> You only have to install one application that handles all your games (or applications) just like spotify handles all your music and your browser handles all sites.
The experience today for serious 3D games is, a full install for each game. Platforms like Flash and Unity attempt to do what you say, be the 'spotify' of games, but in general game devs ship their own proprietary native code.
I agree on mobile/tablets the existence of an app store infrastructure is more 'web-like' than the experience on desktop/laptops. In the end, this is a bit of semantics -- Google's native client stuff is probably the ultimate solution technically, sandboxing full-speed native code instead of relying on Javascript for client logic. However that is farther down the pike in terms of cross-platform adoption than webGL.
It all comes down to a tradeoff between adoption and bleeding-edgeness. My argument is with regard to what the situation will be if/when webGL is running on 90+% of browsers, including mobile and tablets.
The experience today for serious 3D games is, a full install for each game. Platforms like Flash and Unity attempt to do what you say, be the 'spotify' of games, but in general game devs ship their own proprietary native code.
I agree on mobile/tablets the existence of an app store infrastructure is more 'web-like' than the experience on desktop/laptops. In the end, this is a bit of semantics -- Google's native client stuff is probably the ultimate solution technically, sandboxing full-speed native code instead of relying on Javascript for client logic. However that is farther down the pike in terms of cross-platform adoption than webGL.
It all comes down to a tradeoff between adoption and bleeding-edgeness. My argument is with regard to what the situation will be if/when webGL is running on 90+% of browsers, including mobile and tablets.