With 3D sneaking into the browser via Google’s O3D and WebGL many pose the question – is the web going to be 2D or 3D? Some are so confused they ask if social networks will evolve into virtual worlds like Second Life?
This reminds me of a time when communicating with a computer was a hot topic. The geniuses over at Microsoft and of course Bill Gates himself thought the best way this would be accomplished was to talk to your computer.
The PC five years from now — you won’t recognize it, because speech will have come into the interface, the screen will be a flat screen, the performance will be 20 times what it is today.
Today it’s obvious they were blinded by the technology as the fastest way to input data has always been the keyboard. I feel like many people today are blinded by 3D. It’s often said that one of the benefits of virtual worlds is improved communication, but exactly how is that? Sure there are some users who find having an avatar is helpful but the majority see it as a burden, a novelty at best. Just ask some co-workers to have a meeting in Second Life, they’ll ask if they could just give you a call.
The Internet is about communication – email, Twitter, message boards, Skype, instant messaging, etc. Comparitevely 3D offers nothing. 3D isn’t good for communication, at least not the kind that is taking the world by storm these days – asynchronous communication via Twitter, collaboration via Google Wave and Mozilla Raindrop.
3D is for entertainment
What 3D is good at is entertainment - games, interactive story, MMOs, etc. Read my lips, “3D is for entertainment”. I’ve heard the stories of how 3D models helped scientists visualize data in a new way and lead to some breakthrough, but that doesn’t mean it will help me with my email.
Related posts:
A Senior Product Manager at
Comments on this entry are closed.