This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > VRML > December 2006 > comparing contact and cortona
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
comparing contact and cortona
|
|
| Steve Smith 2006-11-19, 7:36 pm |
| It's difficult to fairly compare browsers because we tend to work to the
strengths of the browser developer on and then curse when it doesn't look so
good on another browser. Since Cosmo shuttered I've tried to develop
cross-platform for Contact and Cortona but abandoned this because you work
with the lowest combined platform and the proprietary features are too cool
to not use.
So I now use Contact & Cortona for different jobs.
CORTONA
The big strength of Cortona is its robustness, conformance and accuracy.
Especially cool is the touchSensor which has allowed us to digitize
accurately off terrain models of 100000 polys. Contact is hopeless here, it
gives up with a few dozen polygons and can only really notify mouse in/out.
The big weakness of Cortona, for us, are those wretched texture flashes when
switching LODs. Why can't the LOD not change until the new texture is fully
loaded ? Contact is much better but will sometimes still flash when changing
a heavy texture.
CONTACT
The big strength of contact is a nicer; smoother browsing experience. The
frame rates are higher and the user interface is more intuitive. I specially
like the way, in fly mode, that you follow up and down over hill tops and
then carry on in level flight. Also love the way its so easy to set up
multi-user via blaxxun community.
So come on you browser developers lets have the best of all worlds !
I wonder how other users would rate flux, octaga, freewrl, xj3d in terms of
the above.
Steve
| |
|
| pretty much how i see it,
i like the way scripts run very fast in contact, but for anything
dynamic, where this speed would be really useful, finding ways of
avoiding the long and distinguished list of gotcha's in contact becomes
just too much.
simon
| |
| Joerg Scheurich aka MUFTI 2006-11-19, 7:36 pm |
| > I wonder how other users would rate flux, octaga, freewrl, ...
The weakest point of the current stable freewrl is it's PERL based parser,
which is really ssssslllllooooowwww for big worlds 8-(
The weakest point of the current beta freewrl is it's non PERL based parser,
which breaks Scripts and PROTOs 8-(
so long
MUFTI
--
Die erforderliche Kompilierung-Mindest-Option zu dem Generieren der
entsprechenden Hafencodesequenz für eine Windows-Basierte Anwendung
ist das /Gw-Switch in Windows 3.0
Artikel-ID: 88190 Version: 1.1
| |
|
| Steve Smith ha scritto:
[...]
> So come on you browser developers lets have the best of all worlds !
[...]
I've been working with Cortona since a couple of years, for developing a
quite complex 3D application under MFC, using its ActiveX control and
COM interfaces...it fits our needs, but it's just a *slow* engine, when
you go for big worlds, or use GeoVrml elevation grids...
I'd like to try out Contact, but I won't pay before I try, and I can't
see any trial sdk-download...do you ?
| |
| Steve Smith 2006-11-19, 7:36 pm |
|
Contact may give you a 30% improvement at best.
Your problem is that elevation grid is a hopelessly inefficient way of
handling a DTM on any engine.
You need to use TIN (triangular irregular network) held as IFS.
With TIN you can reduce poly count by 90% with negligible accuracy loss.
If your software does not support TIN then try to save as IFS and then use
Parallel Graphics Model Optimiser (which in effect produces a TIN)
Parallel Graphics Model Optimiser is well worth the investment and a 'must
have' Cortona companion.
Steve
> COM interfaces...it fits our needs, but it's just a *slow* engine, when
> you go for big worlds, or use GeoVrml elevation grids...
> I'd like to try out Contact, but I won't pay before I try, and I can't see
> any trial sdk-download...do you ?
There is some info the the blaxxun contact 5 documentation.
| |
|
| > The big strength of Cortona is its robustness
That's too funny.
Contact is far more robust than Cortona.
Cortona sacrificed alot I think for a small download size.
Cortona goes to the big-blue screen of death when
dealing with small floating decimal places like when
modifying the pitch field in AudioClip Nodes.
Not even Cosmoplayer did that.
It also can't seem to handle moving VisibilitySensors
en-masse like Contact.
I speak from an experience with someone who attempted to use
AvatarStudio avatars (which are equipped with VisibiltySensors
to control gestures) in Deep Matrix using Cortona rather than Contact
as an MU browser.
It didn't go over so well. Took away the VisibilitySensors and it
worked,
but even then Cortona simply can't handle nearly as many avatars
as Contact. Contact isn't perfect. I think both Cortona and Cosmoplayer
are probably closer to the spec in terms of appearance issues, but in
terms of robustness Contact is all over them.
tc
Russ
Steve Smith wrote:
> It's difficult to fairly compare browsers because we tend to work to the
> strengths of the browser developer on and then curse when it doesn't look so
> good on another browser. Since Cosmo shuttered I've tried to develop
> cross-platform for Contact and Cortona but abandoned this because you work
> with the lowest combined platform and the proprietary features are too cool
> to not use.
>
> So I now use Contact & Cortona for different jobs.
>
> CORTONA
>
> The big strength of Cortona is its robustness, conformance and accuracy.
> Especially cool is the touchSensor which has allowed us to digitize
> accurately off terrain models of 100000 polys. Contact is hopeless here, it
> gives up with a few dozen polygons and can only really notify mouse in/out.
> The big weakness of Cortona, for us, are those wretched texture flashes when
> switching LODs. Why can't the LOD not change until the new texture is fully
> loaded ? Contact is much better but will sometimes still flash when changing
> a heavy texture.
>
>
> CONTACT
>
> The big strength of contact is a nicer; smoother browsing experience. The
> frame rates are higher and the user interface is more intuitive. I specially
> like the way, in fly mode, that you follow up and down over hill tops and
> then carry on in level flight. Also love the way its so easy to set up
> multi-user via blaxxun community.
>
> So come on you browser developers lets have the best of all worlds !
>
> I wonder how other users would rate flux, octaga, freewrl, xj3d in terms of
> the above.
>
>
> Steve
| |
|
|
Russ wrote:
>
> That's too funny.
> Contact is far more robust than Cortona.
>
> Cortona sacrificed alot I think for a small download size.
> Cortona goes to the big-blue screen of death when
> dealing with small floating decimal places like when
> modifying the pitch field in AudioClip Nodes.
> Not even Cosmoplayer did that.
>
have done exactly this and never had a blue screen from either player,
find them both quite stable, have you tried this on a few machines,
could it be your drivers to blame? althought i think a lot of window
software ends up working round what common hardware drivers complain
about.
| |
| jake reid 2006-12-06, 7:37 pm |
| I think you are spot on, on your advice to Russ regarding graphic
drivers. I have noticed this on a few machines where the graphics
sometimes have the wrong drivers. This allows ignorance to play a
part in judgement regarding what`s the best! I have no problems with
Contact but prefer Cortona overall. Anything else are mere emulators.
Jake the auld Jock
On 3 Dec 2006 16:35:14 -0800, "simon" <psiplace@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>Russ wrote:
>
>have done exactly this and never had a blue screen from either player,
>find them both quite stable, have you tried this on a few machines,
>could it be your drivers to blame? althought i think a lot of window
>software ends up working round what common hardware drivers complain
>about.
| |
| Steve Smith 2006-12-06, 7:37 pm |
| > Contact but prefer Cortona overall. Anything else are mere emulators.
I was hoping that someone would reply and say that flux or ocataga would
give the best of all worlds with Mac & Linux versions coming. Oh well.
VRML/X3D will struggle until there is one stable browser for PC, Mac &
Linux.
I've been doing this for 10 years now and still getting no nearer to William
Gibsonian Cyberspace.
S
| |
|
|
Steve Smith wrote:
>
> I was hoping that someone would reply and say that flux or ocataga would
> give the best of all worlds with Mac & Linux versions coming. Oh well.
>
> VRML/X3D will struggle until there is one stable browser for PC, Mac &
> Linux.
>
> I've been doing this for 10 years now and still getting no nearer to William
> Gibsonian Cyberspace.
>
> S
ocataga has always been very unstable for me, i've tried it twice over
the last year or so, drivers? or just needs quite a modern machine.
i've also been checking out flux beta, for a while now, and it has
generally proven OK, it can't run many of my worlds, because most have
scripts, and there is a bad bug in the script support, apart from that
seems to be highly conforming, runs at a similar speed to cortona,
looks ok, navigates well, but a lot of niceties missing so still
definitely a beta.
both prefer a newer machine to what the 3 c's will tolerate.
| |
|
| Seems to me there is a problem with common sense here.
Now let me get this straight....
I have a world that modifies the pitchfield of an AudioClip
Node with small floating decimal places. The world
works fine in both Contact and Cosmoplayer. However
it sends Cortona to the blue screen of death. And the
problem is a driver and not Cortona?
Seems to me Cortona was out-voted 2 to 1.
jake reid wrote:[color=darkred]
> I think you are spot on, on your advice to Russ regarding graphic
> drivers. I have noticed this on a few machines where the graphics
> sometimes have the wrong drivers. This allows ignorance to play a
> part in judgement regarding what`s the best! I have no problems with
> Contact but prefer Cortona overall. Anything else are mere emulators.
>
> Jake the auld Jock
>
> On 3 Dec 2006 16:35:14 -0800, "simon" <psiplace@netscape.net> wrote:
>
| |
|
| > I've been doing this for 10 years now and still getting no nearer to William
> Gibsonian Cyberspace.
I suggest moving to Second Life. Looks like SL is trying for all three
OS.
The reason VRML hasn't really progressed to your desired goal can
be summed up in one word: money
tc
Russ Kinter
Steve Smith wrote:
>
> I was hoping that someone would reply and say that flux or ocataga would
> give the best of all worlds with Mac & Linux versions coming. Oh well.
>
> VRML/X3D will struggle until there is one stable browser for PC, Mac &
> Linux.
>
> I've been doing this for 10 years now and still getting no nearer to William
> Gibsonian Cyberspace.
>
> S
| |
|
|
Russ wrote:
> Seems to me there is a problem with common sense here.
> Now let me get this straight....
> I have a world that modifies the pitchfield of an AudioClip
> Node with small floating decimal places. The world
> works fine in both Contact and Cosmoplayer. However
> it sends Cortona to the blue screen of death. And the
> problem is a driver and not Cortona?
> Seems to me Cortona was out-voted 2 to 1.
Russ wrote:
> Seems to me there is a problem with common sense here.
> Now let me get this straight....
> I have a world that modifies the pitchfield of an AudioClip
> Node with small floating decimal places. The world
> works fine in both Contact and Cosmoplayer. However
> it sends Cortona to the blue screen of death. And the
> problem is a driver and not Cortona?
> Seems to me Cortona was out-voted 2 to 1.
>
you seem to be thinking drivers are somehow linear, with a simple one
to one relationship between what goes in and what is produced, if only.
Cortona could easily be using a completely different part of a driver
than the other two, a part with a bug, a real test is to try different
machines with different drivers/hardware and see if it occurs on all of
them, that's why i told you it didn't happen on mine, because that is
really good evidence its not the program, also a blue screen is much
much more likely to come from a driver, and a pretty poor one at that.
i think you should try googling for known issues with your sound set-up.
| |
|
|
> I'd like to try out Contact, but I won't pay before I try, and I can't
> see any trial sdk-download...do you ?
why can't you use an old version, still fast, and they don't seem to be
into bug fixing, more just adding new features, so if you dont use the
new features there isn't much of a problem.
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|