Re: The State Of The Art

[Christian Lavoie <clavoie enter-net com>]

> >(Stand in the middle of a sphere, and have a plane perpendicular
> >(which represents the screen) to your field of view go away from you
> >on a radius of the sphere, the last point would be right in front of
> >your viewpoint, where the center of the window is, so all else would
> >be before that point, from your perspective.)
> Hum - I hadn't thought of using real 3d, partly because of the CPU 
needs,
> partly because 3d interfaces are a whole other ballgame.  I was just 
using
> the sphere conceptually; the part of the sphere that you could see 
would
> always be flat and up "against the glass" of your monitor (like a 
spherical
> balloon pushed up against a flat surface).
> Otherwise all your windows need to be distorted, and therefore become
> unreadable.
> dr g

1) Actually, I thought that only the center of the window would be on 
the sphere, preventing distortion, the window being flat... the 
corners of that window would actually rest on another hypothetical 
sphere's edge.

Without true 3D, I think it'll be hard to present a small model of the 
sphere anyway.

2) True 3D apps are becoming easier in today's world with more 
powerful computers. Whether or not you go for a real 3D environment 
depends on the goals of the project, though I think you should aim the 
higher you can. When 2d flat UIs first started, the CPUs were on their 
knees too. Let's just say you'd be writing the standard for computers 
in 5 years from now.

3) 3D Environment are crap today, I have to agree. Though I don't 
think this is because the idea itself sucks. Only the implementations.

Christian Lavoie
clavoie@enter-net.com
UIN: 947212




> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com