Google released an experimental plug-in that may one day be released as a standard component of browsers and is said to supplement the efforts my Mozilla to bring 3D to Firefox.
Ars Technica reports that it will be several years before the approach to 3D in a browser is refined enough to make it ready for serious production. But with the efforts by the Mozilla folks to accomplish something similar, and the moves to bring 3D as a native component of Flash (building off of approaches similar to that of Papervision), and Microsoft looking to deepen the appeal of Silverlight, there are now significant players looking to overcome what is a frustrating barrier to exposing consumers and enterprise to rich 3D content: the plug-in or download.
With 3D embedded directly into the browser natively or via Flash applications, this promises opportunities for games, data visualization, or presentation of 3D content using existing navigation methods. Users know how to click, they know how to browse, and there’s the ‘comfort’ of being in a browser and avoiding a download.
This is one of the reasons that Metaplace is on to something: removing the plug-in or download helps to remove a major barrier to virtual world adoption. And where Metaplace benefits further is that their architecture will support all kinds of clients, whether Flash or, I’d imagine, built on components like those being developed by Mozilla and now Google.
Raph comments on his blog about the Google development:
“It’s not compatible with Mozilla’s Khronos effort, but Google says they intend it to converge over the course of a few years. And yes, it is fully cross-platform. There’s a shader language (again, non-standard, doesn’t match HLSL or Cg), and of course it supports loading SketchUp as well as from Max and Maya. It also can run inside an OpenSocial gadget, or run offline in Gears.”
But browser-based content isn’t, I believe, competition for 3D worlds that DO require a plug-in or download – but this will put increasing pressure for the ‘download’ worlds to either offer a far richer experience visually, or increasingly deep tool sets for simulation, education and collaboration. The “rich worlds” have as much to learn from where the gaming industry is headed as they do from advances in the browser – the biggest risk, perhaps, is ending up caught in a vague middle.
Nice post. I tend to agree. In browser 3d content will take a place aside fully-immersive 3d content platforms, like, dare I dream, a cryengine3-driven type of Second Life that enjoys wide adoption and rich community and economy.
http://www.starbasec3.com/c3patton.tgz
this model will load into the o3d sample viewer at googles lab..
this is good news… a overloard of distribution that tech geeks fear… and a simple browser plugin that from the get go works on ALL current platforms and makes mac creatives feel INVITED to the web3d party…..finally…
try the jungle isalnd scene, its looking mighty CRY..lol
shaders.. needs a decent card..but its the same basic tech that i beleive liveley used…. but stripped of all pretention to be a “service” ad driven “community” of avatars..lol
they just need to keep developeing the core engine/plugin and the import tools….bring all of max/maya animations to it. plus library up and make a free set of java behaviors ala LSL….
the firefox deal with knonos evaded MS.. this will just ignore them… ive already run all the demos in ie7 and 8 and firefox…
this is imo is not fcked up , the best chance at a rich 3d media for realtime web that ive seen in 15 years….
if goog then packages the tools and sells them ala sketchup pro.. and then releases the mu server from lively… or sells access to them as sunscription or rentals as isp…. then we got a real model for commerce…
also we need to get a better encyption that tgz… that like native vrml files will never fly to create a monified 3d web of places, not pages….
c3
maybe smiling..
just no google paid for cartoons…lol
partner google.. dont own creativity, or like AOL and yahoo, youll die…slowly.
It is a shame that Google does not reach out and talk to and collaborate with companies that are already in this space, who already have defined offerings that are far ahead of what they are currently proposing. There are a number of companies like mine that have a wealth of experience running rich immersive 3D environments in a Web browser. We have been walking the walk now for over 3 years and yes with JavaScript and rich graphics, physics, audio and video.
People were getting all excited about what the Khronos group was offering with their low level API, yet they forget that 3D on the Web is not just about the 3D, it’s also about the logic that goes behind the virtual world or environment, the physics, interactivity, sound, video, voice chat and text chat, etc. How does that figure into the plan.
Google wants to own the world and the motto of “Do No Evil” has an increasingly hollow ring to it. Their attempts with Lively were laughable, they showed their inexperience and ineptitude in this space yet they think they know what’s needed for 3D on the Web!
Sure Raph is touting this as a good thing, he has too. He made his bed with Flash and the 2.5D limitations that go with it. I’m sure he would love to have access to full 3D and no downloads, it would get him out of a tight spot.
Clive:
I should mention Pelican Crossing more. I think you’re right about Google – I wonder what their process is for stuff like this – rip through other code to see what works, or act like mad scientists in a lab with no windows.
The advantage to what Google is doing I’ll leave to people like Cube, I guess – I can’t interpret whether the plug-in itself will do what it says it will. But the big advantage seems to come from the fact that they might eventually be able to migrate it directly into the browser and avoid plug-ins entirely – ANYthing to get past those pesky IT folks and weird security settings that prevent folks from downloading the simple little (or large) apps they need to make stuff run.
Raph took the approach he did so that he could be decoupled from the client, can build an architecture that supports the buffet of client types that will emerge in the years to come (mobile, surface, holographic, whatever), and in the short term meet his goal of NO download.
Unfortunately, while Pellican Crossing is a great app – and I’ve visited the showcase worlds btw…there’s still the download, and I found the process for finding it and installing it sort of baffling, but maybe that’s just me. For whatever reason, I guess I put it in the camp of Unity and Quest – ‘browser-based’, but needing a plug-in, which isn’t meant to belittle it, I’m just explaining where my thinking was with the Google announcement.
@Cube3 – I agree with you – it seems to me that whenever Google gets out of the app business and into stuff that involves communities or whatever they come up empty handed. This seems to stick to what they’re good at, which is tech, and perhaps the tech is partly derived from Lively, I have no idea.
But I also agree with Clive on something: I can’t help getting this odd tingling of warning that Google seems to be, well, pretty much everywhere.
im no fan of the googleplex terra 1….
i think ive made that clear before, here and elswhere.
ive known of clive and pelican since the atmosphere days.. i have reached out a few times since, but frankley it all has to work BOTH ways clive….;)
resources are always tight. BUT….
I was close to how flash and 3d via kinetix found dominance… and so far NO web3d/vr worlds platform has come close with that understanding of the relationship between the “showmakers” and the “techmakers”.
they say they do. buts its always too late…and another bubble bursts and more 3d engines just get lost to be reinvented as “whaterver” teh trend is at the next set of orielly hot tub shows are:)
Ive been through 100 3d apps in a decade, so forgive me if ive seen it all, and dont have much pity for the small or the large players who cant seem to ever see beyond their own “expertise” and realize that were not all here just to annoint them “game gods ” or help them reach a solo 4 billion dollar valuation with their bankers or exit plan to google.
and you really dont want me to tell you the truth about “open standards” and web3d orgs..lol do you.?
google is a double edge hoot, it creates fear in content owner makers and code makers as well..
something MS never evolved to do…
its your world, i only rent here…lol
This is great!
Our enterprise clients are in need of these solutions.
I am glad to see it is approaching us
I wonder who will become supreme ruler of this web based 3D browsing?
Project Wonderland
Google
Unity
etc.
etc.
Any takers?
@Dusan That’s OK, I know you are more into Second Life than 3D on the Web. The problem of finding the plugin should not really be a problem. If you hit a Web page that has 3D content and you don’t have the plugin installed, it will start the download/install for you, assuming you give it permission. Unity works the same way and as far as I remember so does Vivaty and Quest. It works exactly the same way that Flash does. And to be pedantic here, Flash has a plugin as well, it’s just that it has become so ubiquitous that it is delivered with the browser. Every now and again you still have to download the update, all be it a small one. In the next version of Blink 3D the install process will be even smoother and faster taking only around 90 seconds.
I think the thing that worries me most here is that Google is a threat to my livelihood and a host of other companies. Yes there will be new opportunities but I have invested a lot of time and money in the current one. Also with Open Source projects, if you really, really, don’t like the direction they are taking you can fork the code and go your own way with it. With O3D the code has to be delivered with the browser to get the benefit of no plugin download. Only Google will have the clout to make that happen with all the browser vendors. So even if I took O3D and made what I thought were improvements, I would not be able to get it distributed if Google did not like the improvements I had made.
Now I suspect Google will say that this will be an open standard and that they will hand it off at some point to an independent body, maybe, maybe not. But I think it is very scary when a player like Google tries to dominate a space like this. You know that Adobe and Microsoft will be more than a little concerned. Check out the license agreement for O3D, while reading it I was bracing myself for the follow on full body cavity search!
@cube3 I’m sorry I can’t quite remember what you and I spoke about, but I suspect it was something to do with VRML/X3D, which is I’m afraid something I’m still not interested in.
@Andrew With Oracles purchase of Sun, Project Wonderland may get a rough ride. Having looked at O3D from Google, they have a very long way to go, doing things like inlining shaders into the JavaScript of the hosting HTML page is not the way to go at all, it is a totally unscaleable approach. It is also hideously complex, I code for a living and it made my toes curl. The fact that their tiny island world is a whopping great big 17MB should be sending off alarm bells everywhere. In Blink 3D you can have a a virtual world with 4 city blocks for less than 8MB.
So speaking of Blink 3D, perhaps you should at that to your list, preferably at the top
I’ve been following this for a while. There is already an ISO standard for this called x3d (formerly VRML). Blink 3D and others use it already. Why go through all the hassle of creating a new system when one already exists?
Browser makers need to add an x3d viewer as a standard, the sooner the better.
Your last paragraph is spot on!
I had nothing to do with vrml or x3d. It had everything to do with the web3d business and adoption of the media by customers.
c3
typo and maybe freudian slip.. damn you blogs…lol
it should have read:
“IT had nothing to do vrml or x3d…”
“I” yes, tried many times to make business happen with those “standards” and the “players” around it.
The stated vision was good, the reality of the executions just horrible.
I do “feel a bit for ya clive” but “non coders” who want to make products in web3d have heard and felt this all before.
c3
“but “non coders” who want to make products in web3d have heard and felt this all before.”
Could you elaborate? Blink 3D can be used by coders and non-coders, that was one of the main design goals of the product. Or are you referring to other companies/products?
Blink 3D can do A.
Unity 3D does B
Axel3d did C
VIewpoint did D
Cult E
Shockwave F
etc etc.
Over 100 3d companies and Products over a decade.
And “used by” and “viewed by” are two different things:)
cube3.com
This is ridiculous. It’s not practical and looks like a cheesy Nintendo game from the late 90′s.