[gameprogrammer] Re: OpenGL reality check.

  • From: "Kevin Fields" <drunkendruid@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gameprogrammer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 09:26:54 -0400

I agree that it's not the best way to go about doing things; however, if you look at the advancements that the new DirectX drivers and Shader Model 4.0 are making, then you might change your mind (at least a little). That article I posted the link for describes the advances that Microsoft is making with DirectX 10, and I'm kind of excited to see how they perform.

Keep in mind, that it's been the card manufacturers and the ARB that have been providing the support for OpenGL. Microsoft hasn't given any support for it since 1.1, and they're doing the same thing for Vista, except they've said that they won't give anything above 1.5. It's up to the card manufacturers to support any subsequent version, which is what's been happening for years anyway.

Microsoft isn't trying to kill it, otherwise, they wouldn't be providing a second desktop that doesn't use the new DirectX drivers setup. If they REALLY wanted to kill OpenGL, all they had to do was remove that second desktop, and decent OpenGL implementations would be gone from Windows. But, if they did that, they would lose thousands of users; perhaps hundreds of thousands. So, that would be a very bad marketing decision for them.

From: Ken Johnson <johnsk16@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: gameprogrammer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: gameprogrammer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gameprogrammer] Re: OpenGL reality check.
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 23:02:52 -0700

> Nothing's forcing you to use that desktop. There's another desktop that
> doesn't use DirectX. I don't recall ever saying it's a good thing.

You are right, you didn't say that, I just assumed from previous
posts(my response with respects to your newest post below) that you
supported this change.

>Microsoft isn't trying to kill OpenGL. They just aren't supporting it using
>the new desktop. The new desktop shell is using DirectX 10 to take advantage
>of the hardware. The old desktop is still available, which, as Microsoft had
>stated, will have support for up to GL 1.5. Beyond 1.5, Microsoft is leaving
>the support up to the individual card manufacturers, which is what's
>currently happening anyway.

How is that not trying to kill it? Who wants to use the old desktop
when there is a newer flashier version? End users don't want the old,
they want the new, and the new doesn't support up to date OpenGL.

>But, people are panicking because Vista's default desktop is using DirectX
>10, and will convert OpenGL calls to DirectX calls. These people are causing
>mass hysteria with no good reason to. They just refuse to find out accurate

No good reason? As I said above, end users want the new stuff, if
OpenGL isn't supported to its newest versions, is slower, etc, who
would say to users, "Um, you gotta turn off the newest stuff, enable
the old desktop, just to play our game and have good performance."

I see Microsoft doing what they do best, pushing their own standards
on the rest of the world, all packaged up in their OS. And you know
what? Yes, this is the best thing to do if your Microsoft. It is also
very bad for competition.

--------------------- To unsubscribe go to http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html

To unsubscribe go to http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html

Other related posts: