***Post-SIGGRAPH VRML
by David Lohse
After the VRML blowout at SIGGRAPH this year we talked to some of the
players in the VRML community to get their reactions and feelings as to
where VRML was going. Overall, the response to the 2.0 spec was warm -
all of those asked felt the spec was solid and ready to go. The only
shortcoming seen is already well-known, as commented on by Rick Denny of
OZ Interactive: VRML 2.0's lack of support for avatars/multi-user
environments. While several companies are developing VRML-based multi-
user environments (including OZ Interactive and Black Sun Interactive
among others), their multi-user capabilities are based on proprietary
solutions rather than an industry standard, a fact which could slow or
stall the development of VRML as a multi-user platform.
The primary concerns voiced over the future direction of VRML were
primarily related to content and education: all of those asked felt that
the primary hurdles for VRML 2.0 are the lack of good content as well as
the lack of public education about what VRML is actually good for. That
should be the primary responsibility of the VRML Consortium, at least
according to Harry Vitelli, the VP of Marketing at Axial (the first
venture capitalist-funded VRML company), who felt that the success of
the Consortium depends on a "good business-oriented management team in
place that will focus on *marketing*."
Over the question of whether VRML can actually make money for anyone,
the respondents were somewhat wary. While many obviously feel that VRML
can in some way generate income (just look at the number of VRML
companies that have sprung up in the last couple of years), no one is
completely sure how, especially in light of the Internet model (with
free browsers and low-cost tools); some argue that the only ones that
will make money will be content developers, while others are basing
their business models on selling multi-user servers and environments.
Wave Issue 9607 8/30/96 Article 4-01