>
> I'm expecting the average user to own a 486 or Pentium machine with a 2D
> accelerator board of some kind and not a high-end machine (be it Windows NT
PC
> with a 3D accelerator or UNIX workstation).
This won't be true forever. I think its a bad idea to limit VRML based
on the technology that the average user has available to them today. The
level of 3D performance on the average machine will only get better. We
better think about it now. Evans and Sutherland sells a PC card today that
does texture mapping in real time for $2400, so it will probably be here
sooner than most of us could imagine.
Also, VRML can help accelerate this process. If people find interactive 3D
compelling, they will be more compelled to outfit thier machine to handle it.
On the other hand, if 3D seems slow and burdensome, then people will just
wonder what all the hype is about, and download some more flat, boring,
non-interactive, 2D flatlander stuff.
>
> The ElevationGrid idea is a *good* one, but grids of 100x100 are probably all
> your basic PC will handle easily. One nice thing about grids is that you can
> do automatic LODs by sub-sampling the grid.
"will handle easily" today, but what about tomorrow.
jim terhorst (MountainTop::Computing) [email protected]