I heard rumor that java 3D has been open sourced. will it affect the development or the future direction of Xith 3d ?
I am planning to port java 3d application to Xith due to performance reason. Besides Java 3d seems to halt development and I am worried about vitality of sun’s java 3d api in long run.
what is your opinion?
thanks,
Meow
http://www.java-gaming.org/cgi-bin/JGNetForums/YaBB.cgi?board=xith3d;action=display;num=1079599062
http://www.java-gaming.org/cgi-bin/JGNetForums/YaBB.cgi?board=xith3d;action=display;num=1079591437
Hi,
[quote]I heard rumor that java 3D has been open sourced.
[/quote]
This is not a rumor anymore. The source code is published at https://java3d.dev.java.net/.
There are several points related to Xith3D and Java3D:
As Doug Twilleager wrote,
[quote]Java 3D and Xith3D can co-exist with no problem. Xith3D has a focus on games, and some non-games applications can take advantage of the things that it has. There is also a very large Java 3D development community that doesn’t make games. Because of Java 3D’s asynchronous multithreaded design, it fits very will into visualization systems. It’s focus is not likely to change because of its large visualization installed base. So, having a games focused scene graph is a good thing.
[/quote]
Java3D implements thread-safe scenegraph, while Xith3D implements non-thread-safe one, and here is a major performance difference.
Java3D 1.4 seems to remain thread safe: at https://j3d-core.dev.java.net/ you can read
[quote]…We envision 1.4 including features such as programmable shaders. Our goal is to minimize large scale changes to the system in order to deliver 1.4 as quickly as possible.
[/quote]
And this implicitly means that thread safety most probably will be preserved.
Short note: Java3D is published as subproject of JavaDesktop, not JavaGames. I see good reasons of doing this, but I think this is a clear indication of Java3D target user group.
There is one very important issue: licensing.
For me, Java3D licenses are too restrictive. Xith3D released under BSD license, so you can do with it nearly whatever you want. Read Java3D license and you will see a lot of explicit and implicit limitations.
We will keep trying to be as compatible with Java3D as possible, and if new (alive) JSR will be filed for Java-based 3D scenegraph, we will try to keep compatible with it, having in mind needs of Java game development.
These days I am getting ready to start full power with LWJGL support for Xith3D, which is mostly maintainability question - I want to keep both JOGL and LWJGL renderers to be absolutely synchronized (in development) and to have single codebase for both. This will need some time, but after we will get 100% community-driven solution for 3D programming in Java (OK, another one).
There are a lot of ideas related to this project, and any suggestions are welcome.
Yuri
P.S. I think this will be 3rd time this week I say “Xith3D is not dead”.
[quote]5. These days I am getting ready to start full power with LWJGL support for Xith3D, which is mostly maintainability question - I want to keep both JOGL and LWJGL renderers to be absolutely synchronized (in development) and to have single codebase for both. This will need some time, but after we will get 100% community-driven solution for 3D programming in Java (OK, another one).
[/quote]
This is something we want to try in Survivor, having had some problems which we suspected are JOGL-related. It would be nice if xith.org had some overt statement about the comparitive statuses of the LWJGL and JOGL bindings (I couldn’t see anything anywhere, but I was following the posts here on LWJGL status…just can’t remember what the latest was :)).
Perhaps a FAQ question? Or even an extra section on the main site for “opengl bindings” (or some more descriptive name, perhaps “graphics engine” or something), that would contain:
I’m very much looking forward to the LWJGL version; I’d really like to do a 3D game one of these days but up until now I really haven’t had the resources to do all that tedious gruntwork like model loading and so on.
Cas 
The licensing issue is definitely a big one. Xith3D’s license is very liberal and you can understand it without talking to a laywer. This goes hand in hand with the game focus of the API, as it’s nice from a commercial point of view being able to do what you want with the code.
Will.
[quote] I’m very much looking forward to the LWJGL version; I’d really like to do a 3D game one of these days but up until now I really haven’t had the resources to do all that tedious gruntwork like model loading and so on.
Cas
[/quote]
jME has supported your API for awhile now.
jME’s biggest problem AFAICS is that it doesn’t have a category on JGO :(. That’s a BIG marketing problem (and unfair - but then you would have to ask will they also add Auriga, and all the others that are appearing? Seeing as they can’t find the time to assign a moderator to every category, I doubt it)…
Another reason to make jgo an independently controlled and updated site rather than something the GTG do when they have nothing better to be getting on with…? ;D
Actually blah is dead right, jME always slips under my radar completely unecessarily… I keep meaning to check it out properly but in all honesty I’m not touching any scenegraph APIs until I see a 100% finished 100% polished game that’s fit for sale out of one of them
Cas
patience is a virtue princec. All things come to those who wait. And ive run out of patient puns, but what im saying is that a good game is going to be out sooner or later. And then, youd be sooo pleased, that you just completely ignore your work and start coding for Jme full time! 
DP
To counter DP’s youthful exuberance I’d just like to say that you should see some results on the jME side of the fence in the next 2-3 months. It will be up to the individual to decide if they can determine the full quality of the underlying library by playing a few 1st gen (really pre-1st gen) games, but at least the opportunity to do so will be there.
[quote]I keep meaning to check it out properly but in all honesty I’m not touching any scenegraph APIs until I see a 100% finished 100% polished game that’s fit for sale out of one of them
[/quote]
So what about those of us with scenegraphs that aren’t designed for the gaming community?
:-*
[quote]… but in all honesty I’m not touching any scenegraph APIs until I see a 100% finished 100% polished game that’s fit for sale out of one of them
Cas
[/quote]
RenderWare is a scene graph API.
so is NetImmerse, but NetImmerse is priced in the $125,000 so if you can afford it, can you give me a copy?
Renderware is even more dear. GTA3 and Vice City were made in Renderware, Elder Scollers were made in NetImmerse. So princec, will you be touching Renderware/NetImmerse any time soon?
Renderware is a nightmare better off with Xith3D i can
tell you. much more cooler… nicer people too.
As if I’ve got that kind of cash lurking in the pockets of my trousers!
I don’t mean Renderware etc. anyway - I mean a Java scenegraph library.
Cas
Ok, then how about we go too far in the other direction and compare with Xj3D. That’s a scene graph, though almost everyone uses the VRML/X3D side, not the lowest level stuff. We find Xj3D embedded in all sorts of applications, just nothing is games oriented. There are plenty of shipping products using Xj3D, though mostly you won’t find them as they’re military in nature and not for consumption by the general public.
ive shiped big stuff using GL4Java… its what u make dudes
not the SDK just need to get ones head around it
Xith3D is top stuff if u ask me…
S’rite. I’m going to sit here and see how successful someone can make it. If Xith3D ships an actual production title that compares favourably to what is available to, say, Quake3 based engines, I’ll be there.
Cas
what about jME? would you be there if someone ships something >= Quake 3?