[gameprogrammer] Re: best software
- From: "Kevin Fields" <drunkendruid@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gameprogrammer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:05:25 -0400
I agree with Bob... OpenGL and DirectX aren't close to each other. The first
big difference is the way they were designed. OpenGL was designed to be
cross-compatible with multiple operating systems, whereas Direct3D isn't. It
is in this point that you can see how different they really are. Microsoft's
main interest was to create an API that worked solely on their Windows
operating systems, so they designed DirectX to be built off of the Component
Object Model (COM incase you didn't know ;) system. This pretty much killed
any possibility to have it work outside of a Windows OS environment.
As for learning curves, it all depends on your background (at least that's
how I see it). For me, I have a small amount of knowledge using COM, so
learning to use the DirectX interfaces in the API isn't too big of a step.
But learning OpenGL was very simple. When I started out, getting a basic
window with the ability to switch between windowed and fullscreen mode on
the fly was the big test for me to compare the APIs. It was much simpler to
get OpenGL to work than it was to get DirectX to work.
Keep in mind, however, that once you've learned one, learning the other is
going to be a LOT easier. If you're asking which one you should learn first?
It depends on whether you're familiar and comfortable with how COM is
structured and works. If not, then I'd recommend OpenGL, because wrapping
your head around COM is a task in itself. That's what stopped me from
learning DirectX first; I couldn't get my head around how information was
being passed around between the interfaces.
Kevin
>From: Bob Pendleton <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: gameprogrammer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To: Gameprogrammer Mailing List <gameprogrammer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [gameprogrammer] Re: best software
>Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:24:19 -0600
>
>On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 20:46 +0700, floyd_fr wrote:
> > hi,
> > is opengl easier than directx ?
>
>First off, DirectX and OpenGL are not equivalent. OpenGL is *only* a 3D
>API. DirectX has everything from dealing with the keyboard to sound to
>3D computer graphics all rolled up in one big lump. So, for the rest of
>my reply I am going to assume you are only asking about the 3D part of
>DirectX.
>
> >From my point of view, OpenGL is a lot easier to learn and use than
>DirectX. But, I know people who have exactly the opposite opinion.
>
> > is opengl has more power than directx ?
>
>Define "power". I, personally, can get more done in a day using OpenGL
>than using DirectX. The code I write using OpenGL is portable to a large
>number of different kinds of machines and to many different operating
>systems. The code I write using OpenGL runs at pretty much the same
>speed as DirectX code.
>
> > if you want to make a game, which one do you choose ? opengl or directx
>?
>
>I prefer OpenGL.
>
>But, this is all based on my experience, your experience may be very
>different. I have used graphics APIs related to what became OpenGL for
>close to 30 years. So, when OpenGL came along it was just a variant on
>an existing theme. Just about all graphic APIs are related in some way
>to OpenGL. OTOH, DirectX is pretty new and I swear it looks like they
>did their absolute best to make it as different from anything that came
>before as they could. The result is that I find DirectX truly alien and
>difficult to work with.
>
>Since I want to get the job done, I use what I find most natural. It is
>the best for *me*. You are not me. So, you may have a completely
>different experience.
>
> Bob Pendleton
>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------
> > To unsubscribe go to http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>---------------------
>To unsubscribe go to http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html
>
>
---------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html
Other related posts:
