Slashdot Mirror
Bringing Online Shopping Into the Future With the 3D Web
An anonymous reader writes "While there is now the possibility of using 3D in the browser over WebGL, it is still hard for regular web developers to get 3D content into websites without being hardcore graphics programmers. XML3D, a project at the Intel Visual Computing Institute, tries to tackle that problem by having a very easy-to-use language as an extension of HTML5. The goal is to standardize it with the W3C. There are already modified Firefox and Chrome browsers that support XML3D natively. At Intel's Research Blog you can find a video on what shopping at an online store could soon look like. In the example, the user purchases a DSLR that can be fully interacted with in 3D, including attaching various lenses and an external flash."
the new VRML.
Until the 3D image is actually some sort of functional 3D projection, what's the point? Ohhh... I can attach a picture of a lens to a picture of a camera!
Spatula City already led this revolution, perhaps just a bit too far ahead of its time.
...an inteface that makes shopping harder!
I can wear a 3D headset with it. Actually, I want to wear something like Iron Man's helmet, and make it so that no matter where I turn my head, there is something 3D that I can look at.
And then I want a full metal exoskeleton that I can use to fly around in and fight bad guys and blow up watermelons with! I could pee inside of it and drink my own purified urine!
I would totally pay $300 for one of those. Any more than that and it's a rip-off. Even if you tossed in a portable energy generator. If you get enough Chinese children, you can build these for $150 each and make a 100% profit!
The problem isn't that web devs can't figure out 3D. The problem is rotating and zooming an object in 3d space is much harder for users then clicking a picture to show a different angle. Most of Adobe's plugin techs can render 3D just fine. If this was the kind of thing users wanted in a web store, you'd think someone would have used it by now.
Is it me or do the animations look really choppy and clunky looking? Must be powered by Intel graphics.
XML3D sounds intriguing. And since we all know that porn drives new technology, it is only logical that there must be a porn site that is using this technology. And for purely educational reasons, I was wondering if someone could post a porn site that is using XML3D - I have to actually see this technology in action to truly understand it.
I will not acknowledge 3D screens/monitors/viewing technology until a camera which detects my distance and position with reference to the screen is always embedded into the system to make it possible to look at the monitor from the top/sides. Also I will consequently not acknowledge 3D technology until monitors can be viewed from 180/180 hor/ver degrees without visual distortion.
All over again.
On a long enough timeline. The survival rate for everyone drops to zero. Chuck Palahniuk, Fight Club, 1996
4chan in 3D!
(You're welcome)
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
A 3D view may be good for clothing, home decor, furniture but it does not solve much in terms of helping a consumer purchase the right item. Does this solve size vs. proper fit? Does a 3D rendered view help you determine if an item is cheap junk? Actually a 3D rendered view can make something look like cheap junk.
Also a 3D demo with a camera is pretty lame. Am I buying a camera because I like how a lens or flash looks on it or how well it is going to take pictures?
This may be best applied for items that can be purchased and printed on a 3D printer.
I am not sure what XML3D provides that X3D or Collada does not. Another "not invented here" technology? 3D scene creation is complex and compelling visualizations will never be able to be XML hand coded like HTML can be.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
I want reviews from real people, specs, facts and comparison shopping when I shop online. All of my purchases are thoroughly researched and vetted for at least 3-4 weeks before I plunk my money down(big purchase anyway). If I really wanted to see it in great detail and touch it (feel it) I'd go to a retail store. I dunno maybe this will catch on with the emotional buying crowd but if I'm buying something online this is a big waste.
"We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
I'm imagining online shopping for clothes, where your full-body avatar has all your dimensions and you get to see how clothes might look on you.
The 3D web has extremely limited uses.
Unless you FORCE the entire web to go 3D like in the Futurama age, things just aren't going to work.
Most websites will just throw 2D content up on 3D canvases and call it a day. That is just going to ruin it.
However! This will be extremely useful for those working with Canvas to add 3D. Combined with that, it could be pretty powerful for games and other social applications such as the chatroom style you saw in said episode of Futurama that was essentially just a bar of bits.
On here if anyone missed it.
31st century internet
Note also that Comedy Central are terrible and probably have it region limited. Yep, they do. Die CC, die.
So... "look at this crap we want you to by... *look* at it! ooo..." [moves object fitfully in/out of visual plan]
HUH? Wouldn't you put the object to be sold on top of a properly lit platform, surrounded by 24 cameras, press a button, then software converts all the images into something a shopper could quickly and easily spin around?
Call Joan Rivers. She already has this on Fashion Police.
Or just flip all 24 images with 20 lines of javascript and 4 buttons.
Have not video game platforms perfected the Wolfenstien 'run around a building and grab things' interface a long time ago? Put up dresses and fishing rods instead of game items. Would not ebay be just another level? How is a poorly designed, ever changing virtual floor plan any more intuitive than a bad site search engine and an ever changing menu system?
Gaming consoles would be the platform not PC's. The Kids have the gaming consoles. The Kids would be right at home embracing this new tech, if it is going to be embraced. Not grandpa and his blackberry and his VCR. Grandpa is just going to drive her to the mall, where he can sit in the lounge and drink while she is shopping. She over spends and he over drinks. Neither says anything about the other and life is good.
With a gaming console in the media room, The ladies could sit on the couch with their girlfriends in front of the big screen and shop. After all, shopping is more enjoyable as a group activity.
The central problem with 3d-ing stuff is that it solves no problem, scratches no apparent itch, feeds no bull-dog, *and* annoys the pig.
Agreed, up to a point. Maybe it's just an artistic itch?
is if it was used with glasses so that they would project websites out in front of you without obstructing your vision.
Imagine how awesome it would be if you could be driving a school bus while reading and posting at 4chan and listening to 'You Are A Pirate." And you could be texting your wife and your mistress at the same time, while carrying on a phone conversation.
You could be doing 6 things at the same time while taking a bunch of little brats to their public school.
Everyone bought cocks, got bored and left.
Korma: Good
What you're saying is true, but the example of Thingiverse rather points the way to solving the 3D artist problem: 3D scanners. One of the bottle necks in additive manufacturing is the need to design something in a CAD system before feeding it to the printer. And that's the same bottleneck you've pointed out for 3D websites. If you have a 3D scanner to generate a CAD file for an existing object, then no 3D artist time is required. Of course, in the case of a 3D printer you need to scan with X-rays to pick up internal structure, but for a website a surface scan is entirely, or at least mostly, sufficient.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
Seems to me the story submitter has lost his common sense (if he ever had one). This connection is beyond stupid. First, online shopping is something that needs to reach the largest number of people possible, hence the technology needs to be simple and solid. 3D is an enemy of that. Then, people need to not spend too much time before they buy, as that decreases throughput. 3D is an enemy of that. And then, presenting things in 3D and while not adding any value whatsoever, this drives up the costs of doing business.
I vote this most stupid headline of the day.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
They have been trying it for years, every time a new incarnation, every time a new failure... heck even the os use 3D for purely useless cosmetic effects... it is much simpler to use a regular catalog with clicks and stuff. unless technology changes radically beyond the browser level (like total immersion display ... which does not seem practical except maybe for gaming/ movies), this is not going to happen soon
Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that
It was tried in the late 1990's and early 2000's. Places like ActiveWorlds, Worlds, Inc. et al had partners. You could shop in a virtual store and buy goods that were sent to you. Let's also not forget VRML, which was billed to do the same thing. Seriously, nobody cares. They want to type "Canon i462" into a box, look at a picture, check out specs, read user reviews and buy it on a flat page. Because it is more efficient than dragging a stupid avatar around looking for the thing you want (like in a real store) getting lost (like in a real store) and having to ask somebody where the hell they keep their cameras (like in a real store) then gaining little to no information about the actual product (like in a real store) with the added downside of not being able to physically touch the object.
I've even coined a term for this. Generational amnesia. People my age can remember when this stuff was tried and it was stupid. The next generation didn't learn the lesson and is trying again.
Various incarnations of this have been tried for at least 10 years.
All of them miss the point. That it's not more visuals that is lacking from online shopping, but other senses. Feeling the weight and texture, touching something, getting the full experience.
It's like increasing the resolution on sports TV because you think too many people still go to the event instead of watching it at home. That decision was hardly ever because the picture was so small.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Remember X3D? Didn't think so. X3D is VRML in XML syntax. It was supposed to put "3D on the web about a decade ago". There's also "Quicktime VR", which lets sites display a panorama, which can be either a move around the object or a view around the camera. A few real estate sites tried it. Didn't help much.
The real "3D on the Web" is in the industrial area. Companies from Asea Brown Boveri to Zummer are putting solid models of their products on the web. Not to look at, though. The models are for use with 3D CAD programs, so you can import the model for an off-the shelf gear or shaft extender and make sure it will fit before you buy. This makes mechanical design much easier, and tends to push buyers towards the sites with 3D models.
Parts Community hosts many such catalogs. Gears, gear motors, inductive proximity sensors, bearings, pneumatic cylinders, springs, robot parts, pipe fittings... The stuff you need to get work done.
Egads!!
Goatse in Interactive 3D?
Spelunkers are now cringing in terror, you insensitive clod!
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Everyone's saying it's been done before. This one's based on OpenGL, which is AWESOME, not some proprietary crap thrown out as a gimmick which requires plugins and whatnot.
My only gripe is that MS have publicly stated that they wouldn't be implementing it, citing that browsers are developed with security in mind, and awesome graphics would have to be programmed with performance in mind instead of security, and would be a major security hole.
I thought it might have just been Microsoft steering interest away from OpenGL, until I heard John Carmack talking about the same security issues.
I do hope they come around on this :P
3D Shopping is a failure, just take a look at Second Life. If it were so popular then why does http://marketplace.secondlife.com/ even need to exist, and why is it thriving whilst in-world shops are barren and empty? It's more efficient and more effective to find items using a traditional website than the inefficient approach of stumbling through 3D space.
The whole concept of the 3D browser keeps popping up every year or two like bad RIAA-lobbied legislation, and with about as much success.
The simple fact of the matter is that while there are some vertical market needs for 3D technologies like being able to show a "virtual house" on a realtor's website, the expense of creating that 3D content DWARFS the expected benefits.
So what if I could take a 3D model of a camera and put virtual lenses on it in a virtual store using 3D web interfaces? How is that going to tell me anything about how heavy the camera is, how it feels to carry, or just how easy it is to attach and remove lenses?
What really amazes me is how many hundreds of millions have been spent by different companies and backers for a technology that hardly anyone needs or even wants. It's worse than a 3D TV with virtually no content available that isn't animated. Unless you really like animation, a 3D TV is about the worst waste of money you could spend a dime on, and the 3D browser is even worse.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Web shops and UIs were never good examples. But think of sharing designs for 3D printers. Or webapps for game creation, animation movie editing, architecture planning. Or construction diagrams: how much more comprehensible those could be once you can navigate them in all dimensions. Or data visualization. An added dimension goes a long way.
... Into the Future.
There. Fixed that for you.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
....there is also the open source X3Dom project around (http://www.x3dom.org/) that is bringing X3D - the successor of VRML - to a webpage. You can add X3D content directly in HTML(5). Good thing: it is already a standardized file format, supported by dozens of exporters. And X3Dom doesn't reinvent the wheel, only finally doing what VRML promised. Although I wonder, whether a web designer wants to go solely with a declarative way or would rather prefer something imparatively (solely JavaScript) driven such as three.js (https://github.com/mrdoob/three.js/) or others.