I forgot to mention my background with Java3D:
I am actually new to Java3D (only picked it up 2 months ago) but I am planning
on using it for a large commercial CAD program. My main requirements from
Java3D from a commercial point of view is:
- Continued support/development (open-source availability like the JDK with a
reference implementation and support offerings from Sun)
- One of my main advantages over my competitors is cross-platform support. The more
platforms Java3D supports, the more money I will likely be making.
- Lastly, my CAD application (if successful) will become huge over time. Java3D, being
a high-level API on top of OpenGL, is actually a very important detail for my
business. I do not want to be fiddling with and micromanaging low-level OpenGL details
as they are beyond the concern of my business. Flexibility is good but my point is
that Java3D as a product is an *important* piece of the Java + 3D-world puzzle. Sun
should not simply replace it with a low-level OpenGL binding.
And as a sidenote, as other people have been saying: DirectX support would be
"nice" (in so far as Java3D would be even more cross-platform) but it is in no
way necessary. Frankly, I believe the way to go with DirectX support is:
- Sun provides a reference OpenGL implementation of Java3D on Windows (only supports
OpenGL binding)
- Anyone is able to view the reference implementation's source codes
- Anyone is able to port *the* (I say "the" because it would be standard) underlying
OpenGL binding to their platforms (hopefully sources are out for this too) thereby
automatically porting Java3D over to their platform as well.
- I am 100% sure some Win32 guys will come along and create their own DirectX
JOGL-like binding, then go and implement their own implementation of Java3D on top of
their DirectX binding. There is enough demand among Win32 people to make this happen
even if Sun doesn't implement it themselves. The point is that people should
be legally able to create their own DirectX-binding and Java3D implementation on top
of that binding as long as they follow the standards set forth by Sun regarding the
Java3D API specification. The same goes for anyone wishing to port the OpenGL-binding
to another platform; as long as they follow the specifications they should be
allowed to release it.
I hope this works out well for all of us.
Gili
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 15:34:51 -0700, Justin Couch wrote:
>As many of you know, I've been involved with Java3D for a very long
>period of time. This has given me, and consequently my company (we' a
>small contracting shop) access to many different people within Sun.
>Right now, we find ourselves in an interesting position with regards to
>the whole Java and 3D graphics community. There will be more
>announcements and so forth over the next week or two, but now I have a
>specific request of the Java3D community to provide us with feedback,
>that we can then pass on, and hopefully help make a difference.
>
>
>Let's start with the assumption that Sun is no longer, and will never be
> supporting Java3D. There is a body of code lying dormant inside Sun.
>Now, look to the future.
>
>What I am seeking is as many responses as possible from everyone here,
>either private or public about what your future holds either definitely
>or as a wish list, with respect to Java3D. Both positive and negative
>comments are encouraged. I specifically looking for answers on what you
>would prefer to happen. Here are some different responses that I'm
>thinking people could give:
>
>- Java3D is not useful in any way to my projects. I've left it for
>something else (eg Xith3D or LWJGL because you are gaming oriented).
>Better off to leave it to wither on the vine.
>
>- It's a good thing and I use it in many of my projects. If someone was
>out there actively supporting it, we would continue to use it. I don't
>really care what the codebase is doing, so long as it is actively being
>developed.
>
>- Chunks of Java3D are of particular interest to me. It would be really
>good if I could have parts X, Y and Z were released as open source.
>
>- I'd like Java3D to be completely open sourced so that I can take it
>and support/develop it myself. I'm not really interested in long term
>someone else support, but with the source code available, my own
>projects can continue to move forward.
>
>- I'd like Java3D to be completely open sourced, but really I want
>someone to be a steward of the codebase to make sure that there is a
>central "reference" implementation to work with. Alternatively, we could
>pay someone else to do the maintenance on it. I'd like to recommend that
>you consider ABC Company/Consortium be given the code to work with.
>
>- If I had access to the source, I'd like to help develop it further
>along the direction of product market LMN (eg CAD-specific or SciViz).
>
>- It's of mild interest to me. I was planning on moving off it, but if
>it was open sourced, then we would hang around and continue to use it.
>
>- Having the code there as a reference would be really useful to me. I
>already have plans to build my own scene graph/rendering engine, and
>don't really plan to use Java3D code directly, but knowing some of the
>design decisions would be really handy.
>
>
>I'd appreciate it if in your response you could give some small
>background of the type of projects you are using it for. For example - a
>university, so it is being used as a teach tool or visualisation engine
>for experimentation.
>
>Note that myself and Yumetech are not wanting to use this information to
>market to you or anything like that. We're in a position to provide a
>case to Sun about what to do with their code. We're basically going to
>package up the replies, put a summary on it about the general mood
>expressed and then chat about the results with the appropriate people in
>Sun. Sun is a big an varied company, with not all parts marching to the
>same tune. They're interesting in working out what the current business
>cases are surrounding Java3D. They are certainly not even remotely
>considering Sun putting any engineering resources into continuing Java3D
>development, but they are looking at whether it is worthwhile helping
>others to do so. We're certainly not looking for a specific response
>like "please open source it" - if the majority of people really couldn't
>care less about Java3D, then we'll pass that along too.
>
>Please feel free to pass this message along to anyone that you feel may
>want to respond - particularly if you know of people that have already
>moved away from Java3D and are no longer on this list. I'll be posting
>this to the javagaming site later this evening.
>
>--
>Justin Couch http://www.vlc.com.au/~justin/
>Java Architect & Bit Twiddler http://www.yumetech.com/
>Author, Java 3D FAQ Maintainer http://www.j3d.org/
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>"Humanism is dead. Animals think, feel; so do machines now.
>Neither man nor woman is the measure of all things. Every organism
>processes data according to its domain, its environment; you, with
>all your brains, would be useless in a mouse's universe..."
> - Greg Bear, Slant
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>===========================================================================
>To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
>of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
