WebGL的与第三方插件（unity3d），在浏览器的最佳选择 [英] webgl vs. 3rd party plugin (unity3d), best option in browser
问题描述
我一直在负责渲染和在浏览器中操作3D对象和真的想要一个强大的应用。我所做的研究表明，两个主要选择这里。我可以使用HTML 5中的新WebGL的工具。或者，我可以用一个浏览器插件，如unity3d（我敢肯定有其他人及这个问题的一点，是等同的）。 （是否有我错过任何其他的选择吗？）是我的应用程序需要相当标准，但是，这些都是重点：
I have been tasked with rendering and manipulating 3d objects in the browser and really want a robust application. The research that I've done shows two major options here. I can use the new webgl tool in html5. Or I can use a browser plugin such as unity3d (i'm sure there are others and for the point of this question, are equivalent). (Are there any other options that I'm missing?) My needs for the application are fairly standard, however, these are the focal points:
（1）最重要的部分是场景的分辨率。我想尽可能多的多边形/点，我可以得到的。我想，希望100万多边形/分，10万多边形/点50万个多边形/点？什么是现实的可能？
(1) The most important part is the resolution of the scene. I want as many polygons/points as I can get. I want, hopefully, 1 million polygons/points, 10 million polygons/points, 50 million polygons/points? What is realistically possible?
（2）的场景将在很大程度上静态的，我将载入我的场景，然后我只是想浏览周围和探索的方式。我并不需要经常变动我的场景。
(2) The scene will be largely static, I will load my scene and then I just want to navigate around it and explore that way. I don't need constant changes to my scene.
权衡得失，我看到的WebGL的缺点是没有IE浏览器的支持（还）。并迫使他们安装一个插件（这我认为是一个巨大的障碍），使用统一的不方便用户。如果你把这些了，有没有任何两者之间的性能差异？人会给我比其他的多边形？我想presume它们是相同的，因为它们都具有直接访问相同的硬件设备上。
Weighing the pros and cons, I see the downside of webgl as not having IE support (yet). And using unity inconveniences the user by forcing them to install a plugin (which I view as a huge barrier). If you take those away, is there any performance difference between the two? Will one give me more polygons than the other? I would presume they are the same since they both have direct access to the same hardware on the machine.
在这个问题上的任何经验或想法会大大AP preciated ......
Any experience or thoughts on this matter would be greatly appreciated ......
推荐答案
WebGL是完全能够呈现的<一个href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQrC5YLKFUY&lc=6TQAtYG5SsfTHY1RfEYuOsDjLLcl5n6eGxQlz_jiiBY&feature=inbox">lots和的很多 =http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORI1Jdk5e5g >几何只要你聪明地绘制。所以，是团结。多边形的数量都将是一个pretty的有争议的问题，特别是如果你的场景是静态的。
WebGL is perfectly capable of rendering lots and lots of geometry as long as you draw it intelligently. So is Unity. Polygon counts are going to be a pretty moot issue, especially if your scene is static.
你真的要考虑多渲染速度是一样的工具链和用户可访问性的因素是什么。 WebGL的有一个快速成长的社区，但在成熟的工具的方式并不多。如果你需要商业支持，也许团结会更好。 WebGL的还缺少IE支持你指出的，但即使在支持它，你可能不能够访问它，如果你的显卡的blacklisted 。也就是说，如果因任何原因被确定，以避免插件那么你的选择是已经作出的，不是吗？
What you really want to consider more than rendering speed is factors like tool chains and user accessibility. WebGL has a quickly growing community but not much in the way of mature tools. If you need commercial support maybe Unity would be better. WebGL also lacks IE support as you pointed out, but even on browsers that support it you may not be able to access it if your video card is blacklisted. That said, if for whatever reason you are determined to avoid plugins then your choice is already made, isn't it?
WebGL的具有无可辩驳的书呆子酷的因素，但可能会在你的目标受众完全丧失。这也是值得考虑的团结将是相当的游戏中心，这可能会或可能不会给你的需求是一件好事。 WebGL是更一般的，但较低的水平。
WebGL has an undeniable "geeky cool" factor to it, but that may be completely lost on your target audience. It's also worth considering that Unity is going to be fairly gaming centric, which may or may not be a good thing given your needs. WebGL is more general but lower level.
至于其他的替代品时，Flash 11的Stage3D，这是我听说过很能干，和Silverlight具有Molehill的，这是我所听到旁边一无所知（对不起！）。显然，无论是插件为中心的，但如果你是篱笆上他们很可能价值至少在看。
As far as other alternatives, Flash 11 has Stage3D, which I've heard is very capable, and Silverlight has Molehill, which I've heard next to nothing about (sorry!). Obviously both are plugin-centric, but if you're on the fence they're probably worth at least looking at.
这篇关于WebGL的与第三方插件（unity3d），在浏览器的最佳选择的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
