Pages using bleeding-edge tech like this need an easily accessible fallback. I can't find any way to access the content from that Beercamp page in a non-busted-3d format.
Article's example of correct 'depth-sorting' isn't demonstrating depth sorting, since depth sorting sorts entire elements to the front/back - interpenetration isn't possible. For interpenetration like he demonstrates, you have to split scene elements up into smaller elements or depth-sort at the pixel level (modern 3d cards do something resembling an approximation of this via the z-buffer).
No, there isn't a way to access everything without a 3d capable browser. This was more of a time constraint than anything else.
Thank you for clarifying the depth-sorting issue. I've perhaps overgeneralized in that area. So, will browsers render interpenetration differently based on the hardware?
Tried in Google Chrome on Debian Wheezy AMD64 with Intel GM45.
Place feedback and alternative links at the top of the page also. Otherwise users are just left puzzled.
The deviceorientation event enables us to pull alpha, beta
and gamma rotation values. Note that these values are
relative to the current orientation of the device. The
image above shows the axes of a phone held perpendicular
to the ground in portrait mode.
Unfortunately, each browser implements depth-sorting
differently and, therefore, has its own issues. The best
we can do to combat the glitchy pop-through of underlying
elements is to keep planes away from each other.
If this were built in Flash, I'd be worried that looking at it for too long would result in my Macbook burning a hole through my desk.
I decided to test Chrome - better but still peaks around 50%. Safari was the best peaking at 30% while using it.
Also, are you sure a Flash version would use more CPU? This only uses 60% when I'm walking around - http://www.unrealengine.com/flash/
Each year we abandon browser support and throw a “Pshaw” in the face of semantics so that we can play with some emerging features of modern browsers.