Universal3D vs. Real Open Standards

Posted by timothy on Saturday August 28, 2004 @08:57AM from the trapdoors-can-be-open-too dept.

viveka writes "Back in April, Slashdot reported the announcement of a Universal 3D File Format by Intel, Microsoft & others - to be "as open as MP3". Of course, that's not all that open. And this turns out to be the sneaky part. There is a real open standard already - X3D is ISO-ratified, royalty-free, and has multiple open source implementations. U3D is "going to be submitted to ISO" - one day - but right now they're talking to ECMA, which allows royalty-bearing patents. I found this article by Tony Parisi, co-chair of the X3D Working Group a fascinating insider's picture of the standards wars, along with insights into what it takes to release an online game, what really killed VRML, and why open standards do (and don't) matter. I mean, a royalty-bearing, pseudo-open universal 3D format from Intel and Microsoft? Sorry, guys. That trick doesn't work anymore ;)"

3 of 174 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

FUCK ALL THIS by Anonymous Coward · 2004-08-28 08:59 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Props to Gabe for my first post [TM] and the Mtn. Dew.

Also, props to:
Married Ponch, LinuxDave, Fozzy [pro]

much love to HOT GRITS
Not really gonna work. by oR3n · 2004-08-28 09:01 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Companies, fierce competition, typical rivalry. I guess; that'll hinder this. Plus, you know?Things like that wouldn't likely appeal to the common consumer. "As common as mp3?" Right. ;-) Get a free flat screen! * (my ref link)

--
Free flat screens
Well certianly not in this case by Sycraft-fu · 2004-08-28 09:14 · Score: -1, Offtopic

I'll normally go load up the article, if it's clearly linked (and the server is still alive). However foret it in this case, too much info about something I don't care much about. A single link to an article to try adn make me care is much more likely to get my intrest than this.