Re: Looks Like They Want To Charge for ActiveVRML

Neophytos Iacovou ([email protected])
Wed, 13 Dec 1995 16:13:34 -0600 (CST)


James Waldrop writes:

> The trouble I see politically (not technically, there are other troubles
> for that), is the following:
>
> SGI's WebSpace is effectively the reference VRML browser implementation.

It is?!!? Len Bullard just posted that he uses WebFX as his reference
browser. I use VRweb. I'm sure plenty of other people use something else.

> Let's run the same thought scenario with ActiveVRML (RBML). Presumably
> Microsoft would have the first RBML browser, and presumably it would also
> hold the coveted position of "reference implementation." Unfortunately,
> in this case, it's also on the dominant platform. So Microsoft would have
> the "best" browser on the most common platform. Where do folks like Paper
> Software and Chaco Communications go after this? They are effectively shut
> out of the game, if you ask me. I don't think this would be a good thing.

So we shouldn't look at ActiveVRML because if we did and we liked it
Microsoft would make money from it, more money than Paper Software and
Chaco Communications?

BTW: who are Paper Software and Chaco Communications?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neophytos Iacovou Distributed Computing Services
University of Minnesota 100 Union St. SE
email: [email protected] Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA


  • Next message: James Waldrop: "Re: Looks Like They Want To Charge for ActiveVRML"
  • Previous message: Neophytos Iacovou: "Re: Looks Like They Want To Charge for ActiveVRML"
  • In reply to: James Waldrop: "Re: Looks Like They Want To Charge for ActiveVRML"