

3D duck, done in Javascript, 4k.  - mixmax
http://wurstcaptures.untergrund.net/duck.html

======
DarkShikari
And this duck with a hundred or so polygons takes up an _entire Core 2 2Ghz
core_ to render.

I feel like I've traveled back in time to the early 90s.

------
dazzawazza
3D in a canvas is no longer amazing.

3D without is amazing but it does make you wonder why.

------
miloshh
Nice demo. But unsurprisingly, if something is Turing complete, you can do
rendering in it, too. The bigger question is - why did we get into this sad
situation where "web" and "performance" are antonyms?

The standard answer would be that you _need full control_ over the machine to
get performance, and you really don't want to give full control over the web
for security reasons. But this answer is false. We just need more advances in
code validation, e.g. something that would prove a piece of code cannot do
system calls.

~~~
ori_b
You don't even need that. Your OS just needs a sane security model to enable
sandboxing processes.

~~~
eru
Or do both.

------
jasonkester
<standardeply>

Google IECanvas and include the one line of script needed to make this cross
browser. It continually baffles me why people don't do this.

</standardreply>

~~~
bd
In this particular case, the answer could be performance.

Google's ExplorerCanvas (emulation by VML) is much slower than native canvas
implementations (particularly compared to new JS engines like in FF3.1 Beta 2
or Webkit nightly).

For standard 2D graphics it's good enough, but if you push browser to the
limits, like with a software 3D renderer, ExplorerCanvas would probably be
unbearably slow.

This demo looks like a Demoscene release [1], so they probably wouldn't like
to be caught with a slow code :).

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoscene>

------
ashleyw
The only problem I see with this kind of thing is it uses the same CPU as
flash (FF3.1b3 and Safari4b1), and Flash is pretty slow on OSX anyway!

~~~
DLWormwood
Doesn't Shockwave[1] (Flash's predecessor and an a spinoff of Macromedia
Director) support native 3-D? Unlike Flash, Shockwave was built with more
consideration for system performance, at the cost of download size.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Shockwave>

------
ivankirigin
I'm afraid the new standard for me is Quake 3. Real-time multi-player good-
enough 3D graphics. This is definitely cool though.

~~~
nirmal
I don't think that the graphics of Quake 3 are done in Javascript. I believe
only the setup of games (team building, joining levels) is done with AJAXy
things.

~~~
bd
Yup, Quake Live comparison is not fair.

If you use custom plugins, you should be compared to desktop games. Plugins
run regular compiled C++ (or whatever) code, browser just gives them a place
where they can draw. And from Quake Live FAQ it seems they even use DirectX,
so it's actually hardware accelerated.

~~~
ivankirigin
My comparison isn't fair if you are a stickler for implementation. Users
aren't.

I'd be happy to say X is better than Quake Live, regardless of underlying tech
-- IF you show me something better.

I'm looking for net effect here.

~~~
barrkel
Perhaps, if you're interested in the business-level angle - but binary plugins
have had a long (and blighted) history, so they're less relevant.

If you're interested in technology and creating something new using the common
elements of the web, on the other hand, stretching the limits of what's
technically simple javascript + canvas is indeed important.

