've worked with a lot of people producing 3d environments over the years (Since 1996). Several projects called themselves "Web 2.0" but I guess that name finally stuck with an even more hyped technology.
The problems are:
1) Speed: It's slower than a web page. Always will be.
2) Unscanable: If I want to scroll through a web page I scroll through it. If I'm in a virtua
mouse pad (Score:2)
Vrml? (Score:2)
I was just wondering about this last week. Sure back in 98 with no decent 3d cards it sucked balls and turned a might pentium into a trs-80 but the standard might be hot today with 3d cards and fast processors.
You dont need a 3d browser for these features if anyone actually kicks up the old standard again.
VRML is actually still used (Score:2, Interesting)
VRML (Score:2)
Ugh! I mean, you have to click a button to change from "walk" mode to "strafe" mode...
What?!?!?!? (Score:2)
Firefox _is_ a 3D browser. (Score:2, Interesting)
Packard Bell Navigator (Score:4, Informative)
It was stupid then, and it's stupid now.
Re:Hmmm... (Score:3, Funny)
Like grammar, for example.
Re: Browse3D's 'patented three wall technology' (Score:2)
*All* the efforts I've seen to create it have sucked - from VRML to 'Second Life' - suck donkey because they miss the point - and that's to get information as fast as possible. It aint going to get any faster than typing search terms into google (in fact with all of these environments it's nearly impossible to find what you need).
Re:I could see some uses... (Score:2)
Better idea: I click on the E-Book Library icon, which opens up a Spotlight-style search box. I start typing in the title or author of the book I want, it starts returning matching results, and after I've typed three letters it's narrowed down far enough that I can click
Re:I could see some uses... (Score:2)
How long does it take for this 'flying car' to go from, say the MoMA in New York to the Prado in Madrid? Currently, I can do it in as long as it takes me to type in the Prado URL. Flying car style, I have to also w