I'm not a unity3d dev, but from my point of view: . Penetration is low but installation is easy. And the fact that a first-time instalation don't usually need a browser restart is a huge plus; since it's supposed to be used to more advanced experiences like games, I think it's a small barrier of entry.
. It's not *that* new. It has been around for a few years and while it's only gaining some mainstream attention now, it has already proven itself quite capable for what it's trying to do. . It uses a bunch of different languages, so it's not only C#. IMO, for more advanced games (3d etc), Unity is not even a question. Zeh On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Kerry Thompson <[email protected]>wrote: > Karl DeSaulniers wrote: > > > Well if Unity 3d is a good 3d program to use, then I am going to learn. > > Just take a look at this. Wow.. nice functionality. > > Unity is good. Real good. They're doing a lot of things right over there. > > Just to keep perspective, though, there are some downsides. > > - Plug-in penetration is low > - It only does 3D > - For more complex apps, you need to go beyond the drag-and-drop stuff > and write code. I believe C# is the language of choice. > - It's relatively new. If you've been around a while, you have seen a > number of good technologies come and go. iTribe, mTropolis, Icon > Author, etc. > > Of course, new apps sometimes succeed. Unity's main competition is > probably Director/Shockwave, which positions Unity very nicely. They > might make the cut--as I said, they have some Real Good People working > for them. The technology is there, and the marketing is making > inroads. Time will tell. > > Cordially, > > Kerry Thompson > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > [email protected] > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list [email protected] http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
