Re: cross-platform scenegraph?

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Jenny Zhao (zhz++at++dandan.engr.sgi.com)
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 12:06:03 -0700


I can see your concerns. Trust me, you are not the first
one that has raised these points to us. One reason you have not
seen many postings like this on info-performer is because
this is a technical group. People have been pretty careful not
to use the bandwidth to engage in this kind of debate.

Please come to Friends of Performer at SIGGRAPH. I am looking forward
to having a great discussion with everyone.

On Aug 5, 10:45am, Kent Watsen wrote:
> Subject: cross-platform scenegraph?
>
>
> *** Sorry if you receive this more then once! ***
> *** Also, sorry about the off-topic Performer post ***
> *** Please read entire message before flaming... ***
>
> A few years back, when SGI was way ahead of everyone else
> in graphics technology, it was clear how one developed
> their VR application - Performer. Performer has been and
> is still a good scenegraph (straight forward, fast, stable).
> However, the times have changed and MIPS/Irix is no longer
> exclusively used development and/or deployment, as SGI
> itself has acknowledge thru its various multi-platform
> graphic API attempts (OpenGL, Cosmo3D, OpenGL++, Fahrenheit).
>
> As a developer of VR software, I have been patiently waiting
> for a "solution" - a cross-platform scenegraph (inc. low level
> api - opengl assumed) that meets my operational requirements:
>
> 1) straight forward, standard features, stable, etc.
>
> for obvious reasons...
>
> 2) low cost for development
>
> I'd be nice if everything were free, but I don't mind
> paying for my development environment.
>
> 3) No distribution restrictions or costs
>
> In order to realistically deploy applications outside
> the development environment, it is necessary to
> minimize the end user's installation process.
>
> 4) Written in Assembly/C/C++ with like API
>
> The reason for this is several fold. While the primary
> issue is maximizing runtime performance, there is the
> truism that all other languages are embedable, but not
> visa versa. Mind you, I am not promoting C/C++, as I
> believe languages have their strengths and weaknesses.
> But this is the only (efficient) way that I know of for
> code written in multiple language and executing in the
> same process space, to act on the same scenegraph. Why
> you would want to do that is left as an exercise for the
> reader (hint: look at http://watsen.net/Bamboo).
>
> 5) Available on many platforms
>
> Nobody likes to see their applications become obsolete,
> like that raytracer I wrote on my NeXT. One of the best
> features of Performer is that its had a long run, which
> is now to continue on Linux (yeah!). But, its not on
> Windows and that is a big audience. Clearly there is no
> technical reason why Performer can't be ported to Windows
> or many other platforms - it just doesn't make business
> sense for SGI (and, in the case of Windows, it may not
> even be legal). Too bad, as this would be my #1 choice.
>
>
> For a while there, I thought the my patience had paid off -
> Fahrenheit. Not that it was ever going to be on "many"
> platforms, but I knew that it would at least be on two (irix,
> windows) out of three (linux being the other) that I care
> about. But now that SGI has publicly announced a reduced
> interest in Fahrenheit, due to use restrictions in their
> contract with Microfoft, it appears that we (people trying
> to deploy solutions across platforms) are back to not having
> any cross-platform scenegraph solution.
>
>
> What are we to do?
>
> This really is a question for you all. What are your groups
> doing about all this? How come now one is talking? Is my
> group the only one that feels abandoned?
>
>
> To get the discussion rolling, I see a few viable alternatives:
>
> 1) design code to use existing platform specific graphic APIs.
>
> this could either be done using a "common denominator"
> api wrapper or be done using a factory pattern (OO term
> for moving specialization into a derived class). The
> first approach allows for code-reuse while the second
> allows for platform-specific extensions. If anybody
> has done this, please share...
>
> 2) find a vendor-neutral solution
>
> does anyone know of a company out there selling something
> meeting the above requirements (language bindings optional)?
>
> 3) find an open-source solution
>
> does anyone know of an open-source solution out there
> meeting the above requirements (language bindings optional)?
> BTW, I am open to the idea of starting one if need be...
>
>
> And before you say it: yes, Java3D is great - too bad Java's GC
> is so unpredictable....
>
>
> PS: I subscribe to all the mailing lists I sent this to
>
> PPS: see you at SIGGRAPH!
>
>
> Kent Watsen
> http://watsen.net/kent
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/software/performer/
> Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
> Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com
>-- End of excerpt from Kent Watsen

-- 
Jenny Zhao        zhz++at++engr.sgi.com     650 933-5091	IRIS Performer Manager

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Thu Aug 05 1999 - 12:06:09 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.