PDA

View Full Version : Call to Action: Help to ensure that OpenGL remains a first class API under Windows Vi



Karmacop
08-06-2005, 09:02 AM
http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/cgi_directory/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000001

Basically, in Windows vista, open gl will be a wrapper on top of Direct x making it much slower. So make some noise and spread the word ;)

Para
08-06-2005, 10:35 AM
Ehh...that's like asking for native OpenGL support for MacOS. (FYI, it's emulated) Sounds like "evil Microsoft is doing its evil things again, we must fight!"-kind of thing. Proof? Just notice the usage of $ in MS...

JML
08-06-2005, 10:38 AM
http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/cgi_directory/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000001

Basically, in Windows vista, open gl will be a wrapper on top of Direct x making it much slower. So make some noise and spread the word ;)

there is nothing you or others can do. if they want to do that, they will..
we have to wait and see..

JML
08-06-2005, 10:41 AM
Ehh...that's like asking for native OpenGL support for MacOS. (FYI, it's emulated) Sounds like "evil Microsoft is doing its evil things again, we must fight!"-kind of thing. Proof? Just notice the usage of $ in MS...

yeah that's true.

Karmacop
08-06-2005, 10:45 AM
Excuse my ignorance but how is opengl emulated in OSX? It would explain the issues it had under OSX but I didn't know it was emulated?

The M$ has only been posted by forum members, not the people that run the site, and of course there's going to be some forums members writing that ;)

Well if Companies like Newtek, Alias and Softimage complain because they don't want their software being 50% slower then it may make MS to rethink their decision.

Para
08-06-2005, 10:53 AM
Excuse my ignorance but how is opengl emulated in OSX? It would explain the issues it had under OSX but I didn't know it was emulated?

Like anything is emulated: A piece of software on operating system level captures the OpenGL calls from application, interprets the calls and delivers them to the GPU and then re-interprets what gets sent back and delivers that back to the original application. Kinda like normal display drivers but it's all a big game of guessing if the interpreting software gets it right or not. As for speed it's about 20-30% slowdown, nothing like 50% or more so if the app is made well, it should work a bit slower but would still be usable just like LW and for example modo.


The M$ has only been posted by forum members, not the people that run the site, and of course there's going to be some forums members writing that ;)

Of course but it's the community itself that forms the actual image of the site and such members make me run away.


Well if Companies like Newtek, Alias and Softimage complain because they don't want their software being 50% slower then it may make MS to rethink their decision.

Yes, that could happen although because modern GPU:s are developed with specially D3D in mind using that would most likely give out more power on Windows platform than tweaking OpenGL rendering to its limits which would make artists happier.

Karmacop
08-06-2005, 11:17 AM
Like anything is emulated: A piece of software on operating system level captures the OpenGL calls from application, interprets the calls and delivers them to the GPU and then re-interprets what gets sent back and delivers that back to the original application. Kinda like normal display drivers but it's all a big game of guessing if the interpreting software gets it right or not. As for speed it's about 20-30% slowdown, nothing like 50% or more so if the app is made well, it should work a bit slower but would still be usable just like LW and for example modo.

I still don't get this, how does OSX implement opengl differently to windows? By that I mean what process does windows currently use, because I thought they'd be fairly similar?



Yes, that could happen although because modern GPU:s are developed with specially D3D in mind using that would most likely give out more power on Windows platform than tweaking OpenGL rendering to its limits which would make artists happier.

Are you saying we should be using D3D instead of opengl?

Para
08-06-2005, 01:26 PM
Are you saying we should be using D3D instead of opengl?

Yes. (10charlimit)

Karmacop
08-06-2005, 07:26 PM
1. Windows is the only platform which supports D3D, so Newtek would need to maintain a code base for both D3D and opengl, slowing down development. It'll slow down development even more now looking at the features in 8.5, it's just a bad idea.

2. D3D offers no advantage over Opengl. They are both about the same speed and can do many of the same things. Actually, open gl can do more things (ie volumetrics). The only advantage will be the speed in Vista because of this architecture difference, and if you read the forum the 3Dlabs guy said it doesn't need to be that way.

mattclary
08-07-2005, 06:52 AM
D3D is MS's way of monopolizing display API. Let's call a spade a spade.

How do we fight it? We stay on XP and don't give them money for an upgrade. If this is true, I'm staying with XP until it just doesn't work anymore.

Karmacop
08-07-2005, 08:21 AM
It's not as bad as it sounds, basically if you want open gl to run native or any version greater than 1.4 (for example opengl 2.0) then you have to use the normal windows 95 desktop, which I have no problem with, but most people wont know this. There's more complex reasons on why they have done this but most users (not us) will just think open gl doesn't have as many features at directx (as it'll only be 1.4) and that it's slower (because it's emulated). Also, if most users think this then game developers will only develop direct 3d games because of all the issues, further killing opengl and cross platform products.

So to sum up, it's nothing major, we'll still survive, but it's a slippery slope to the death of opengl.

JML
08-07-2005, 08:57 AM
maybe the home edition will be like that but maybe the Professional version
of windowVista will support OpenGL2 without problem..

(just a thought)

mattclary
08-07-2005, 09:16 AM
maybe the home edition will be like that but maybe the Professional version
of windowVista will support OpenGL2 without problem..

(just a thought)

That's funny, JML. ;) MS wants to kill OpenGL. That "Open" part is what they hate.

Karmacop
08-07-2005, 09:56 AM
No, they made presentations at sig and they are only supporting 1.4 through emulation. You can use opengl 2.0 but it'll have to be through the video drivers (nvidia, ati, etc) and you'll have to use the windows 95 interface.

Paul_Boland
08-07-2005, 11:22 AM
How sure are we on this info. It seems like a step backwards to me. Now I know Microsoft has done some funky stuff in the past (such as removing the Indeo codec from Windows on the realese of XP), but this really does seem daft. It doesn't really make sense.

Karmacop
08-07-2005, 07:36 PM
It describes what will happen in http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/8/f/98f3fe47-dfc3-4e74-92a3-088782200fe7/TWPR05007_WinHEC05.ppt

I'm not certain about this, but Lightwave 8.5 may (and I think it was said somewhere that it does) use opengl 2 for it's new hardware shading of opengl ie procedural textures, shadows etc. So that means in windows vista you wont get this nice feature, or you have to revert to the windows 95 desktop.

JCG
08-08-2005, 12:57 AM
Personally, the first thing I would do IF I upgraded to Vista would be to switch to the win95 desktop even if this issue didn't exist (it was the first thing I did with XP) so that's not really a problem for me.

The problem (for me) is that, if video card companies stop making OpenGL drivers for their gaming cards (something that a major reduction in opengl game development could cause), we'll have to buy pro cards for every single computer in the world that uses LW>8.3 ...and that's a very big problem.