Right on... LOL... There is always room for love... :D Peace mate!
Cheers,
Sam
On Aug 2, 2007, at 12:35 PM, Johannes Nel wrote:
i am not trying to flame you in the slightest :) LOL, i just think
you presented something which is not definitive as fact, which is
inacurate. you did answer the question correctly however.
On 8/1/07, Samuel Agesilas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
LOL... now are we getting a little touchy Johannes... I don't have
to prove anything... you can look up the results yourself. It is
clear as day. Look at how papervision handles mesh's for example
and how papervision handles materials. When you look at their
respectively algorithms you can clearly see why papervision has an
advantage. I was merely correcting the assumption that all of these
3d engines are the same. They clearly are not! Just look at the
code, it's nothing personal against the developers of away3d and
sandy I think they are doing wonderful contributions. But alas when
it comes right down to it... Papervision has the meat and potatoes
to surpass the other too engines. So before trying to flame me...
download the source code and objectively look at the routines
yourself and you'll clearly see the difference. But, if you just
want a visual example ( unscientific but ballpark )... look at the
materials demo for away 3d and then compare the performance with
papervision materials or even texture mapping for that matter. Also
bear in mind that the real power of papervision is it's ability to
handle lot's of objects. In sandy for example the more objects are
on the screen the slower it get's. I also based on my previous
experience with sandy I found the api to be inefficient in the
sense that it uses the gc way too much and in some instances the
flash player has to clean up stuff which in turns slows down the
animation. And if that does not marginally convince you then ask
yourself this... why aren't there any fullscreen demos for Sandy or
Away3d? I haven't seen any. However there are some nice ones for
Papervision that fully demonstrate the performance capabilities of
papervision. But as always the proof is in the code... so I urge
you to download and analyze the code and make your own proofs and
report them here instead of wasting everybody's time by me or
anyone else for that matter personally.
Cheers,
Sam
On Aug 1, 2007, at 11:18 AM, Johannes Nel wrote:
i think as misguided as his "factual statements" are he touched on
one important point in relation to the question:
-which one of the three would add the LEAST amount of code for a
simple 'cube rotating' effect + -which one of the three has the
smallest learning curve (i have a tight deadline to meet)==>
means from whom can i copy and paste the easiest. and there is an
example cube rotating in pv3d's examples library and more people
blog about it. hence more vigarous copy-paste application.
for the rest the statements carry as much relevance as creationism
and he can never offer sufficient proof of any of these claims.
On 8/1/07, Mariano Cerrutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Samuel:
Same as Martin, please give some references for your comments.
cheers to all
Mariano
On 8/1/07, Martin Wood-Mitrovski < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Samuel Agesilas wrote:
> no no no no!! This is not the case.... Papervision3d is far more
> superior than Sandy and away3d. Papervision performance competely
> blows away sandy and is much Much better than Away3d.
>
> To answer your question more directly.
>
> 1. Papervision - Why? The papervision API is really clean and
simple.
> Something like a rotating cube can be accomplished with very VERY
> little code ( even if you want to texture map the sides )
> 2. Papervision - Why? It is the more mature of all 3 of those
> platforms. Papervision3d has a very small learning curve and there
> are lots of examples out there to analyze and learn from.
can you give a bit more evidence to back up those claims?
some code, some links, some benchmarks for example.
you could well be right, but i want proof :)
thanks,
Martin
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
--
j:pn
http://www.memorphic.com/news/
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
--
j:pn
http://www.memorphic.com/news/
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
