Three 3D Web Browsers Reviewed

mikemuch writes "Use that graphics card for something besides games. ExtremeTech has a group review of three browsers that use some aspect of 3D to display the Web. While none of them are going to put Firefox or IE out of business any time soon, they're fun to play with and give a new slant to the Web." From the article: "Whatever happened to the virtual reality, 3D world of the Web? Back in the late '90s, all the hype was about VRML -- Virtual Reality Markup Language -- which would turn the web into an immersive environment that you'd maneuver around to get to the information you wanted. We're here to tell you that the reports of the 3D Web's death are greatly exaggerated."

Not dead

But still completely useless and unneeded

Re:Not dead

No way, dude. Boobs've gotta be WAY better in 3D.

Re:Not dead

No way, dude. Talking about 3D, real boobs are WAY better than virtual boobs.

Re:Not dead

We're Slashdot readers, we wouldn't know.

Re:Not dead

It is very much not dead. Look at any MMORPG or FPS. It's the internet and people are networked through a 3D world are they not? But outside of games getting information would actually be more difficult in a 3D world. The information you want is all 2D anyway, text, images, video, ect. It would cause lag, waste system resources and cause many other problems. For gaming, 3D worlds are very important and add to the realism and strategy involved. For gathering or sharing information a 2D world simply works better! Adding another dimension doesn't mean it's better. Thats like saying adding more salt to a recipe will make it taste better. Sounds good in theory until the final result is so salty you will want to throw up.

*Notice I avoided (yet another) car reference*

Re:Not dead

It may be useless in its current incarnation, but that doesn't mean someone won't come up with a good way to use it as the technology matures.

The main problem is that people have this nifty tool, but they keep applying it to bolt it onto an existing interface instead of really trying to create a new one. (And when they do try to create a new one, the drawbacks outweigh the advantages. I swear, these "airport/city" metaphors and the like remind me of nothing so much as Microsoft Bob.) It's like using advanced 3D graphics to render a console app -- in a hard-to-read font.

Someone needs to figure out what a 3D display brings to the table, and build on that. Texture-mapping the 2D web onto the walls doesn't accomplish much.

The 3D Web state-of-the-union in a soundbite:

Texture-mapping the 2D web onto the walls doesn't accomplish much.

That's the problem with ALL of the 3D web-browsing/user-interface implementations right now. You use markup and controls that are designed to render onto a flat 2D raster surface. It seems logical to bundle an existing renderer (an IE/gecko control, or a UI toolkit window rendering) and point it at a texture, and then schlep that into a 3D framework... but that's just so completely wrong.

At least for web browsing... if you want to make it 3D then you first need to WRITE a 3d renderer for XHTML. You need to figure out some way of interpreting the tags and markup and using 3d (or 3d accelerated algorithms) to do something intelligent with all that CSS and hints.

You are going to need to at least have an antialiased glyph renderer for text. Either using real polygons or dynamically created texture maps (maybe a single mip-mapped texture for each character).
Because on the web the most important thing to be able to have is LEGIBLY RENDERED TEXT.

Maybe for the sake of keeping polycounts low you reserve the shape-defined text for h1/h2 tags and render the rest as rasters. But do something useful with them.

Don't start putting textures containing text at oblique angles unless you've got it at least 2x oversampled. Instead, render it to a surface in a bounding box and "float" it where you want but keep it's normal pointed straight at the view frustrum. Or use a particle or sprite primitive.

Come on people!

Have a look at some demoscene demostrations and how they integrate text and 3d. I guarantee you can always read the text clearly (as it is often used to convey jokes or greetz). And that stuff is just for fun.

Obligatory Movie reference

Hack the Gibson!! [nyud.net]

Not the first time...

...that 3D graphics have been used to display web data. Back in the early 90s, CompuServe had a virtual mall which was a bit like that. It was painfully slow; a real gimmick. I can't see any benefit beyond the gimmick for then, and now.

Re:Not the first time...

> I can't see any benefit beyond the gimmick for then, and now.

This missed opportunity to employ 3D web browsing technology has been brought to you by...
Breasts!

Smells Like Hype

My first thought was VRML and what a clunky thing that was before it all but vanished. I've still got books and CD's for doing stuff in it, in a box somewhere, probably in the car-port.

Not really what I had in mind when I thought about what would make for decent 3D browsing. This looks like something you could knock off in a plug-in, like Flash. Probably has some decent uses, like creating a game on your own website or a Realtor giving you a VR tour of a house (which i think someone nearby already has.) Handy for exploring a Mall, to see where a shop is rather than looking at those little hand-bills which are sometimes so artsy-fartsy you just try to go in the general direction and hope you find it. Hope people keep these sites updated. More content==more overhead for maintenance.

Second Life

Second Life is a sort of 3D web browser. To me, Second Life is everything I envisioned and more when I first heard about VRML.

Re:Second Life

I've only tried Second Life for a few hours, but I agree with you there. Unfortunately, it's still very difficult to navigate and otherwise interact with -- at least compared to the web as we know it today. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a fully 3D web, but I'm not willing to sacrifice functionality to get it.

Some things are better in 3D, some not

We need a decent ubiquitous 3D plugin for things like showing off stuff you can buy in 3D.

We don't need a browser to show us a 3D representation of the web, because that is too much information. Hyperbolic mappings are not somehow more intuitive than simple lists. In fact, they are less so.

When we get common 3D displays and controllers, then my position will change.

Lacks an application

I can see the need for "visualisation". See, the step from command line to graphical interface surely did some good for people who can't be bothered to learn the commands. While this caused the influx of dimwits to the web, it certainly was something that faciliated the approach by heaps. The information can be presented in a way that is easier to understand.

Now, 3D graphics on a 2D display is the opposite. Instead of presenting information in an easier understandable way, it obscures it. Basically, what we lack now is suitable interfaces. Input as well as output. The mouse is not the best way to navigate in a three dimensional world, neither is a non-stereo view the best display for it.

My guess would be the new interface for Vista will face a similar fate.

3D

Whatever happened to the virtual reality, 3D world of the Web?

As long as the screen on my computer is 2D I don't think the 3D web will really take off. Now, if you can get me some cheap VR glasses and gloves, that's another matter.

-Grey [wellingtongrey.net]

the best 3d web thingy ever

The best 3d web thing I've ever seen is Apple's dashboard widgets in OSX. Each widget can have a (nicely standardized) button which activates the preferences for the widget. The prefrences are on the back of the widget. Literally when you click the prefs button the widget flips over in 3d animation and you interact with the preference panel.

I find this incredible because a) it's an amazing practical use of 3d and b) it's not at all flashy or trying to create a 'new 3d browsing paradigm' or some such silliness. Instead, Apple has used the graphics tools available to them and once again, made a fantastic advance in user interfaces.

Before you call me an Apple fanboy, you should know that I don't even own a Mac, I just think they're neat is all.

Sigh

It is understandable that if your only tool is a hammer, every problem will look like a nail. However, when every problem is a nail, why the hell would you look for a screwdriver?

Wii?

When I first heard about a web browser being put onto the Wii, it occurred to me that this would be an excellent opportunity to add some 3D capabilities to the web. The Wii has a pointer that can simulate a mouse, but the analog controller might actually make moving around a 3D environment to find information easier than surfing in any conventional fashion. I don't know about you guys, but I think it would be fun to fly around in a 3D information-laden room with the nunchuku firmly in hand, grabbing at relevent pieces with the wiimote.

Terrifying Vision

I just had a horrible nightmare about flash ads going 3d....

The extreme annoying-ness is too much for my feeble brain to handle.

Imagine the most hyperactive ADD person you know.

Now imagine them when they go into hyperactive mode that happens right before they need a nap.

Now give them lots and lots of soda and candy.

Now give them some crystal meth.

This is half the annoying-ness of a 3d flash ad.

Already tried

Microsoft already tried placing small items/thumbnails in a "3D" environment. It was called Microsoft Bob [toastytech.com] and it failed completely.

No 3D browsers before flying cars, dammit!

The flying car was promised loooooong before the 3D web browser.

It's time that we draw a line in the sand: no further development on the 3D browser until a commercially viable flying car hits the market.

3D + Internet, not 3D + Web

3D is useful (even with 2D screens) for all kinds of data, and conventional interfaces are adequate, if not ideal, for working with it (otherwise, we wouldn't have 3D games). But 3D's internet utility, I think, is going to materialize in forms that are very much not like what we think of as "web browsers", though there may be some overlap (of course, "Web" applications are becoming increasingly ill-suited to the traditional web browser model as well, leading browsers to increasingly become fairly generic application platforms) -- I think that things like OpenCroquet are more like where internet 3D will bloom than 3D adaptations or plugins for traditional web-browsers.

Packard Bell Navigator

Back in 1996, Packard Bell computers came with this thing installed, called navigator. It was a picture of an office, with a desk and shelves and books and things. Clicking on the items would take you to different applications, file system browsers, etc.

It was stupid then, and it's stupid now.

Re:Hmmm...

And many things are not all they are 'hyped' up to me.

Like grammar, for example. :P