[X3D-Public] Virtuality Uber Alles

[GLG]

I didn't say open source - that is an entirely different
discussion. I said open standards. Internet Explorer,
Chrome, Safari and many others are proprietary browsers, not
open source, yet they work with open standards HTML and all.
What happened to the previously used proprietary online
markup languages (if we can call them that)? They all but
disappeared for any practical purposes. I am not suggesting
that commercial software is not viable, the code languages
is what I am referring to. As far as the NetworkSensor node,
that is just to help simplify network coding, but is not a
prerequisite for MU servers by any means. As a matter of
fact, X3Daemon still does not have it implemented - we save
that for later - and I'd doubt viewer vendors who have
implemented it did not adhere to the specification in that
regard. There is only so much that specs can dictate when it
comes to internals. So no sinking yet, they'll need to be
much tougher than that. :wink: :wink:

Cheers,
Lauren 


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Russ Kinter [mailto:pyth7 at verizon.net]
>Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 8:33 PM
>To: info at 3dnetproductions.com; 'X3D Graphics public mailing
>list'
>Subject: RE: [X3D-Public] Virtuality Uber Alles
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: x3d-public-bounces at web3d.org [mailto:x3d-public-
>bounces at web3d.org]
>> On Behalf Of GLG
>> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 7:38 PM
>> To: 'X3D Graphics public mailing list'
>> Subject: Re: [X3D-Public] Virtuality Uber Alles
>>
>> >When compared with the features of Second-Life/Open-Sim
>or
>> >Wonderland any would-be VRML/X3D MU server system faces
>> >staggering odds.
>>
>> Hello Russ,
>>
>> That maybe so. It certainly 'looks' that way from a
>> short-term perspective. As you know, MU servers are not
>easy
>> to build. But don't forget, much investment capital found
>> its way to VW's. I call that the 'Virtual Worlds Bubble'.
>> Let's wait until that runs out and dry. See who is still
>> standing.
>>
>> Do you remember when proprietary systems such as AOL,
>> Compuserve, countless BBS's and online business
>information
>> databases more or less ruled the world? Most if not all
>of
>> them eventually fell flat and had to give way to open
>> standards, with very few exceptions. I'd say that most
>> popular virtual worlds today actually ARE the "would-
>be's" -
>> simply taking advantage of fast deployment and speed to
>> market - and I fully expect them to eventually fade away,
>> being replaced by open standards based worlds (such as
>with
>> X3D). I'm definitely not loosing any sleep over this.
>Unless
>> complete novice (which is the case for many users in
>today's
>> virtual worlds), and especially as the market matures,
>> people and businesses will want to 'own' their worlds
>just
>> like they do their Web sites today, not relegating that
>kind
>> of power over to any particular company. Companies have
>> tried repeatedly to promote various systems and/or
>> languages, but in the end, open standards win. A few,
>such
>> as Sun Microsystems, realized the dilemma and were able
>to
>> turn loose their IP (i.e. Java), but I doubt today's
>> proprietary virtual worlds are in that position, even
>though
>> some are trying to do just that. Again, no lost sleep. It
>> isn't really their game, historically and ultimately THEY
>> are the copycats, and it is hard for copycats to succeed
>in
>> the long run. To each its own; X3D will never die.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Lauren
>>
>Then this format is really sunk MU wise since both Open-Sim
>and Wonderland
>ARE open-source. It's sunk Mafia-style with concrete boots
>too because with
>Open-Sim and Wonderland everything is open-source, while in
>the case of
>X3D/VRML MU systems Contact, Octaga Player, and Instant
>Player are
>proprietary. The one attempt at trying to open the MU
>market for X3D has
>been ham-strung by allowing the protocol for the
>NetworkSensor Node to be
>proprietary.
>
>tc
>Russ