On the RTG matter.
Important Disclaimer: I have neverpersonally seen the technology, so the following is only based on my own knowledge of the field and of the individuals involved.
RTG was, according to interviews given by MTLS & al, acquired with the hope of turning two 3D technologies perceived as breakthroughs into licensing revenues streams.
The first one is a dynamic mesh resolution technique: Simply put, this means that 3D objects, which are typically made of a mesh of triangles or curved surfaces at a fixed resolution, could now be viewed, edited and displayed in real time at the most appropriate resolution, regardless of the original resolution at which the object was defined. This is key because it allows for data compression (needed for any 3D data sent over the Net), potentially faster key frame rates in games and other 3D apps (since if the object is tiny in screen space, only a coarse resolution will be used), lower memory requirements for the display of 3D scenes, improved 3Dbrowsers, etc... So this potentially has large applications.
The risks on this one are that it is not yet productized (demo effect) so that: implementation in commercially viable solutions might take longer than anticipated, performance could degrade in real world apps, ... Nothing unusual for a technology at such stage, but risks nonetheless to the extent that revenues are attached to it. The other major risk in my mind is that Microsoft wants this (it is a core 3D technology) and has the in-house talent to do something similar, although not necessarily using the same solution. They have already done work in this area in the past 2 yrs, and they unequivocally have the single best 3D research (this does not mean products) team in the world at this point. For proof, look at their contribution at last year's Siggraph. Of course, this also means they could be a potential licensee assuming everything comes off as planned at MCRE.
The Specular engineers will work with RTG and have turned good products more or less on schedule in the past, if this can be any indication.
The second technology is a 3D scanner made of off-the-shelf components. The question here is the same as with all HW work done by SW companies. Will they avoid the pitfalls of fundamentally different business models? The encouraging sign is that they are looking for a HW partner. So it will all boil down to the choice of the right partner and the management of a successfull business partnership (a difficult feat as always in an industry full of strong personalities).
Hope this helps, and sorry for the length of the post.
Eric |
