3Dwm Updates 94
Robert Karlsson writes "3Dwm, the Three-dimensional window manager, an open source project at Chalmers Medialab, has just released a new, extensive release of 3Dwm, release 0.2.2 - VNC support, 3D scene graph, big texture splitting, client connection, framework, 3D materials support, testsuite added." miles away from a real desktop, but a great testbed for those ideas that are way ahead of their time.
Re:*Shakes head* *confused look* why? (Score:1)
What I find strange is that Win 95 will run fine on a 486, but in my experience X chokes with insufficent ram. X itself is bloated, and building a WM on top of that adds to the problem. Quakes footprint is not ALL that bad, and again, you would have to modify the code for your specific purpose anyhow.
I would love to get Carmacks opinion on this.
Re:VNC support? (Score:3)
--Ben
Guys.... (and gals) (Score:4)
I agree that burying Linux, typically the darling OS of the "why do I need a GUI when I can just grep -v -x | sed -qvf | tar -qt32pir2 : smeek -frfk > kibble.rpm ?????" set, in a 3D window manager seems weird: a total waste of CPU cycles, a criminal waste of memory, and an exponentially bad version of Microsoft Bob (eye candy that actually got in the way).
But who knows? Maybe someone will come up with a way of visualising and representing data that'll only make sense this way.
Time mechanics data? Physics data? Who knows?
Just because I can't think of a reason for this yet doesn't mean one exists.
No, that was FSN (Score:2)
Re:"This is Unix! I KNOW this!" (Score:1)
Re:VNC support? (Score:1)
Re:big deal (Score:1)
Re:Generic Slashdot Post (Score:1)
We wouldnt have to worry about using anything but those "totally adequate" 386's ehh?
If no one ever dared to push the limits of everything, and of no one ever dared to be different or try something new how would we know what works and what doesnt?
Jeremy
Slashdotted (Score:1)
----------
No big deal (Score:2)
Re:Oh, but if only... (Score:2)
If you are interested in fully interactive controls look at that technology - biocontrol [biocontrol.com] has some cool toys to play with too
Sweet Merciful Crap... (Score:5)
If the only thing we can vary in our user interfaces is how many dimensions they display, its going to be a long time before we make any inroads into dealing with large amounts of data using arbitrarily generated paradigms that minimize the energy input required to acquire a particular piece of information.
DATA--that is, what computers deal with--DOES NOT require a user interface mapped to the tangible nature of our reality.
People seem obsessed with the question, "Where is it??? How is it arranged?? How is it layed out???" while the question "WHAT is it??" seems to elude them.
Sorry if this post seems angry, but this isn't ahead of its time at all. Our interfaces and computers are BEHIND the times. (assuming objective time... yeah, we're both wrong I guess)
Just my $.02, and yes, I am working on my own interface, but I am only 1 person, so it's going to be awhile.
--
Disgruntled AC
Re:Isn't It Obvious Yet? (Score:1)
Re:Guys.... (and gals) (Score:2)
The Star Destroyer could be rendered in 2D GUI but in an application window in 3D... right? It's interesting. I'm curious as to why the GUI needs to be 3D.
Re:Why not use the Quake engine? (Score:1)
You could I suppose use flexible design in the way you used the brushes to create the level. You are correct though. The BSP design is fast when the level is already VIS'ed. Good point.
Re:big deal (Score:1)
Re:Do you still need a cluster or an SGI to run it (Score:1)
Re: This is a bad idea. (Score:1)
Slashdot crowd too status quo? (Score:2)
"An x86 UNIX clone? Who needs that? What's the point if we have BSD already? And its not like x86 will ever be fast enough to run UNIX or anything! Why bother?" -Microsoft Weenie circa 1991.
Be open to new ideas or the dynamicism and vision that made computers successful will dissapear. Even if an idea isn't immediatly useful in raising your Q3 fps or running your JAVA project faster, it might still help in the future. The thinking that I've seen on Slashdot lately is probably the same thinking that led Xerox to invent a networked set of GUI computers exchanging email and not capitalize on *ANY* of it!
Berlin (Score:1)
This has rather more to show for it, though.
Anti-aliasing etc. (Score:1)
4D editor (Score:1)
Would it be possible to use these 3D programs to do 4D editing?
That would really be something *new*
Anyone remember "HOTSAUCE" ? (Score:1)
Re:Clearing up some points (Score:2)
Several attempts have been made already to rectify this, but it doesn't look like there's been anything major really accomplished. DRI is still where all of the manpower goes, even though projects like GGI/KGI exist.
Hopefully, someone will come out with a standard soon, and we can eliminate this kind of waste of effort. (Well, it's not likely, but we can hope, right..?)
Preferably, such a spec would allow for:
- kernel-level drivers that just pass along commands
- a library where all of the actual code exists, to keep the junk out of the kernel.
Actually, this is what KGI and GGI are.. but you can read about the XFree86 peoples' reasons for not going with their way of doing things for yourself.
(Incidentally, can anyone think of any reasons why this sort of thing ISN'T a good idea..?? I still haven't figured out myself why the XFree86 people are so hesitant to split X like this. Granted, it's an extra pipeline, but then again, that's pretty much what DRI is, too. And considering the added safety of not having a root application playing with kernel registers..)
James
Re:Why not use the Quake engine? (Score:1)
It's the same window manager (Score:1)
Re:*Shakes head* *confused look* why? (Score:2)
Re:big deal (Score:1)
God I love math humor.
Isn't antialiasing outdated (Score:1)
Re:"This is Unix! I KNOW this!" (Score:1)
Well, maybe not. :) But seriously, that's pretty neat.
My favorite Star Trek quote: (Score:1)
Re:Do you still need a cluster or an SGI to run it (Score:2)
This is something that actually could serve a more general, practical purpose than a 3d game engine: 3D visualization of workspace data. This, in my opinion, is a better justification for a hardware purchase than Q3.
Oh, but if only... (Score:2)
Seriously, though, this is a good point. If we're going to have a new sort of WM with new dimensions of navigation, then we should ideally have new input devices along with it. The mouse/trackball/whatever is already really inadequate in 2D space (to me)...
I seem to remember some people having gotten a Nintendo Power Glove connected and working with a PC as an input device, though that might not be the best idea unless you could still type, and preferably de/equip it quickly and easily. I remember trying the Power Glove when it first came out, and it wasn't exactly the easiest thing to use (although the argument could be made that neither is a mouse unless you're used to it, which is the same argument I use about Windows vs $OS)
Sotto la panca, la capra crepa
Re:big deal (Score:2)
Or were you trying to be funny?
Re:Doom is easier on a server (Score:1)
On the other hand, consider this (taken from one of our servers at work):
load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
... and distributed.net isn't interactive enough for me.
Re:This is not the only 3d WM out there... (Score:1)
Litestep is a buggy clone of AfterStep that makes windows slightly more usable but much less stable.. in no way is it remotely 3d or attemps to be that way.
Re:Why not use the Quake engine? (Score:1)
Back in 1996 I remember downloading quake levels that were exactly that.
It has been done with doom as well.
From what I understand the novelty of such things has worn off because I have not heard about it being done in Quake 2-3 or any other engine to date.
Re:Oh, but if only... (Score:1)
Re:*Shakes head* *confused look* why? (Score:1)
I ran Linux/X on a 386/20 with 2 MB of RAM, 20 MB of disk and a Herc monochrome card a hell of a lot better than any competing "OS". Also note that X runs on Compaq's iPAQ handheld.
Joe
Re:Think about it (Score:1)
Anyway, they were primarily concerned with medical imaging and CAD type stuff. Probably all for the investors. Why do medical work when I can watch Windows crash in both 2d and holographic 3d?
Uses of 3D window managers (Score:1)
Re:Oh, but if only... (Score:1)
Re:"This is Unix! I KNOW this!" (Score:2)
The 3D graphical file browser seen in Jurassic Park was fsn [sgi.com], a throwaway, proof-of-concept tool developed at SGI. It was real.
Re:*Shakes head* *confused look* why? (Score:1)
No, its not BS. As I said in my original post in my experience I have watched X choke. I was dual booting a 486 DX with 32 MB of ram and win 95 ran faster than Linux with X and FWMV95. Thats what I have witnessed. (RH 5.2 back in the day). Ok, maybe I don't know how to optimize X to give it better performance than explorer.exe. Fine.
Would you care to let me know how to do it? Because on my P-133 with 32 MB of ram X is still slow. On my primary machine (Celeron 450, 192 Mb of ram, matrox G400, dual boot) Windows does not have a chance. X just *SMOKES* explorer. It runs like a dog on the other machines.
Re:Why not use the Quake engine? (Score:2)
Re:Isn't antialiasing outdated (Score:1)
(and this is true - my 17" fell off the truck at unload and now at 1152x864 the image is a liiitle fuzzy (like a
--
When things get INTERESTING (Score:1)
We've all gotten used to "3d" games on a very "2d" monitor - time to press forward!
Oh, and you know it has to be said: "Can you run a beowulf cluster inside 3dwm?" =^) -Ben
Do you still need a cluster or an SGI to run it? (Score:1)
Re:Why not use the Quake engine? (Score:1)
Re:Berlin (Score:1)
There're other drawing kits available too. It's not the only one.
And as far as X compatibility is concerned, that's already there. There's support, already, for getting a GGI context, from which you can run XGGI on top of it. (XGGI is an X server that runs on a GGI context.) The other method, integration of X into GGI, is something I have no clue as to what's being done. (I'm on the mailing list, but I haven't heard much talk about this at all, so.. *shrug*)
James
*Shakes head* *confused look* why? (Score:1)
Re:Why not use the Quake engine? (Score:1)
"This is Unix! I KNOW this!" (Score:1)
Re:Clearing up some points (Score:1)
DRI is an arbitration manager for direct rendering. anyone can use it, not just X...
Exactly how? (Score:1)
Why not use the Quake engine? (Score:4)
Quake is a lean 3d graphics engine, and now with programmers working on it at sourceforge [sourceforge.net] it can only improve. Heck, since you can run it from the command line you can completly bypass X! (Although too much software depends on X now...)
Yeah (Score:1)
This is a bad idea. (Score:3)
It relates to the file manager she was using (Score:1)
Doom is easier on a server (Score:1)
Maybe slashdot should warn sites before listing (Score:1)
VNC support? (Score:2)
Or is there some other "VNC" acronym in play here?
Re:Doom is easier on a server (Score:2)
IIRC the minimum requirement for software-rendered Quake was a P60.
Just for perspective, a web browser requires more than that now days.
What's up with that 'more portable' comment anyways?
It's totally out of context...'More efficient' or 'lighter weight' would have been appropriate,
but 'more portable' makes no sense in a statement about resource usage.
--K
---
Re:Guys.... (and gals) (Score:2)
At least for me.
Re:Why not use the Quake engine? (Score:1)
Think about it (Score:2)
Of course, you have to remember, this could also just be the first step to a real 3d WM. What I mean is, no matter what kind of 3d accelerator you have, no matter what 3d FPS games you play, no matter which 3dWM you use, you're still staring at a flat (or reasonably so anyway) screen in front of your face. Once the technology exists for TRUE holographic (or whatever) 3d display systems, you'll see the REAL benefit of all this. Of course, who's going to construct cool holographic displays before there's a good 3d WM to run on it.....? Get my point? I say more power to ya. Wish I could code like that so I could help ya.
Re:"This is Unix! I KNOW this!" (Score:1)
Re:Oh, but if only... (Score:4)
Unfortunately, glove interfaces (even with a more expensive and more accurate DataGlove) have two problems: fatigue and lack of haptics.
Re fatigue, how long can you mouse around on the desk for? (hint - how long can you play quake at one sitting?) Now try swinging your arm, unsupported, in the air for that amount of time - that's called calisthenics.
Re haptics, a great deal of control comes from kinesthetic feedback (why you can touch your finger tips on opposite hands together with your eyes closed). When using something like a mouse, the inability to move in certain directions gives you a great deal of information. A mouse is relatively crude at this, but a pressure-sensitive tablet is better and an actual paintbrush is better still. Now pick up a virtual paintbrush (hint - you can't feel it in your fingers) and try to paint with it (hint - you can't tell when it touches the canvas). Researchers have tried substituting sound (a noise when you run into something), and "ghosting" to show where the virtual object actually is (because of physical constraints) and where you put it (i.e., straight through the canvas).
This has, in part, I think, led to the recent research popularity of augmented reality and "virtual desktops".
This is not the only 3d WM out there... (Score:1)
The website's unfortunatly all Flash 5, so you can find a summary (and the beta binaries) here [pimpin.net] if you're flash-intolerant.
But if you want my opinion, everything pales in comparison to Litestep [litestep.net] :)
***JUMP PAD ACTIVATION INITIATION START***
***TRANSPORT WHEN READY***
Re:*Shakes head* *confused look* why? (Score:1)
The G400 on the other hand is a card people are willing to work on, because it is a kick ass card(i own one, great for everything from quake3 to crystal clear 2D).
The killer app (Score:4)
Surely a lot of people will just say no! waste of cycles, waste of memory, waste of time!, but i couldn't disagree more. If i could have a 3d view of 6 different programming sessions with a real time representation of runtime results i would. it doesn't matter how much hardware i throw at my current system, i just can't do this today. same for designers, engineers, etc. this would mean a real productivity boost.
which brings me to my point... with the current pointer/icon/double-click/window interface, there isn't much to gain on the productivity side even if you throw in 5 years of moore's law. we're stuck. it's the same thing that happened when the GUI first came along, everyone said it was a waste of resources, but now that we have the hardware we're glad they worked on it nonetheless.
of course we need a good navigation system an efficient way to handle objects, but both exist today: i'm pretty efficient in moving around in quake and homeworld, and i can move objects in 3d pretty easily using truspace or Max...
actually i think we're late in doing this. the hardware to support a totally 3d desktop is here (GTS Ultra, 1GHz CPU, 512MB Ram would probably do the job). it's just a few years before similar hardware is standard configuration for most. If by then linux (or similar) are the only platform that will give you an intuitive 3d environment, lots of people would get it.
MOSX (Score:1)
They must have been using some sort of beta release of Mac OS X. I haven't seen the film in a long time, but I swear they said they were using UNIX, but all of the hardware had Apple logos on it. (Of course, I could be confusing details from the book with the Hollywood production).
Re:big deal (Score:1)
wog
Re:"This is Unix! I KNOW this!" (Score:2)
-jfedor
Re:VNC support? (Score:1)
Re:MOSX (Score:1)
Misnamed, but way cool (Score:3)
This sucker is not a window manager. Not mainly.
This is the 3-D equivalent of X-Windows.
Like X-windows, it allows many programs to run using the same resource. Only, instead of that resource being a 2-D plane, it's a 3D volume.
Take a look at this screenshot [3dwm.org]. It looks to me like the desk and the screen are being generated by two separate programs, through 3dwm. And it's apparently network-transparent.
What's really new about this seems to be the display of several 3-d programs in the same space, not the notion of a three-dimensional desktop.
Re:Why did he even present himself for election? (Score:1)
On Slashdot, however, it probably has negative effects on your Charisma...
Re:"This is Unix! I KNOW this!" (Score:1)
You did see Jurassic park, didn't you? You may remember the little twerp who sat down at a system and proceeded to zoom her way about the system in true Max Headroom 3D style.
I look forward to the day when we replace /etc/passwd with a VRML file, MD5 sums with collision hulls, and the 31337 h4x0r 0wnz j00 only because of his superior dexterity.
Mark my words - all this Quake playing you do today - this practice of button reflex and mouse coordination - this is going to pay off in SPADES once we enter the world of - 3D SECURITY!
3D Desktops (Score:1)
Re:Why not use the Quake engine? (Score:1)
Wrongo (Score:1)
For instance, with every mouse movement you have to calculate the new coordinates in a 3 space trialog, instead
of the old Cartesian method.
Even a first year calculus student knows this is BS. Moving to 3 space dosn't cause you to change from cartesian coordianates. No if for example you base your coordinates on rotational movement then you might have a point about doing something but even then it's not a function of a larger store of video ram but a faster processor.
Seriously? (Score:1)
Not that I don't mind, due to the fact that I'm busting a gut LMAO about some of the topics here
Desktop backgrounds? (Score:1)
Re:Do you still need a cluster or an SGI to run it (Score:1)
Why not get some use outta a 3D card than gaming?
Different strokes for different folks...Diversity to an extent is good, this is a good kind.
Jeremy
Re:"This is Unix! I KNOW this!" (Score:3)
Actually, it wasn't a fake 3D window manager, it was a real 3D file manager. It is actually named fsn and you can read about it and download it from here [sgi.com].
-jfedor
Re:Isn't antialiasing outdated (Score:1)
Until they're at *least* 250 dpi I'll still want antialiasing.
Just because you read it on slashdot doesn't mean it's any where near true.
Inform yourself. Don't parrot back what some ill-informed slashbot said.
Re:The killer app (Score:2)
This is not going to work (Score:1)
1. We cannot see three-dimensionally. We see only a two-dimensional projection of the three dimensional world plus a little depth information. If you close one eye, you lose even that.
2. A monitor is two-dimensional. You can emulate the third dimension, but it really isn't there. Thus, on a monitor you don't have depth information either.
A three-dimensional interface might be worthwhile if we had big holographic displays in which we could enter and interact with, similar to a "holo-deck". But until we have that kind of technology, I believe 3D user interfaces are not going to make significant inroads, especially not if they take the approach of 3dwm, namely moving 2D windows around in a 3D world. 2D window managers let one manage windows quite efficiently today. There is not much to gain on that front.
bye
schani
Re:"This is Unix! I KNOW this!" (Score:1)
days. Picked up a green R4400 250Mhz for about
$500.
Clearing up some points (Score:5)
I'm one of the core developers of 3Dwm, and I've watched with horrid fascination as the webserver was nearly toppled by the tremendous /.-onslaught just recently (have a look at the logs [chalmers.se]). Now, browsing the comments, I thought I should post and clear up some points.
First of all, yes, 3Dwm is misnamed. 3Dwm is NOT an X11 window manager, it is a user environment (the beginnings of the 3D-equivalent of X11). However, the name has stuck with us since our first appearance [slashdot.org] on Slashdot, so we don't want to change it.
Secondly, the main platform for 3Dwm is not normal desktop computers (though it does run on desktop systems), but Virtual Reality devices (like this [chalmers.se] one). In Virtual Reality, you have some amazing 3D interaction possibilities that few existing applications exploit.
As for VNC [att.com] support, 3Dwm has VNC client (not server) functionality, just as one observant slashdotter pointed out. This allows us, in a network-transparent fashion that is in keeping with the distributed nature of the rest of 3Dwm, to display graphical desktops of any major windowing system (including Windows, X11, and MacOS) in 3D.
There's always skeptics who wonder what you would use a system like this for when 2D is perfectly fine. To that I can only answer that there are, in fact, areas where 3D could help a great deal, mainly in the fields of design, modelling, and information visualization. Why, take a look at this [chalmers.se] (and this [chalmers.se] and this [chalmers.se]) screenshot for a prototype 3D web browser.
Btw, today marks the one-year anniversary of our last slashdotting (I wrote up a short summary [3dwm.org] of the comments we got last time). Cool, eh? :)
big deal (Score:3)
wog
Re:*Shakes head* *confused look* why? (Score:1)
One word for you: antialiasing. Finally a way to have antialiased text in X. That's worth two 3D accelerators and another DIMM if you ask me - if you spend as much time staring at a display as I do, you may agree.
Sure be nice if there were a cheaper way to do it though. :P
Findings (Score:1)