And here’s the real link:

http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/docs/shadinglanguage.html

Some sample code was posted today. For them that wants to write that deep into the engines, looks fine. For those who don’t, use the frameworks. Otherwise, it’s one layer API deeper than X3D.

What I don’t want to do is rehost. Tired of it. I want to make new content. The existing players work. Everything else is evangelism.

OTOH, I’m still interested in Google’s reasons for going it alone or with a chorus section. Technical explanations that come down to “bloat” aren’t very informative or helpful.

HAVE succeeded by any means necessary to “plant” a new media tech into the commercial mass world

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. We saw spectacular failures from IBM, Intel, Microsoft and Google. In fact, open standards are what these companies do very badly all claims to the contrary. I don’t really care that they want to build Yet Another 3D Plugin. Code is like opinions that way. What I mind is Yet Another Web3D Needs Our Standard Because We Own It announcement from these companies that play no role of significance in the industry. That approach is threadbare and highly corrosive.

So I’ll continue to ask: what about the O3D scene graph is demonstrably superior such that a real standards organization should pay attention at all? We have commercial products such as Flash and we have an ISO standard that is doing heavy lifting for the high dollar adopters.

Exactly what is Google bringing besides their lack of experience at having to budget products for long life cycle content support?

Reality is a bitch. That’s why I stick with the only standard that has worked for over a decade and is still working. No slag on the commercial products such as Flash because good work is done and there is room in these markets for different systems with minimal interoperation. On the other hand, where the content is expensive, the life cycles are long and the IP has to be unencumbered, there is only one reality.

why “hate” to say it:)
Its always been that way in reality, not the virtual:)

Windows to the Mac OS in the 90s for example… and who can forget that BETAMAX was better, to the techies, but it couldnt hold a full 60-90 minute “ahem porno ” movie that us silly non coders/techies had to sell:)

Putting 2d vector art/animation in the browser was easy too in 1995. The past shows how that turned out after a small purchase, a dump of the “app” for free to a few creative portal media ventures to fail from AOL and MSN;), and the later bundlling of that app plugin with the browser/pc sales that then allowed the wrapper for video protection to occur on the web a few years later…UTUBE.

The other issue to a new media is always the short term protection of what you got, which is why MS and Adobe have some issues to work out.;)

Collada makes Autodesk happy, so I see no real issues for Google IF they continue down this path.

Adoption requires not only a tech player, but a model for others beyond it’s maker to profit from its usage. Itll be interesting to see how the Goog/if the goog can head that way with this initiative.

So much will be “reinvented” but thats what the culture of tech gets you, until the “then obvious” tipping point of what seems to work, gets everyone in media bubble fever over and over again.

Reality is a bitch. But virtual reality is headed for full on bastard;)

Len,
this is just tech, thats my point. When google, or any other tech company-yahoo-aol attempt to do “media content” internally under tech managnemt rules, like the head designer at googles leaving due to the 41 shades of blue,- it always fails. The history of web3d is littered by this arrogance.

If you look at googles 03D web paged presentation it looks like the VRML spec/X3D or the web3d .orgs tech web pages and demos a decade ago… only they have provided a first pass, web browser for all, and the mac creatives have been invited…that means DOLLARS for advertising games and 3d media beyond flash/paper3d.

the only spec ever is a REASON for the media to exist and for many to profit from it,
Im not a google overlord fan, as Ive stated way too much online;), BUT the 20%? of the time.. that MS or Macromedia, or Autodesk HAVE succeeded by any means necessary to “plant” a new media tech into the commercial mass world, they have forced the defacto standard that fuels a decade or more of content media that each bubble calls “new “..

Lively was as dumb as most vr worlds “social service plays” of the last 3 years… Google is not Warner brothers. or even a HEAVY.com THAT was their hubris and the stupidity of not learning from history.

It appears unless im wrong that the core tech of o3d is from the lively browser experiments etc.. but now being released as api code for techies.. thats ok-great, not ever an issue with me:)…unless of course google decides down the road that they will own all/control all the 3d content distributed or built using the o3d api base…. if so then its all the same bull that the other vr services offer today…

Will o3d become another x3d/ or I3d, or whatever.? time will tell, but i saw a starbasec3 3d model of mine in all major broswers and platforms yesterday on the web. And the overlord company that provided/is invested in that plugin/tech etc. was not platform bound and as its apparent here, able to bundle and truly dump a 3d enabled browser into the market and have no reason not to allow rt3d to eat 2d flash markets/or 2d window markets of a new media wrapper for mass audiences.

tech was never enough Len:) Metaplace IS a good example of that understanding, but i cant find another web3d focused group that has a chance in heck to show that importance on the horizon.I have tried, over and over again to ears that cant hear.

AND yeah google enlists fear in all techies as well as creatives… Ask Clive Jackson:) i feel for him, but Ive been waiting 15 years too:)

if i had this 3d plugin to show ALL NY creatives in 1995, flash mania might not have happened 2 years later;) just sayin….;)

c3

They’re going to have to really decide to get behind it, as opposed to their handling of Lively.