Subject: Re: [vwrap] Technical basis for VW client in a web browser?

From: Dzonatas Sol <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 19:18:43 -0800

Maybe developers have realized that large platform-style development is 
not fast enough for today's market with many more brands. No longer can 
we expect the handful of brands we had in the past to program against. 
Eventually, they'll get the idea to write for a virtual machine that 
doesn't do everything yet enough to manipulate the UI in needs possible. 
Every VM made (and built-into viewers/browsers) has had years of 
security issues and monolithic problems.

Virtualization on the motherboard let's concepts be easily shared with 
hand-held devices. That may sound OT easily when not appreciated the 
same as VW... but city on the chip is no new publishment.

Morgaine wrote:
> Has anyone seen a well argued technical assessment supporting the 
> concept of "VW client in a browser"?
>
> I would be very interested to read such an article or post.� 
> Everything I've read so far doesn't hold up at all technically, and 
> just highlights the huge impedance mismatch.
>
>
> Morgaine.
>
>
>
>
> ========================================
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Richard L. Barnes <[email-masked] 
> <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>
>     Folks on this list are probably better plugged in to this stuff
>     than I am, but in case people hadn't heard: Earlier this week,
>     Katalabs released a virtual world based on WebSockets and WebGL.
>
>     <http://www.katalabs.com/blog/2010/11/30/kataspace-released/>
>     <http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2010/12/kataspace-browser-based-virtual-world-built-with-webgl-and-html5.ars>
>     _______________________________________________
>     vwrap mailing list
>     [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> vwrap mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>   

-- 
--- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant

---

From: Dzonatas Sol <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 19:42:12 -0800

Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:
> Logic: JavaScript appears adequate for most application logic, but the
>> amount of data that needs to be processed per frame in a complex world like
>> SL is significant - far more than most games. Most WebGL demos so far have
>> extremely simple requirements.
>>     
>
> though i'm a bit of a JavaScript fan, i think it's an open question
> whether JS could handle the types of data rates SL sends at a viewer.
> this being said, a "light" experience with less detail, fewer
> textures, etc. is probably do-able.
>
> -cheers
> -meadhbh
>   

We need to stop the language requirements and stay with lower-level VM 
code. It makes it too hard to share experience. We seen scenerio happen 
too many times where people tout their favorite language, and everybody 
that doesn't agree "...is on drugs." People don't consider real-world 
problems are acceptable reasons why we need to bend development to help 
these needs...

...(mine simply being missing children and people accuse me of drugs 
because of related depression... enough of that hateraid!!! Hate saying 
it... sometimes need to remind us about disabilities despite the 
business door.)

Take the serious look at concepts. Business vs development, the market 
always wins one except that doesn't cover areas where money is life, and 
I bet my life I'm worth it, and expect each of you to say the same. We 
need forward-thinking, yet justifications can't contain such 
"requirements" unless they are already real. Technical writers need to 
learn that fact more. Being mixed between concepts that work and 
concepts that are desired is the main headache with many production 
systems (includes the marketers too).

That said, maybe you see why the design taken by current VW viewers and 
apply separation in them into programs that wrap around UNIXen more 
closely, like devices drivers, are the real way forward. You may not 
like this... it isn't that hard as you think. You just lose the M$ 
monolithic project...  and grow up like a tree... and let the fruit fall 
off. Some just hold onto the apple longer and hope it doesn't rot...

Android is a proof-of-concept and not just anti-iPhone.

--