<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Browser makers go for WebGL</title> <atom:link href="http://www.raphkoster.com/2009/08/04/browser-makers-go-for-webgl/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.raphkoster.com/2009/08/04/browser-makers-go-for-webgl/</link> <description>Raph Koster&#039;s personal website: MMOs, gaming, writing, art, music, books</description> <lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 06:02:55 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: Rog</title><link>http://www.raphkoster.com/2009/08/04/browser-makers-go-for-webgl/comment-page-1/#comment-150144</link> <dc:creator>Rog</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:13:37 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=3087#comment-150144</guid> <description>I see the whole thing as positive. Sure, there&#039;s scepticism over the snail&#039;s pace of adoption and this is something in its infancy, but if it flies, look at the strong points:
- It could end the era of crappy baseline graphics (IE: Intel chipsets). If capable hardware is needed for browsing, it&#039;ll drive the industry to being well, a little more capable.
So those bemoaning necessary upgrades, think at least that the upgrades would mean more than they do today. The complaints IMHO today are valid because the upgrades are so hollow outside of the triple-AAA games market.
- Games in the browser won&#039;t have to &#039;fake it&#039; via plugins. Some of them (Quake Live, FreeRealms come to mind) fake it pretty good, but better integration would make this so much easier and seamless.
- Consistency with games, regardless of platform. This is the pro-active solution, far far better than WINE, etc.. Apple isn&#039;t on board atm but if the standard gains traction they&#039;ll come on board. For me personally, if this works out, I&#039;ll finally be able to kiss bye-bye to Windows.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see the whole thing as positive. Sure, there&#8217;s scepticism over the snail&#8217;s pace of adoption and this is something in its infancy, but if it flies, look at the strong points:</p><p>- It could end the era of crappy baseline graphics (IE: Intel chipsets). If capable hardware is needed for browsing, it&#8217;ll drive the industry to being well, a little more capable.</p><p>So those bemoaning necessary upgrades, think at least that the upgrades would mean more than they do today. The complaints IMHO today are valid because the upgrades are so hollow outside of the triple-AAA games market.</p><p>- Games in the browser won&#8217;t have to &#8216;fake it&#8217; via plugins. Some of them (Quake Live, FreeRealms come to mind) fake it pretty good, but better integration would make this so much easier and seamless.</p><p>- Consistency with games, regardless of platform. This is the pro-active solution, far far better than WINE, etc.. Apple isn&#8217;t on board atm but if the standard gains traction they&#8217;ll come on board. For me personally, if this works out, I&#8217;ll finally be able to kiss bye-bye to Windows.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: len</title><link>http://www.raphkoster.com/2009/08/04/browser-makers-go-for-webgl/comment-page-1/#comment-149992</link> <dc:creator>len</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:12:11 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=3087#comment-149992</guid> <description>More content kudzu.  More graphics boards to replace. Great.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More content kudzu.  More graphics boards to replace. Great.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Amaranthar</title><link>http://www.raphkoster.com/2009/08/04/browser-makers-go-for-webgl/comment-page-1/#comment-149989</link> <dc:creator>Amaranthar</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:00:14 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=3087#comment-149989</guid> <description>I assume this would be very good for browser based games? What about other games, can this be used wholly or in part with any other kinds of games?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I assume this would be very good for browser based games? What about other games, can this be used wholly or in part with any other kinds of games?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Ola Fosheim Grøstad</title><link>http://www.raphkoster.com/2009/08/04/browser-makers-go-for-webgl/comment-page-1/#comment-149978</link> <dc:creator>Ola Fosheim Grøstad</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:28:33 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=3087#comment-149978</guid> <description>Thank you for keeping tabs on new and intersting stuff! raphkoster.com and osnews.com are now the only news-sites I check regularly... ;-*</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for keeping tabs on new and intersting stuff! raphkoster.com and osnews.com are now the only news-sites I check regularly&#8230; ;-*</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Sente</title><link>http://www.raphkoster.com/2009/08/04/browser-makers-go-for-webgl/comment-page-1/#comment-149959</link> <dc:creator>Sente</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 06:14:28 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=3087#comment-149959</guid> <description>If it is not based on DirectX I guess MS won&#039;t touch it. Probably will release a &quot;competitive standard&quot; with some &quot;improvements&quot; to WebGL a bit later.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If it is not based on DirectX I guess MS won&#8217;t touch it. Probably will release a &#8220;competitive standard&#8221; with some &#8220;improvements&#8221; to WebGL a bit later.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Jason Booth</title><link>http://www.raphkoster.com/2009/08/04/browser-makers-go-for-webgl/comment-page-1/#comment-149950</link> <dc:creator>Jason Booth</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 01:16:14 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=3087#comment-149950</guid> <description>Which means we can expect it to be standard in 4 years plus whatever delay MS ads. Gah, the web... Turning a 2ghz dual core with a terreflop of pixel pushing power into a pentium at 80mhz..</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Which means we can expect it to be standard in 4 years plus whatever delay MS ads. Gah, the web&#8230; Turning a 2ghz dual core with a terreflop of pixel pushing power into a pentium at 80mhz..</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
