Intel's 3D divorce rate
shockland.com
You can read this article from the link below:
http://news.com.com/Intel%27s+3D+divorce+rate/2100-1038_3-5238357.html?tag=nefd.
top
Here is the Macromedia related part:
History of misses
Intel's membership in the Web 3D Consortium wasn't its only 3D misfire in
recent years. The company's April 20 announcement of the 3DIF marked its third
major 3D collaboration strategy since 2000, when it claimed its new partnership
with San Francisco-based Macromedia would "allow 3D to take off on the Web."
By all accounts, that hasn't happened.
Shockwave 3D "didn't become the universal application that they had hoped, of
course," Maher said. "It's still a function within Macromedia's tools. Intel
was the more disillusioned party because Macromedia didn't open it up as freely
as Intel thought they were going to. In order to author stuff, you had to use
Macromedia's tools."
Macromedia did not return calls seeking comment.
Benoit said he didn't know whether or not his company and Macromedia had
quarreled over Shockwave 3D's openness. But he noted that in figuring out where
to go from the moribund arena of 3D shopping and online games, Intel asked
Macromedia to continue their partnership.
Macromedia, according to Intel, turned down the chipmaker.
"We invited Macromedia to participate, but they basically realized that they
wanted to move away from 3D because it didn't pan out from a revenue generation
perspective," Benoit said. "So they redirected their resources to their core
products like Flash."
The failure of the collaboration between Intel and Macromedia took a heavy
toll on the 3D start-ups it inspired.
"That was a period when everyone thought 3D on the Web was going to be huge,"
Maher recalled. "And there was so much hope that it spawned a lot of
businesses. A lot of companies placed their bets on it, and they were all sort
of murdered by the failure of that collaboration."
Intel blamed the Shockwave 3D failure to live up to expectations on the
vagaries of the market, and said it had drawn on that experience in deciding to
quit the Web 3D Consortium and spend the next several months doing market
research with the likes of Boeing, BMW, General Electric, Hewlett-Packard,
Lockheed and Airbus.
"We missed the target (with Shockwave 3D) because at that time, the 3D focus
was on games, entertainment, the retail space," Benoit said. "With the Internet
bust, it just didn't pan out. That's why we took the approach we did this time,
which was to go to the end users first and find out what they wanted
shockland.com
Newt99
Since 2000, Intel has been pushing 3D on the web. For Intel marketing
managers, the goal is to promote Intel processors (CPUs and GPUs) by pushing
processor intensive applications such as 3D optimized for Intel processors.
Intel is the worldwide leader in GPUs thanks to their video chips embedded on
the motherboards by PC makers. Intel is #1, ATI #2 and nVIDIA #3.
With all the information I gathered and this article, we can trace Intel
activity on Web3D:
1. In 2000, Intel and Macromedia announce their joint effort on Shockwave 3D
at the Siggraph. Shockwave will embed the Scalabe 3D Graphics Intel Optimizer.
Another famous Intel Optimizer is RealVideo, another embedded technology from
the Intel Architecture Lab (IAL). Video is another processor intensive Intel
optimized app.
2. In 2002, Intel, seeing their collaboration with Macromedia on Shockwave 3D
is not successful enough, they join the Web 3D Consortium to push X3D. Seeing
their Pentium optimized 3D runtime environment would not be adopted as the
standard X3D player, they break apart from the Web 3D Consortium.
3. Early in 2003, Intel creates the 3DIF in order to push the U3D format for
universal CAD visualization in order to leverage existing data. The player will
be Intel's so it fits the marketing strategy of the company.
We must remember Intel's goal is to sell hundreds of millions of CPUs and GPUs
to PC makers and they must find incentive to convince end users to buy a new PC
on a regular basis. 3D is a good reason.
Personnally, I do not mind whether it's Intel or any other who bring up a
standard and their approach of first asking bug companies what they (and
consumers) want is good.
If they want to earn billions of dollards in the process, fine !
We need a down to earth approach to 3D. Only money making will make Web3D
soar. So far it has just been a toy. It needs to become an economic reality and
I believe Intel"s U3D can make just that happen eventually.
Regards,
Karl.
Newt99
Newt99
I meant big companies, not bug companies (oops).
Sorry for the multipost.
Rafael Martín
Now that intel is out of town may be a new Macromedia alliance with nVidia
and including the cgshading system and the NVidia Video cards features into
shockwave 3d would give a huge push to both of them.
just a sugestion....
raf
"Newt99" <webfor...@macromedia.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:cb72ih$91b$1...@forums.macromedia.com...
qui...@hotmail.com
Will directx 9.0 be ever implemented or will shockwave 3d stay like it is as
it's been no major update in a long while (excpept from the ECMA syntax
support)?
"Rafael Martín" <ra...@sintesys.net> wrote in message
news:cb9pdt$pqe$1...@forums.macromedia.com...
Newt99
Use Shockwave 3D until 2006 then switch to U3D.
Look at such recent productions as the Sky Captain game made with Shockwave 3D
to see the engine still has some potential: http://www.skycaptain.com
For e-commerce and product visualization, Shockwave 3D is out because
marketing people (brand managers) will never accept such a rendering quality.
But for web games and standalone games, Shockwave 3D is still the most
widespread standard and still has some potential.
If you want a good rendering quality, you can still hide a talented graphic
artist or buy some models from RT3D: http://www.3drt.com
If you want an easier access to the 3D engine capabilities, check the Chrome
Lib:
http://www.chromelib.com
Cheers,
Karl.
Newt99
I meant hire.
Newt99
Another field where Shockwave 3D can still be used with success is e-learning as the expectations in terms of visual quality are not as high as for product visualizations.
cube3
x3d will be ratified by the same body that u3d wants to be ratified by (
they only ratify ONE standard)
by end of summer.
www.mediamachines.com
www.vizx3d.com
standard driven 3d thats working now.
the future is in GPUs, not CPUS for 3d graphics.....
c3
"Newt99" <webfor...@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:ccbra8$985$1...@forums.macromedia.com...
Newt99
emerges as a standard. May the best win and let the technology be the least
important thing to talk about.
--- the future is in GPUs, not CPUS for 3d graphics.....
quinrou
more... why not stick with shockwave 3d as it's probably the most common
platform for 3d over the web. It might not have taken off like people were
expected it but I reckon it's got potential if macromedia was getting a bit
more involved with director like they do with flash.
Since the shockwave 3d released in 2001 the engine didn't beneficiate of any
updates like for instance keeping up the evolution of directx. This showed
the little interest from macromedia about the potential of shockwave 3d. The
only major update occured recently with the support of the javascript syntax
which I think has been roushed out the door as it is excessively buggy. This
should have been done a long time ago as this language is one of the most
commun for developers thanks to flash. By doing this MM would have
acttracted more developers to develop with shockwave 3d and would maybe have
become the 3d web standard.
It is ashame that MM had really little faith in that 3d engine and didn't do
anything too keep director and the engine uptodate...
Newt99
Virtools, Yappa and Anark Studio as other user friendly tools to create 3D on
the web. All the other web 3D technologies U3D is all press releases for now
but the Intel Architecture Lab develop their 3D technology since 1996 and it is
more real than you think:
- It has been packaged as an Intel Active X Control for Web3D in 1996
- It has been packaged as an Xtra for Shockwave 3D in 2000
- It is used as the realtime 3D display engine for 3DS Max
- Their Multi-Resolution Mesh (MRM) and Progressive LOD technology is used in
many PC CD-Rom games
I understand people involved in X3D are angry to see Intel creating another
standard after having left the Web3D consortium. All the more as it is oriented
to leverage CAD data for other departments in companies, just as X3D intends to
do, a piece of advice given by Intel itself when they were still part of it. In
the end, we are talking about billions of dollars to be made, we are not
talking about hopes of people who support VRML since 1994. Intel, Microsoft,
Adobe, Boeing, Dassault and many other big companies back U3D, and Intel has
the technology. Intel intends to make the U3D format universal and there will
be a Pentium optimized (but also an Itanium optimized) Intel U3D viewer. In due
time, there will also be Apple MacOS X U3D players, Linux U3D players, SGI IRIX
U3D players and Sun Solaris U3D players. Whether it's ratified by ISO/ECMA is
not important as long as it is up to date and becomes a defacto standard just
as Flash. Where is SVG ? Most people don't even know SVG but they all know
Flash. If X3D people have the power to make their technology a standard, then
go ahead ! But I would rather bet on Intel's muscles. I saw what became of the
VRML 97 ISO standard.
What is the economic reality of X3D as of now ? So far, it's just a technology
and a proposed standard just as U3D.
cube3
vrml 97 IS the most numerous web3d format is use...it dwarfs shockwave3d
usage on the net...Just do a google search. ITs only been for "advertising"
"commercial" website design , that its not been used. This was due
to those who first designed it and had left it without copy protection. X3D
has a binary and compresssion schema that will also be ratified as STANDARD
very soon. Its tools and buy in in 1997 was a very Intel, SGI like 20,000
per seat.
but in educational, military, and non commercial usage its the most popular
3d format in use today.
Intel has none and never has had much on an impact in 3d technologies other
than selling pentiums to us.
There own forays in 3d accel cards have been moderate at best. Nvidia and
ATI own the 3d market and they ARE not exactly behind U3D......
Intel s U3D efforts is One guy....really, it is...
angry? sounds more like the responses ive heard from Shockwave 3d users
about the future of all that time you put intomacromedias /Intels 3d
proprietary solutions for web3d, that just havent panned out, have they?
youve been abandoned by a singular company and solution...but this should
not be a surprise....from day one, the effort to market 3d from macromedia
has been minor at best.
its been macromedia and Intel whos 3D history is spotty to failures at
best..remember Macromedia3D?...and BTW adobes history in3d isnt exactly
sparkling either.
Ive been doing X3D related projects for both the Military and Entertainment
properties, all to be shown and released inthe next few weeks by
siggraph...real money, real tools.
not a U3D press release for 2007.
Vizx3D 1.2 is shipping Flux will ship at siggraph. Linux and other X3D
viewers are all in beta, not press release.
BTW- it was Intel, SGI, MS
in 1997 that caused the commercial usage
failure of VRML, with all their MUSCLE, they couldnt figure out what
commercial designers needed or wanted in 1997...
so what makes you think they will in 2005 ?
Flash was created by the lowend few (futuresplash- the flash 1-2.0 used by
so few of us in 1996-7)
....ironically X3D has been as well.....created by those USING it to solve
our design/business issues. its not a trainwreck of corporate egos like
VRML97 or Shockwave3D or soon to be U3D will be,
some food for thought.
why not move to open standards and help Define and build what you need for
realtime 3d, not just sit on ones butts and wait for intel or some other to
deliver you another promised land that turns out barren.
X3D 2004 is NOT VRML in 1997, ironically THAT was Intel and Sgi...lol
larryr
"Newt99" <webfor...@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:ccu6im$3v1$1...@forums.macromedia.com...
Newt99
Designing the Chrome Lib to ease interactive 3D content development is not
quite what I would call sitting on one's butts. I know perfectly that there are
more contents created with VRML than with any other Web3D standard to date. But
if you compare this with Flash, you can see that Web 3D hasn't caught on even
if VRML 97 is an ISO standard. Flash contents are everywhere. In comparison,
VRML contents are almost nowhere (and Shockwave 3D ones too for that matter).
I understand perfectly the motives behind X3D but I think an open standard
cannot win without being backed up by big companies with the proper player,
tool and marketing strength. The relative failure of SVG is telling. Time will
tell.