David Skoglund wrote:
"Consumers don't need it"
It seems like you like to dictate what users need and not. One fact is that
a LOT average users DO play games in their browser even if you don't.
I don't dictate anything. I simply have a strong opinion on this
subject, coming mostly from being harassed x number of years for being a
Flash developer and cluttering the internet. I don't think it has much
to do with bias as much as it has to do with the Flash community growing
up and putting less gradient balls and shape tweens out there. I
completely agree with naysayers, Flash used to make the online
experience hellish, and i'm deathly afraid of it falling into that trap
again.
As for browser games. You mean poker? Sure, go 3d with that, it'll make
a huge difference. The web gamer is casual at best, and popular web
games are along the lines of space invaders.
If you want me to believe that people would happily play world of
warcraft if it ran in a browser, i'm prepared to believe that. But world
of warcraft won't run in xaml. Ever. If someone comes up with a full
cross platform delivery model for fully featured 3d games, that's a good
initiative. But this halfbaked, 3d-for-the-sake-of-3d nonsense is
counterproductive.
"The internet reads like a book."
No it doesn't. If you believe so I really don't understand why you're on a
flash developer list in the first place.
I do standalone projector and mobile device development. I work on
fairly heavy applications, usually Zinc-wrapped against c++ dlls.
Please tell me you'd like to read Flash documentation in 3d. Or that
you'd like to read your news in 3d. That you'd like to chat in 3d, that
you'd like to read movie reviews in 3d, or read your mail in 3d. The web
is a 2d place. It's a plane, as your monitor is a plane. Interacting
with a plane is intuitive, whereas 3d is not.
Your argument seems to be that everything SHOULD be possible, and my
argument is the web needs strict rules to be useful. We're probably
agreeing deep down. Freedom as a developer is important, but i reckon
web developers have a responsability to not ruin the user experience.
"It wasnt until recently that Flash became even remotely
accepted by the average consumer..."
Yes it's going take a long time until (if ever) XAML is a universal
standard, the way flash is. But if any company has the power to make it so
it's Microsoft.
And the method they're currently employing is infection. They're putting
this thing out there and it's going to divide and confuse the market. If
they could supply something genuinely helpful i'd dig it. Sparkle doesnt
strike me as innovative, enriching or useful, mostly because of its
reliance on MS tech. Again, i'll compare it to VRML.
"MS have a history of introducing products that weaken the integrity of the
web"
I partly agree (Messenger etc), but XAML seems like a very open format and
Microsoft is inviting other developers to create tools for creating
applications.
As long as they use their tools, and make their customers conform to PC
hardware. There's more to this than the development side, and MS aren't
philanthropists when it comes to market dominance.
- A
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Andreas Rønning
Skickat: den 25 januari 2006 12:46
Till: Flashcoders mailing list
Ämne: Re: SV: [Flashcoders] Microsoft Sparkle
Sparkle doesn't supply decent 3d. xaml 3d is little more than vrml 2006.
It's not even a step in the right direction, it's just an excuse to use
directx online, and frankly, putting directx online is a shit idea that
dilutes the web. Complete and utter cross platform compatibility is a
simple absolute that web developers MUST conform to. MS have a history
of introducing products that weaken the integrity of the web, and i'm in
no way a fan of any sort.
The average consumer dictates what technology makes money. This is
another truth. It wasnt until recently that Flash became even remotely
accepted by the average consumer, and we are only now beginning to reap
the true benefits of that acceptance. Sparkle is another hurdle, more
noise in the ether. Consumers don't need it, developers don't need it.
The only party requiring Sparkle-type-content is the kind of bloated
site Flash has been criticized the most for since its inception, and in
that regard Sparkle, to me, looks like Flash 4 with polygons and an even
more limited user base.
The internet reads like a book. This is why it works with smartphones,
this is why it works with Nokia series 40 phones, this is why it works
with tablets, laptops, desktop computers, and why puretext browsers like
lynx are an actual viability. This flat book structure isn't a brick of
the establishment to be broken down and destroyed, it isn't a hampering
factor, it is a unifying factor.
As for games? We have decent 3d online NOW with Shockwave 3d. I've seen
a working Unreal tournament in Shockwave with a great framerate and
decent AI. It just hasn't taken off, and it probably won't anytime soon.
Why? Because it's an aberration. It's an abnormality that confuses and
destabilizes.
As a gamer, i will never play a game in a browser because that's not
what a browser is for. For that i'll hook up my gamecube or pick up my
PSP. Putting a technological shove into online 3d is like designing a
car that can double as a screwdriver.
As much as i dig what MS did with the xbox, Sparkle and the whole 3d
kajoozle is just another way for them to integrate the web tighter with
their whole crazy Live idea, and it's an ugly thing that messes up for
developers and users alike.
And i'm not a mac user btw :P
- Andreas
Nick Weekes wrote:
David,
I tend to agree with what your saying. Although Im definitely in the RIA
camp, it seems ridiculous to criticise the development of a technology
such
as this simply because of what the 'average consumer' wants.
How about using the games industry to make my point? If this technology
is
successful (either for Adobe or MS), then browser based DirectX online
gaming isnt too far away. No 5Gb installs, just point to a URL and away
you
go.
Dismissing the idea of decent 3D is waaaay too short sighted.
Cheers,
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David
Skoglund
Sent: 25 January 2006 10:26
To: 'Flashcoders mailing list'
Subject: SV: SV: [Flashcoders] Microsoft Sparkle
OK, you maybe YOU don't care much for it, but a RIA-platform needs to be
flexible as possible and give the developers as much freedom as possible.
Content rules, but why restrict content to 2d? I'm not talking about wacky
3d interfaces where they are clearly not needed, but games, simulations,
product presentations etc.
As I see it Macromedia has always been making good tools for creating
interactive experiences but are now trying hard with Flex 2 to compete in
the corporate applications. Microsoft comes from the opposite side. They
already have most of the corporate developers, and are now trying to get
the
designers attention. And looking at the feature lists they seem to beat
Macromedia on their own turf... I hope that Macromedia/Adobe can compete.
Shockwave 3d has a very steep learning curve and it's just in the last
couple of years that people have really learned to create really nice
games
with it. Look for example att my own first try on creating a shockwave
3d-game: www.monsterland.se/snowwarfare
I wouldn't have been able to create this without the tutorials and helpful
communities that's been built up during the years. In my view Macromedia
had
a good state of the art product, but threw it away since it didn't create
short term profit.
Sparkle on the other side seems quite easy to get into. The 3d-functions
are
well integrated into the IDE so you can navigate between 3d-models in a
scene as easily as you do between movie clips in flash. And there are
lot's
of features beside this 3d-part. Intresting times ahead!
/David
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Andreas Rønning
Skickat: den 25 januari 2006 10:58
Till: Flashcoders mailing list
Ämne: Re: SV: [Flashcoders] Microsoft Sparkle
I couldn't give less of a crap about putting 3d on the web, and i'm
pretty sure the average consumer agrees with me. Content rules.
I seem to recall Shockwave 3d not ever really taking off, and if 3d is
the only thing sparkle has over Flash it ain't gonna do much good as a
competitor.
- Andreas
David Skoglund wrote:
so why does someone post it to this list ?
Since it's going to be a direct competitor/alternative to Flash, and since
it's pushed by Microsoft. Wether you like it or not you'll need to keep
your
eyes on what happening over there.
Personally I think it's great to finally see a promising new standard for
creating web 3d. Hopefully Adobe can create a competitive 3d-solution to
integrate i flash, but looking at Acrobat 3d I'm not impressed, and they
stopped developing Shockwave 3d a long time ago (still the best solution
despite lack of updates last 5 years).
/David
_______________________________________________
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
--
- Andreas Rønning
---------------------------------------
Flash guy
Rayon Visual Concepts, Oslo, Norway
---------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
