Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Thu 23rd Jul 2009 19:08 UTC
Google Google announced their O3D plugin for Windows, Mac, and Linux platforms a few months ago, and that was all very well and exciting; this will enable advanced 3D effects to be performed directly in the browser. These new 3D standards on the web will be a very exciting new step in technology. Lately, though, Google has also announced that O3D will eventually be integrated into Chrome. In the words of Greg Spencer, a programmer from Google, "The O3D team is working on getting O3D integrated into the Chromium build, and we're close to being able to complete our first step towards integration. I'll be making the Windows build of Chromium be dependent upon building O3D as part of the build process."
Thread beginning with comment 375057
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: O3D vs. CSS 3D
by raynevandunem on Fri 24th Jul 2009 14:54 UTC in reply to "RE: O3D vs. CSS 3D"
Member since:

I'd say o3d is much more than svg, e.g. what I do now with o3d (display interactive 3d visualization of 3d point clouds) I couldn't achieve with svg. So I'm currently quite happy with it. A bid of sadness comes from the unavailability for Linux (well, there's this, but it s*cks big time). Other than that it's great stuff.

I know that O3D is currently more extensive than normal SVG. It's that Apple wants to extend their 3D CSS to both HTML and SVG; as in, allow for 3D styling of traditionally-2D SVG (as SVG is already been compatible with 2D CSS for a while now). From the looks of it, Apple's idea will involve a minimum of JavaScript involvement, or at least they're trying to relegate JS to something that people and designers would rarely/barely ever encounter in the final outcome of a 3D web design or animation, while Google's idea is a JavaScript API that can involve greater effort of web developers.

Most recent example with HTML (for WebKit nightly on Leopard): (Video; derived from );
assorted examples with Mozilla Gecko (Firefox 3.5 or higher):

Reply Parent Score: 2