3D is worthwhile, the question is for what.
on
3D Window Manager
·
· Score: 2
OK. First, to declare my bias, I work for a company called ReachIn and all we do is this sort of stuff. 3D is definitely worthwhile for modelling, visualisation and simulation. How worthwhile is a good question. But even these CAVES, at about ~$1 M have been bought by the oil and automotive industries and paid for in a few weeks. 3D window managers are interesting, but how usefull they are remains to be seen. Without computers, for most things people actually work in 2D. Books and paper are 2D. Whether this is because the technology is deficient or because this is the most efficient way is a really tough question. I'm not yet convinced that you can get a whole lot more from a 3D UI, but, this is probably like some UNIX hacker in 1975 saying, what Windows? Nice gimmick, but what do you NEED them for, I can switch TTYs fast. But you should try shaping something in 3D, it's really a new experience, anyone who has ever tried to use 3D Studio Max or Rhino or whatever will appreciate that there is some manipulation of 3D stuff that is painfull in 2D 'cause it's SOOOO counterintuitive. What we do is have a PHANTOM from SenSable and co-locate it so you can see what you can touch. It is really quite neat. We can then do medical training and shaping like you wouldn't believe. If you can, get to SIGGRAPH 2K in New Orleans and have a look around, they'll be stuff from us and hopefully some others that will show that 3D is really capable of being worked in.
Real 3D displays are a real problem. Where I work we are desperate to get a really good simple working one ( www.reachin.se ) . Unfortunately the only solution we have found is a CRT refreshing at 120 Hz and a pair of crystal eyes. We have tried various lenticular lense type things, and they were all crap. The only 2 promising ones we have seen are a british group (forgotten the URL) using holograms and a group at NYU ( the nearest URL I can get is http://www.mrl.nyu.edu/perlin/ ).
I just did an install of NT server, or at least tried, until I reached a block that stopped me in my tracks. The thing is, it really struct me how NT is about the same as Linux to install, the only thing is it recognizes more hardware and is more likely to get going with a dodgy setup.
But what occurred to me is how these myths just get going, we all know how easy Macs are to use, which is crap, shells are a matter of preference these days, how Windows is ugly (well maybe), but the latest w2K desktops are quite slick, and the big one of how Linux is hard to install, well once it was, I bet Linus had a hard time on his first install, but hey, things have changed.
Once these things get going they continue despite any facts that complicate the issue, maybe M$ has a myth propagation department.....
It will be interesting to track the sales of the album - i.e. will they be dented at all? Let's face it, if you're a Bowie fan you're going to buy the album anyway. A few people might even listen to it out of curiosity if they can get a hold of it and then buy it. The most pirated thing of the year - The Phantom Menance - chewed bandwidth but not sales. Here in Europe it was only released a few weeks ago, but EVERYONE who wanted to had seen it. In Greece at the holiday resorts there were videos cut from the VCD - months before release. But it probably hasn't damaged the take at all. Anyway, I'd love to see some figures on this. Afterall if piracy killed industries then there would be no computer games industry......
You're right - it's like a Harley. An old piece of junk that hasn't been redesigned in far too long that is only kept alive because of a cultural quirk. Something that modern machines have long since surpassed. Incidentally, I had an Amiga and it was great, but I really don't understand what the thrill is now. Can the architecture really handle the modern world ? Can it be upgraded as well as a PC ? Why have yet another standard ? And if there does have to be another one - why not BE ? Something new, clean, well designed and worth it ?
Right - interesting. On first sight it looked to me to be very similar to cvd. I have to say that that is the best debugger I've ever used - I do sort of real time work ( haptics 1KHz updates ) and it worked really well and the GL stuff was neat. Also, you could use emacs near it reasonably well which was cool. It seems to show what a great company you guys are , ( oh shit I'm crawling ) and I just hope the new name is not SGI for soon going insolvent.
The PHANTOM, as mentioned above, is really cool, it allows real tactile interaction.
I work at a company in Sweden, ReachIn Technologies that produces hardware and an API that combines graphics and haptics in the one spot, which is really impressive.
There are lots of benefits of having a proper haptics system, it allows the incredible control that we have of our fingers ( we can sense bumps in a smooth surface of 1 micrometre ! ) to be used. There are heaps of potential markets as well, the one catch is that these systems are fairly expensive at the moment, oh, actually, there is one other, we don't support Linux....
The description above is the best description I've ever seen for Wired, it's from a book Generation Ecchh, which was a very funny parody of a lot of pop culture.
At any rate, has Wired really changed, it's always been fun trash and still is !
Finally, the one thing that has always bugged me about Wired ( and American magazines in general ) is that the articles are always way too long, they say what they have to say and then go on for 20 pages. So I guess it's fitting that Jon Katz's article is too long. Compare this to the Economist !
There has to be ways to defend OS's. Microsoft pay big dollars to people to spread FUD ( Mindcraft survey anyone ? ). If the Linux community doesn't make it unpleasant to write grossly incorrect disinformation uncomfortable occasionally then it will suffer.
Imagine also, a similar article about NT that said equally dismissive things and was equally independent of the facts. Microsoft would sue, not just send a few juvenile emails.
The one thing is, this guy actually deserves a great deal of credit for his admission of error. He admitted that he wrote something that was bad. I'll check his column once in a while from now.
I have to say that web pages looks a little suspicious, if this technology works they should have something first class. I work in a company that uses 3D display a lot ( http://www.reachin.se ) and we have just had a look at the display talked about in the article a month or two back in/. For a look at how that works, have a look at this paper ( http://www.brunel.ac.uk/depts/mes/Research/Groups/ vvr/vrsig97/proceed/008/hasdpape.htm . This display was the best passive, i.e. no LCD glasses, display that I have ever seen. The lenticular lense displays that are around are poor. The big problem with all these displays is that they always wind up halving the resolution. The active stereo system give you full res at your monitors display rate. The problem with these is that they need CRTs running at 120 Hz, which rules out LCD's as they have a maximum refresh rate of around 30Hz.
Slashdot Mirror
Why isn't it ??
OK. First, to declare my bias, I work for a company called ReachIn and all we do is this sort of stuff.
3D is definitely worthwhile for modelling, visualisation and simulation. How worthwhile is a good question. But even these CAVES, at about ~$1 M have been bought by the oil and automotive industries and paid for in a few weeks.
3D window managers are interesting, but how usefull they are remains to be seen. Without computers, for most things people actually work in 2D. Books and paper are 2D. Whether this is because the technology is deficient or because this is the most efficient way is a really tough question.
I'm not yet convinced that you can get a whole lot more from a 3D UI, but, this is probably like some UNIX hacker in 1975 saying, what Windows? Nice gimmick, but what do you NEED them for, I can switch TTYs fast.
But you should try shaping something in 3D, it's really a new experience, anyone who has ever tried to use 3D Studio Max or Rhino or whatever will appreciate that there is some manipulation of 3D stuff that is painfull in 2D 'cause it's SOOOO counterintuitive. What we do is have a PHANTOM from SenSable and co-locate it so you can see what you can touch. It is really quite neat. We can then do medical training and shaping like you wouldn't believe. If you can, get to SIGGRAPH 2K in New Orleans and have a look around, they'll be stuff from us and hopefully some others that will show that 3D is really capable of being worked in.
Real 3D displays are a real problem. Where I work we are desperate to get a really good simple working one ( www.reachin.se ) . Unfortunately the only solution we have found is a CRT refreshing at 120 Hz and a pair of crystal eyes.
We have tried various lenticular lense type things, and they were all crap.
The only 2 promising ones we have seen are a british group (forgotten the URL) using holograms and a group at NYU ( the nearest URL I can get is http://www.mrl.nyu.edu/perlin/ ).
Fairynuff.
No I haven't, it should be easy, limited hardware.
I was referring to shells though, where it's personal preference on what is easy to use now.
I just did an install of NT server, or at least tried, until I reached a block that stopped me in my tracks. The thing is, it really struct me how NT is about the same as Linux to install, the only thing is it recognizes more hardware and is more likely to get going with a dodgy setup.
But what occurred to me is how these myths just get going, we all know how easy Macs are to use, which is crap, shells are a matter of preference these days, how Windows is ugly (well maybe), but the latest w2K desktops are quite slick, and the big one of how Linux is hard to install, well once it was, I bet Linus had a hard time on his first install, but hey, things have changed.
Once these things get going they continue despite any facts that complicate the issue, maybe M$ has a myth propagation department.....
It will be interesting to track the sales of the album - i.e. will they be dented at all? Let's face it, if you're a Bowie fan you're going to buy the album anyway. A few people might even listen to it out of curiosity if they can get a hold of it and then buy it.
The most pirated thing of the year - The Phantom Menance - chewed bandwidth but not sales. Here in Europe it was only released a few weeks ago, but EVERYONE who wanted to had seen it. In Greece at the holiday resorts there were videos cut from the VCD - months before release. But it probably hasn't damaged the take at all.
Anyway, I'd love to see some figures on this.
Afterall if piracy killed industries then there would be no computer games industry......
You're right - it's like a Harley.
An old piece of junk that hasn't been redesigned in far too long that is only kept alive because of a cultural quirk. Something that modern machines have long since surpassed.
Incidentally, I had an Amiga and it was great, but I really don't understand what the thrill is now. Can the architecture really handle the modern world ? Can it be upgraded as well as a PC ? Why have yet another standard ? And if there does have to be another one - why not BE ? Something new, clean, well designed and worth it ?
Right - interesting.
On first sight it looked to me to be very similar to cvd. I have to say that that is the best debugger I've ever used - I do sort of real time work ( haptics 1KHz updates ) and it worked really well and the GL stuff was neat. Also, you could use emacs near it reasonably well which was cool.
It seems to show what a great company you guys are , ( oh shit I'm crawling ) and I just hope the new name is not SGI for soon going insolvent.
The PHANTOM, as mentioned above, is really cool, it allows real tactile interaction.
I work at a company in Sweden, ReachIn Technologies that produces hardware and an API that combines graphics and haptics in the one spot, which is really impressive.
There are lots of benefits of having a proper haptics system, it allows the incredible control that we have of our fingers ( we can sense bumps in a smooth surface of 1 micrometre ! ) to be used. There are heaps of potential markets as well, the one catch is that these systems are fairly expensive at the moment, oh, actually, there is one other, we don't support Linux....
The description above is the best description I've ever seen for Wired, it's from a book Generation Ecchh, which was a very funny parody of a lot of pop culture.
At any rate, has Wired really changed, it's always been fun trash and still is !
Finally, the one thing that has always bugged me about Wired ( and American magazines in general ) is that the articles are always way too long, they say what they have to say and then go on for 20 pages. So I guess it's fitting that Jon Katz's article is too long. Compare
this to the Economist !
There has to be ways to defend OS's. Microsoft pay big dollars to people to spread FUD ( Mindcraft survey anyone ? ). If the Linux community doesn't make it unpleasant to write grossly incorrect disinformation uncomfortable occasionally then it will suffer.
Imagine also, a similar article about NT that said equally dismissive things and was equally independent of the facts. Microsoft would sue, not just send a few juvenile emails.
The one thing is, this guy actually deserves a great deal of credit for his admission of error. He admitted that he wrote something that was bad. I'll check his column once in a while from now.
I have to say that web pages looks a little suspicious, if this technology works they should have something first class. /. For a look at how that works, have a look at this paper ( http://www.brunel.ac.uk/depts/mes/Research/Groups/ vvr/vrsig97/proceed/008/hasdpape.htm .
I work in a company that uses 3D display a lot ( http://www.reachin.se ) and we have just had a look at the display talked about in the article a month or two back in
This display was the best passive, i.e. no LCD glasses, display that I have ever seen. The lenticular lense displays that are around are poor.
The big problem with all these displays is that they always wind up halving the resolution. The active stereo system give you full res at your monitors display rate. The problem with these is that they need CRTs running at 120 Hz, which rules out LCD's as they have a maximum refresh rate of around 30Hz.