> >On Wed, 2001-11-21 at 18:35, John Gabriele wrote: > >Actually, just to toss in my $0.02, I think that we should definitely >keep supporting PCI graphics. While almost everyone has an AGP card, >PCI cards are used in a lot of settings to allow for multi-monitor >support. It would be pretty cool to be able to have multi-monitor >support, at least in 2.0. That is a good point. I wonder how many people go that route, as compared to Matrox DualHead or ATI's dual head. >On a side note: >Would it be possible to use OpenGL as the base layer for the Interface >Kit and the graphics? If so, we would only need one hardware >acceleration layer, and porting to a new card might be able to piggyback >more off of X and Mesa. That would be nice. Unfortunately, you need HW openGL to do that. And we have none, nor anyone interested in doing so. HW OGL is not something that you can throw just any warm body at. It is *hard* and needs someone with a vast mind. It is the one think that I am really hoping to see from BeUnited. Most of the other things, we have a really good handle on. HWOGL, though, we have not even put any realy thought or effort into. >Plus, it would be a cool bragging right. "Look, all *our* windows are >3D accelerated." I *100%* agree. It would make the interface kit much easier, I would think. Plus, a number of the fancy things that people want (arbitrarily shaped windows, alpha blending, shadows, etc) would be nearly free. Plus, the UI would run faster on some of these new ultra-3D video cards.