Hi,
> I mean the technical differences. Java 3D is part of a
> programming language and VRML is a language to describe
> 3D data. The relationship between Java 3D and VRML is
> like between JavaScript and HTML. Would you compare
> JavaScript and HTML?
I won't argue too much on this but I strongly feel that your example is
not so accurate.
Maybe I could accept top not compare SWING vs HTML+javascript
> That was definitely not my intention. In my opinion
> Java 3D beats VRML. Just take a look at
Ho Ho Mr Neifer aren't you comparing Java3d and VRML right now ?
Java3D just cannot *beat* VRML since they are technically different ;^))
(just pulling your leg)
I think the difference between what you can *get* with VRML or java3D is
not so different if your application is not *very* complex.
> But here and now it's still under construction
> and we all should help to improve it's abilities.
I thought it was the problem of the SUN team and that, at the opposite,
java3D was supposed to help me.
To come back to efficiency issues, did you do benchmarks between
CosmoPlayer and Java3D VrmlPlayer ? (technically identical this time).
A small figure with several numbers could be more accurate than a bunch of
mails.
If you're interrested, I can send you a patched version of Vrml97Player
which write
the number of frame/s.
cheers and gute nacht
renaud
