> The gist of VRML seems to be that, at the moment, only
> those blesses with SGIs and NT based boxes are able to enjoy VRML.
> ALthough I know thast TGS is working on a Win3.1 / 95 browser, what kind
...and Microsoft...
> of power will VRML require to be accessable? I would guess that at least
> a dx2/66 cpu will be a requirement, and if VRML starts approacing the
> heights that seem to be beginning to be talked about here, then a Pentium
> will be in order. Perhaps we should concentrate on getting a basic form
> of useable VRML, available to the masses, on line before we start to move
> into the higher reaches of cyberspace.
I agree with you. But for those "underpowered" systems, they simply turn
off the options. Sounds won't bounce of walls, light won't reflect, they
lose detail...etc..etc.. VRML can be parsed ANYWAY a client so choses
(well.. almost anyway). But you must put the capabilites there for the
"high-end" systems. We need to give VRML the ability to do EVERYTHING.
How much of that information the designer uses, or the client interprets
is up to each individual.