Mapping a Path For the 3D Web

An anonymous reader writes to mention C|Net coverage of the Metaverse Roadmap Summit, an event designed to look at the future of 3D Web environments. From the article: "While many took issue with the basic premise that an overriding 3D Web will be in place within 10 years, it was clear that most in attendance relished mixing it up as part of an august group that included Microsoft's Robert Scoble, former Sony Online Entertainment chief creative officer Raph Koster, PARC researcher Bob Moore, online game pioneer Randy Farmer, There.com founder and currently IMVU CEO Will Harvey, and CNET Networks editor at large Esther Dyson."

Ten years huh?

Ten years ago i was working in the virtual reality field. People swore we would have a 3D web in ten years ten years ago. Anyone remember VRML?

Re:2*2D != 3D!

Boy, oh, boy are you wrong. First of all, two 2D images projected onto your eyes to simulate depth, are no more 3D than just one 2D image.

Two 2-D images captured your eyes and interpreted by your brain is how you see "3-D" in the first place, so two 2-D images projected to your eyes make pretty much as real a 3-D image as you see naturally.

Re:2D + shading != 3D

You're not just being pedantic, you are wrong. I lost an eye in a mugging and I can see in 3D just fine, for anything further than about 4 feet. I can't thread a needle to save my life, but I can drive a car and play darts pretty well. The brain has many, many circuits for determining distance besides stereo vision. Color fading, occlusion, parallax, change of focal length, all provide depth perception cues. Seeing something in 3D does not require stereo vision, I can attest to that.

Let's Hope...

Let's hope it doesn't turn out like the Lawnmower Man. Why did that movie need a sequel anyway?

Web 3.0?

Web 3.0? Anyone? ...Bueller?

I Find the Concept...

Hard to fathom. How, exactly, can a 3D Web be useful in any way? What benefits will it offer that we don't have currently? Sounds like more hype regarding a useless technology (read: VR).

Re:I Find the Concept...

Hard to fathom. How, exactly, can a 3D Web be useful in any way? What benefits will it offer that we don't have currently? Sounds like more hype regarding a useless technology (read: VR).

In the same way that 2D icons can be used to represent intangibles that the more mundane computer users might have trouble comprehending, a 3D interface would take this a step further and allow you to not only render concepts and ideas as objects, but allow you to establish a 'distance' between them. As you can move to anywhere within a virtual landscape nigh-instantly this distance doesn't serve as an obstacle to travel so much as a spacial representation of virtual surroundings. Consider a google search in which the most 'relevant' search results are displayed near you, and as you 'move' in a given 'direction' you refine your search.

The more pedantic might decry this as a pointless effort to build abstraction where none is needed, but consider that our younger computer users are probably already moving towards thinking in this direction. (Or, at least, their corporate masters hope so.) For instance, the concept of MySpace might be thought of as a virtual 'room' which a user can decorate and furnish in whatever gaudy fashion they believe might render them hip and trendy to their peers. Currently these 'rooms' don't have any tangible distance between one another, and you might not see value in a the creation of a virtual landscape in which to place these rooms.

However, the important thing to remember, is that this virtual landscape instantly becomes a semi-limited commodity. While it could extend to virtual infinity in all directions, the important thing to the hip and trendy users (travelers, inhabitants) of this user space, is their virtual relation to the rooms of their friends, and whatever cultural icons they seek to identify with. And suddenly the plot of virtual real estate in the shadow of the latest boy band's corporate sponsored virtual shrine shoots up in 'value' as the teeny boppers pledge the credit card numbers of their parents to establish their virtual 'room' there.

Just leave it alone

The craze of making everything 3D is over. Just leave well enough alone. If a 3D web becomes necessary at some point, then the technology will be developed. Until then, however, we're just taking shots in the dark at what people *might* want.

That being said, if a 3D web is going to come out of anywhere, it will probably stem from the MMOGs. These virtual worlds have become so popular that in some cases they manage to displace the idea of meeting in real life.

Web 3D

A new and exciting Pop-Up delivery system

3d is a terrible interface to the Web

Because every resource can be "next to" hundreds of other resources with are all "next to" hundreds of non-overlapping resources of their own. ...and all of those relationships can be changes instantly.

Never Fly

This will never fly.
People don't want to 'walk' around a store to shop, thats Why they go online.
My biggest beef with MMOGs is that I have to spend time going to and from missions. The market won't want to commute to and from stores in a virtual strip mall.

Judging by the previous /. article.

One of the questions asked most frequently throughout the event was whether an overriding metaverse of 2016 will be commercially owned or open source. There was little agreement about that, but it was clear that the companies seen as most likely to provide the tools for a single metaverse upon which many 3D, social applications could be built are Microsoft and Google.

Somehow I don't think it'll be open source, if it ever gets built.

3D interfaces will work when we have 3D displays

and controllers.

Immersive VR is doomed to failure until the interface to it improves and gets cheaper. HMDs are nice and all, but without a more efficient way to move through the scene, 2D will continue to be a more productive way to interact with data and 3D will continue to be eye candy.

New 3D web slogan suggestions

"3D Web - For those that miss the slow old days"
"3D Web - Bringing your 5 year old PC to a stop today"
"3D Web - We make 100% use of your available bandwidth"
"3D Web - With the virtual girls we have, there is not even a reason to bother with a real one"
"3D Web - You thought pop-ups were annoying? Wait till you see 3D billboards go by!"

Bang, Zoom!

3D Web!?! I'm still waiting for 3D television!

3d internet map, eh?

Let's go for the Garbage File! I'm gonna hack the gibson! [imdb.com]

not until we get 3D holographic computer monitors

I believe a huge reason why we don't see 3D web pages today is that nobody wants to see a 3D page on a 2D display. I'm pretty certain that a great majority of people out there want things as simple as possible, thus why 3D games have such a small following when compared to the number of people that browse the web. Its also possible that we just aren't ready to get this kind of information in 3 dimensions, we're still used to paper!

Why 3d?

When it comes to me and the limit of my senses and the limits of the output devices today 2d is the way to go. Infact 2d may be the logical way to go even if we did have better 3d functions. 3d is great in games because games are there to simulate rela life (in most cases) but when it comes down to research or buying something online it's much easier for me to goto a fairly simple search engine and look down a list instead of going into a virtual library or whatever.

Unless there is real need for a 3d environment I don't see the benifit of organizing information in 3d, it's just sloppy and frankly the gimick will wear thin quickly.

Why oh why?

Why does the web have to be (pseudo-)3D? What advantage is there to browsing Wikipedia in 3D? I've tried a few 3D file browsers, and they're just a gimmick, nothing I'd ever think of using on a daily basis. Screens are usually two-dimensionally oriented, and 3D messes it all up.
Moving vertices around in 3DS Max in a complex model is already complicated enough, gathering data online shouldn't be.
What advantage does this bring to me? I don't usually shop online, but I don't want to "walk" through a "3D virtual mall" either. I don't want to have porn ads suddenly jump out of a door and blow up in my face accompanied with a loud explosion while everyone on the business end of the screen gets a seizure...

Hey cool!

Now web pages can suck in three dimensions!

3d web with a 2d monitor?

The screen is flat! End of discussion.

hm..

Wait, does this mean Google will have to pay triple for my browsing habits?

No way

You CAN do 3D content based web, 3D navigation and 3D styles in latest Macromedia Flash already.
But, no one really cares, major decisition makers at big media stick to 2D and for a bunch of good reasons.

Only some retarded geeks from Sony's media department may think that 3D is inevitable "next step" but it isnt, 3D has its uses here and there in the pages, some web content is already in 3D (if needed), but general 2D page layout will not be abandoned simply because it works so well, is understandable, simple to use and easy to navigate with current input controlers, keyboard, mouse... this may change only if those controlers and display tech. changes.

It's not just 3D

Sure, pure 3D is pretty useless for browsing the web today, but it's one component of an evolving and emerging technology that blends the real world and virtual world.

One could readily imagine many uses for immersive 3D environments from remote medical procedures to collaborative architecture to interior design to automobile sales to video games to many other things.

3D digital cameras and such aren't that far away and would be way cool. I'd certainly like to enter a map address into google and get a virtual picture of where I'm going. At least 3D enhanced would be great for many things.

Noone needs 3D email, but it clearly has its place in the broader UI technology space. 10-15 years sounds like a reasonable target.

Already HAVE 3D... time

News Flash: We already have 3D web pages -- 'D!gg Spy' (can I say that on Slashdot?) and the "In The News" VOX visualizer both include that important 3rd Dimension: time. Of course Wikipedia has an important time element too.

This to me is a MUCH more useful dimension to add to Web content.

Ten More Years?!?!

As much as this seems like a cool idea, the article fails to back it up with any rational explanation for a 3D web. The only feasible use of 3D would be interactivity, therefore drastically limiting the consumer base. To most, the internet is a tool; A means of communication. Adding a third dimension to many aspects would only serve to exponentially increase the amount of information transferred and stored to maintain such an environment, while adding a new depth (pun intended) to already interactive applications which may or many not benefit from such a change. As much as the ASF may think 3D will revolutionize the way people communicate via the internet, it will likely only apply to a select few (not unlike the "august group" from the article).

Some ideas just won't die

I remember VRML. It was very much ahead of its time. It needed high bandwidth, lots of RAM, real 3D acceleration, and a purpose. It would work great on todays Internet with todays PCs. But, what is its purpose?

The main purpose for the 3D web is advertising, passive entertainment, and interactive entertainment. The idea of a 3D google interface is a bit silly, the 2D document like interface works too well to be replaced by a 3D interface. A simple 3Dish interface is coming (already here?) to the desktop in the form of translucent windows. It is nice to be able to see what is behind the top page, do we need more?

OTOH, 3D advertising might be very effective. 3D passive entertainment (3D TV) might be a lot of fun. (I really like the idea of being able to pick my viewing position for a soccer game or the Olympics, but that isn't going to happen any time soon.) And, of course, interactive entertainment in the form of MMOGs are already here. Being able to browse to them is a very nice way of selling subscriptions.

What technology do we need that we don't have? Not much really. A while back a guy on the gameprogrammer.com mailing list was talking about how he converted crystal space into a mozilla plugin. With that he can built a game and just browse to it on the net. The idea is to just distribute the plugin over the net and off you go. You could modify any of the GPLed Id engines for the same purpose.

IMHO, the guys at the summit could have implemented a large part of the technology needed to provide a browsable 3D net in the time they spent on the conference by using a little creativity and open source software.

We can have a 3D net in a few weeks or months if we want it, but I don't think anyone really wants it.

Stonewolf

Augmented Reality: a user created world

Although the 3D worlds like Second Life are very exciting I'm not certain that they really offer a place for peoples interactions outside of entertainment. I adore the way the system works and can be user programmed, and I'm certain that there are markets that will flourish with these metaverse systems. But in the end they are still disconnected from the real world in a major way. Why go to a conference in a 3D world with an avatar (other than for kicks) when you could just have a video conference call just as easily.

However it seems to me that the real next step is Augmented Reality. With GPS and Mobil computing finally in our grasp this could really explode. Virtual real estate that can be fitted over the real world has value to just about everyone. Not to mention if this was incorporated with what I call a Mecha Subnet (where it could be integrated to help navigate traffic) it would serve a very useful purpose.

There are a few major roadblocks. If Augmented Reality glasses don't look totally lame and are not to heavy I could see people actually adopting them. Heck if the technology actually gets to be the size of contact lenses I think it would be adopted by the larger society. As well building the feedback systems into both real world locations and the machines so that they appear as a part of the augmented reality would take a massive investment. I'm afraid that only the big corporations would have the power to build it and that we would then be locked into a system we, as the users, would have no control over.

What I propose is something that should be started asap. An open source system of augmented reality done on the cheap. The hardware is around and the tools exist. Although this would start as a geek venture at some point others will begin to adopt and put into it. I imagine an augmented reality where the users can all have there own input in creating that AR. Imagine IRC channels but AR channels. The city you lived in could have a different design created by different groups. As well if you wanted to see an avatar of a friend that lives on the other side of the planet you could have them teleport before you. Anyway just a few thoughts.

Grab the power to create before we're all walking with glasses on watching virtual characters do coke commercial skits everywhere we go.

tanks,
end15
"advertise your new product here!"

Hard to see the added value

walking around in a 3d version of the net?
This keeps on poping up ervery once in a while and we been doing experiments with realtime-interactive webpages mapped onto arbitratry 3d object in a themeable/scriptable environment (adding mulit-user stuff using irc-channels) back in the days when we had to transfer the stuff into the OpenGL pixel buffer by hand (nowadays you even have functions like this build into Higher Level scenegraph APIs (and - heaven forbid - Direct3D). (description [spatialknowledge.com] and videos [spatialknowledge.com] and some screenshots [spatialknowledge.com] including browsing /. in 3D. So I really used to be a fan of all that Metaverse initiatives, 3D desktops etc. (and there are loooots of them nowadays)

IMHO the biggest unresolved problem however remains in this: Does the added value of spatial structures of information outweight the added complexity?

When will people learn...

The future of the past is not the present!

Just because some stupid girl used a GUI that moved a spotlight over some boxes in Jurassic Park doesn't mean we all have to slave away to build a system to waste our time in an equally useless manner.

3D not for Web but perhaps for file system

I can't possibly imagine what a 3D Web interface would have to offer me. As pointed out by other contributors, any place on the web is right next to any other place. We will never cruise the web as if it was a highway like in the movies, because we have no idea how to get from one web site to the next (unless we do a traceroute) - nor do we need to know. It would be a completely ridiculous task to memorize all the networks one must traverse to get from point A to point B.

For me, the substance of internet is mostly text - email, articles, reading Slashdot and other forums. How can 3D do anything to enhance text? Of course more and more information is available as audio or video, and that's great to have where appropriate, but there is nothing like the printed article to be able to browse at your own pace, skipping parts that don't interest you and reading a key paragraph twice. In fact, try to imagine the opposite - like - no printed matter - images only like in Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. It would suck!

However, I have often wished I could experiment with a good 3D virtualization of the file system on my computer. The logical analogy is easy to imagine - buildings with rooms full of shelves and filing cabinets with drawers of folders containing files. Each room could be very different in appearance. Each filing cabinet as well may look quite different from another. You could just throw some files into a pile of miscellany on top of a table somewhere to be sorted later. You may keep some things - like your motorcycle maintenance manual - in the garden shed. Your software tools could be on a workbench in the garage. You could store secrets in wall safe hidden behind a painting where nobody would ever think to look :)

One would quickly get to know the layout, and where to find things. Imagine telling a family member where to find that article you downloaded last week: "Go down that hall and turn right at the end of the corridor. It's on top of the shelf at the back of the room". I don't think our current drive/path/name structure really means anything at all to non-technical people, and that's the push behind Google Desktop and Window's new system they have been developing.

On my computer, I always run a minimum of two hard drives, and often three. Everything I have is stored on at least two different drives for backup purposes. I maintain available at my fingertips many years worth of my files - mostly C/C++ source code I developed going back over a decade. I call this "my code library". Even though it's not in any way organized as a library, I can usually find some example of code I wrote years ago that is still relevant to some current project. From frequently browsing through old files, one gets to know right where to go.

On the other hand, of course it gets harder all the time as my files number in the 100's of thousands. Google Desktop is a wonderful tool that allowed me to find things I didn't even know that I had, but is only useful if you invoke the right search key. There have been many situations where I could not come up with a suitable search phrase to find what I was looking for. In such a situation, there is nothing like browsing through old files to trigger your memories. This would be greatly enhanced with a 3D interface as I describe.

What is wrong with you people?

On behalf of everyone who ever read "Snow Crash" and wanted to play in that world: what's wrong with you? Many of us find this inherently cool, regardless of whether it's found to be useful. And drop the stupid "but we can't have 3D without 3D monitors!" meme; it's no more impossible than the 3D games like Doom and Unreal that we're playing today.

It might be a long time before we can achieve fully immersive environments, but I'd settle for an open protocol-driven explorable world on today's monitors. Have you all become so jaded that you don't find it all interesting? If someone dropped a working, documented, hackable VR terminal on your desk you wouldn't even bother to look at it? How can you call yourselves geeks without being excited about cool new technology?

Hiro Protagonist vs. Case: Who will win?

Place your bets!

The future of 3D web:

I think the 3D web will definately go to the same amazing heights and popularity as the 3D book, 3DTV and 3D films!

The application of 3D to information management

What's needed are people who can apply this technology well. VRML never took off because it required more technology to make and view than was financially viable.

Proper application of this has a lot of potential for information organization. Say a corporation wanted to represent what they're doing for the community. Instead of offering a bland community section on their website, they can represent the different aspects of the community within the actual community, and how their efforts changed the community superimposed. What if you could navigate the island of Lost on the web? There's a lot of potential within this, it just needs to be properly implemented.

My Web is Already 3D!

Well, 2.5D if you count tabs.

Web3d = OpenCroquet.org!

Morning Class:
"Web3d" is pronounced OpenCroquet.org

From the article:

  Croquet, an open-source software platform designed for creating collaborative, multiple-user online applications, showed off their software.

That's way understating OpenCroquet's abilities.

Why have a 3D Internet?

Because Neuromancer was cool.

Bathtime Surfing

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't bookshops sell a damn site more "black print on white page" books than they do 3D pop-up books? And isn't the reason for that because most people quite like the format of the boring, standard book?

Or can I expect a "plastic web" sometime in the future such that if I accidentally drop it in the bath, it doesn't get ruined?

3D environments for online courses

A 3D virtual environment that is as accessible as the current Web could be a boon to distance learning via online courses, especially for subjects like science, engineering, architecture, etc. Virtual world apps like Second Life or OpenCroquet will allow instructors to produce virtual, interactive, 3D demonstrations, models and other teaching aids that can be used collaboratively by students that are physically distant from each other and the instructor.

While a real-world laboratory class experience is certainly preferable, simulations in virtual lab settings for education and training are safer and may be more accessible to students who are in remote locations or to students who are disabled in some way that makes a real lab course difficult or impossible for them to attend.

Having taught physics and astronomy classes, I have often wished for a 3D chalkboard on which to draw diagrams to describe, for instance, electron motion in a magnetic field, or the difference between lunar phases and eclipses, or 3+ body gravitational interactions. In a 3D virtual classroom, I could do that. That technology is here and I would like to see it become integrated with the Web so that it is easy and cheap to access and use.

I'll grant that we have a ways to go before we have very good input/output devices for interacting with a Stephenson-like Metaverse, but for now my monitor and mouse will do. The I/O tech will catch up eventually. VR "goggles" are morphing into VR "glasses" or better yet augmented reality glasses. And Nintendo may be on to something with the Wii controller! We'll have to wait and see.

Concerning the skepticism of a 3D Web that I have seen posted in this discussion so far, I don't think the 2D Web will disappear as it gives way to a 3D Metaverse, but I do think there is room and use for both. I imagine that they will be tightly integrated and eventaully thought of as one entity. The Web is already a virtual world of sorts and we teleport around that world whenever we click a link. I imagine a 3D Web will work similarly while much of the content will continue to be displayed as 2D words on a page. However, more and more useful (and useless) content will show up as 3D objects of one sort or another.

Just my two cents.

Re:Only 3?

And these people call themselves visionaries. I'm holding out for 4D. :)

I once had a 4D sound card. No it wasn't one of these 5.1 channel sound cards, it only supported stereo outputs. Now I'm trying to remember how they got 4D out of two channels. I think they claimed accelerating 3D sound position calculations even when it was going to two speakers as 3D and an additional dimension was accelerating sound effects based on time.

In extension 4D could be achieved by simply caching everything that happens in a 3D web and being able to pick any point in the past to view what things looked like then.