------ =_NextPart_001_01C032CD.F2D82F34
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Applets using the Java3D extension gain *hardware accelerated* 3D
real-time rendering, so there should be a *huge* performance =
difference.
=A0
Comparing Java2 to Java3D is like comparing VisualC++ to Direct3D.=A0 =
The
first is for plain old 2D user interfaces and uses *2D* hardware
acceleration when available.=A0 The second is for 3D applications and =
uses
*3D* hardware acceleration when available.
=A0
Coding is also much easier of course since the API takes care of
transforms, lighting, texturing, fog, 3D sound, etc, etc.
=A0
-Lee
J. Lee Dixon=20
Software Engineer=20
SAIC - Celebration, FL=20
[EMAIL PROTECTED]=20
-----Original Message-----
From: T Phillips [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 10:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [JAVA3D] Java3D performance vs. Java2 code
For any specific 3D applet, are there predictable performance
differences between the traditional Java2 version of the applet versus
the Java3D-coded version of the same applet?=A0 I presume that the
detailed answer has to be applet-specific, but can any generalities be
made??
------ =_NextPart_001_01C032CD.F2D82F34
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=285271715-10102000>Applets using the Java3D extension gain *hardware
accelerated* 3D real-time rendering, so there should be a *huge* performance
difference.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=285271715-10102000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=285271715-10102000>Comparing Java2 to Java3D is like comparing VisualC++
to Direct3D. The first is for plain old 2D user interfaces and uses *2D*
hardware acceleration when available. The second is for 3D applications
and uses *3D* hardware acceleration when available.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=285271715-10102000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=285271715-10102000>Coding
is also much easier of course since the API takes care of transforms, lighting,
texturing, fog, 3D sound, etc, etc.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=285271715-10102000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=285271715-10102000>-Lee</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=285271715-10102000>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>J. Lee Dixon</FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>Software Engineer</FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>SAIC - Celebration,
FL</FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</FONT>
</P></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> T Phillips
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, October 10, 2000 10:57
AM<BR><B>To:</B> [EMAIL PROTECTED]<BR><B>Subject:</B> [JAVA3D]
Java3D performance vs. Java2 code<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>For any specific 3D applet, are there predictable
performance differences between the traditional Java2 version of the applet
versus the Java3D-coded version of the same applet? I presume that the
detailed answer has to be applet-specific, but can any generalities be
made??</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------ =_NextPart_001_01C032CD.F2D82F34--
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
