PDA

View Full Version : OpenGL support emulated in Windows Vista - no OpenGL 2.0 support!



kevs3d
08-16-2005, 07:26 AM
Hi,

Not sure if you guys know about this but it sounds really bad for Lightwave:

http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/cgi_directory/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000001

As we know, Newtek are implementing a lot of clever OpenGL preview features for the new version of Lightwave. Now i'm no expert but I'm betting you'll want full OpenGL acceleration and OpenGL2.0 API support for it! The current version of Lightwave OpenGL preview would probably be horribly crippled because of this. The idea of OpenGL being emulated under Vista sounds hideous!

This is something Newtek and other companies that use the OpenGL API under Windows desktop should petition Micro$oft over! :(

Thanks,

Kev
--
http://www.kevs3d.co.uk

mattclary
08-16-2005, 07:35 AM
This is kind of old news, been discussed here and at CGTalk, I believe. In a nutshell, it seems that new drivers from the video card manufacturers will correct any shortcoming. Other than that, I say stay on Win XP, it going to be around for a very long time. Microsoft's decisions on how long to support an OS (or app, for that matter), are often decided by how many (and how big) corporations demand it. There are MANY very large companies still using Win 98 and Win 2000. The corporate world is a lot slower to adopt new OSes, especially when the old OS is as good as XP or 2000. As long as XP has drivers available, it can be used if we need serious OpenGL suport, it does everything I need it to do.

kevs3d
08-16-2005, 07:52 AM
Applogies i didn't know it was old news. I agree with your comments, I'm perfectly happy to stay with XP, I was just disapointed to hear that M$ were out to destroy another perfectly good API just to give their latest shiny toy a fancy (and pointless) interface...

Cheers,

Kev
--
http://www.kevs3d.co.uk

mav3rick
08-16-2005, 09:50 AM
personally i think ogl will be avvailable as alternative ... and yes i love and i will continue on winxp

NanoGator
08-16-2005, 10:22 AM
Windows 2000 didn't have proper OpenGL support out of the box, either. NVidia/ATI fixed that.

Bigboy
08-16-2005, 01:50 PM
This is very true. If its not there, then someone can add it as a layer ontop of DIrectX if need be. With cards and machines the speed they are, you'd lose very little.

Linux has a free one... someone might port that.

stevecullum
08-16-2005, 06:09 PM
And remember it will take M$ at least 3 years to make their new windows as stable and secure as XP is now :o)

Red_Oddity
08-17-2005, 03:15 AM
Personally is think these articles are more 'crying wolf' than actually having any use...
OpenGL has always been crap in Windows, the more optimised OpenGL you're running comes from your installed nVidia and Ati driver.

And besides, Vista won't be released for another year, and won't be production ready for another 3 years (just look at how well it went with XP :foreheads: .)

Nothing to see here folks, move along, move along.

Paul_Boland
08-17-2005, 12:04 PM
Just curious, what will the desktop of Windows Vista look like since it will employ OpenGL technology? Will Windows Vista be using some sort of 3D interface???

NanoGator
08-17-2005, 12:17 PM
Just curious, what will the desktop of Windows Vista look like since it will employ OpenGL technology? Will Windows Vista be using some sort of 3D interface???

The interface will be familiar to everybody that's used Windows. The difference is that it'll be more animated.

Personally, I'm excited about Vista because the graphics will be vector based instead of raster based. This means true resolution independence. In other words, those 3000+ pixel LCD displays suddenly become more practical. Sweet.

Red_Oddity
08-17-2005, 02:42 PM
It's more to do with a familiar API and drawing speeds than anything fancy, nothing new here, as far as i know this is exactly what Apple's aqua is doing already.

iFX
08-17-2005, 07:51 PM
Well... from what I've heard - people aren't getting worried that OpenGL 1.5+ *can't* work in Windows Vista - because it can. However, since the new Vista interface uses Direct3D, apparently, you can't use OpenGL at the same time... (supposedly the included MS implemented OpenGL 1.4 translates everything OpenGL into Direct3D).

So if you want to use Lightwave 3D 8.5+ (or any other OpenGL app for that matter) with the new OpenGL 2.0 (or even 1.5+) features, you have to disable the new 3D Vista interface - which, from what I've heard is probably one of the main reasons people would be bothered to upgrade to Vista in the first place ;) the new interface.

Think I'll be sticking with XP for as long as I possibly can... or maybe someone can bring out a new OpenGL ICD that can make the new Vista interface use OpenGL 2.0 instead of Direct3D ;) (but would that slow down Lightwave, if the OS interface was using OpenGL at the same time as Lightwave??)

Who knows... Like's been already said - Vista's still so far off, anything can happen by the time it's released... (and MS aren't really known for meeting their deadlines, so it probably won't even make it's "end of 2006" release date) - wasn't it originally supposed to come out in 2003? (back when it was still Longhorn or whatever the name was??)

hmmm... maybe I'll change over to a Mac ;) or maybe if Newtek released a Linux version of LW... hehehe (not sure if Linux would be viable for Newtek though...)

Red_Oddity
08-18-2005, 02:48 AM
hmmm... maybe I'll change over to a Mac ;) or maybe if Newtek released a Linux version of LW... hehehe (not sure if Linux would be viable for Newtek though...)

Hah, and even that won't be necessary any time soon, as OS-X86 appearantly can be run on ordinary PC hardware when you circumvent (or hack) the TPM, which is kinda cool really...

badllarma
08-18-2005, 05:07 AM
Well I'm more than happy with XP and the first thing I did to that is choose the clasic look to the interface as those daft XP buttons take up tooooo much real estate space so upgrading to some all singing dancing thing is the last thing I want.

If explorer is anything to go by all you will end up with is s%*@ loads of advertiments appearing on your desk top from people who have cracked the security and will spam you to death :help:

stone
08-18-2005, 08:05 AM
it will be horrible crippled if you dont install the drivers to your graphicscard. otherwise the drivers, catalyst, forceware and what have we, will provide you with fully optimised, up to date opengl drivers.

even winxp only supports opengl1.1 which is older than xp itself, and yet games, programs and everything in between uses opengl1.5/2.0.

i havnt seen microsoft trying as hard to kill any product as they have with opengl, and despite the amazingly rapid development of directx i dont really see them succed.

/stone

Paul_Boland
08-18-2005, 12:13 PM
Hey, thanks for the reply about the Vista desktop. Just wondering, does anyone know where I can view a pic of it, or something simular? I am interested in knowing what exactly will be on offer.

iFX
08-18-2005, 04:38 PM
You can find some here:

http://www.winsupersite.com/vista/

gotta say my first reaction was, "Can they make the interface waste any more room on my screen?" Could the icons possibly be any bigger?!

I'd hope there's a "small icons" option as well as other ways of reducing the space used up by these "enhanced" UI elements, otherwise you'd definitely need a 1600 or 2048 wide display for this one ;)

NanoGator
08-18-2005, 08:34 PM
You can find some here:

http://www.winsupersite.com/vista/

gotta say my first reaction was, "Can they make the interface waste any more room on my screen?" Could the icons possibly be any bigger?!

I'd hope there's a "small icons" option as well as other ways of reducing the space used up by these "enhanced" UI elements, otherwise you'd definitely need a 1600 or 2048 wide display for this one ;)

Heh. The whole point of the vector based display is that you can change the display DPI without degrading the icons etc by rescaling them. I'm fairly certain you'll be able to make them small if you want. They did a demo where they ran Calc.exe with Longhorn and resized it. In this case, it's raster so it still had to be rescaled, but the 3D hardware did some nice filtering on the app so it was sized up, but still smooth. Microsoft also announced that they're working with Viewsonic to make a 300DPI LCD screen. Weeee!

Silkrooster
08-18-2005, 09:21 PM
Microsoft also announced that they're working with Viewsonic to make a 300DPI LCD screen. Weeee!
Now that is something I would like to see. :thumbsup:
Silk

iFX
08-18-2005, 09:53 PM
Heh. The whole point of the vector based display is that you can change the display DPI without degrading the icons etc by rescaling them. I'm fairly certain you'll be able to make them small if you want. They did a demo where they ran Calc.exe with Longhorn and resized it. In this case, it's raster so it still had to be rescaled, but the 3D hardware did some nice filtering on the app so it was sized up, but still smooth. Microsoft also announced that they're working with Viewsonic to make a 300DPI LCD screen. Weeee!

In that case... That DOES sound cool!

Paul_Boland
08-19-2005, 12:27 PM
Hey, thanks for links to the pics. It looks really slick, cool, but some of the screen shots look like the computer was running at a resolution of 1600 x 1200! I hope Microsoft isn't going to force a large desktop resolution on to users. I work at 800 x 600 because when you go any higher, the text gets too small for comfort. I don't mind uping to 1024 x 768 when working with Lightwave, Poser, Particle Illusions, etc., but I keep at a resolution of 800 x 600 for word processing, DTP, and general file work, etc.

mattclary
08-19-2005, 12:38 PM
I work at 800 x 600 because when you go any higher, the text gets too small for comfort.

That means you need a bigger monitor. 800x600 is big even for a 15" monitor in my opinion. Do you have visual problems? At 19" (CRT) 1280x1024 is usually comfortable to most. On a 19" LCD, the text and icons actually look to big and clunky to me. Funny thing is, 17 and 19" LCD usually run at 1280x1024. To me, it makes more sense to get a 17" becuase they are cheaper and you get just as much pixel real estate. I have a 18.1" Viwesonic at 1280x1024 that seems to ne the sweet spot for me.

Paul_Boland
08-19-2005, 12:58 PM
That means you need a bigger monitor. 800x600 is big even for a 15" monitor in my opinion. Do you have visual problems? At 19" (CRT) 1280x1024 is usually comfortable to most. On a 19" LCD, the text and icons actually look to big and clunky to me. Funny thing is, 17 and 19" LCD usually run at 1280x1024. To me, it makes more sense to get a 17" becuase they are cheaper and you get just as much pixel real estate. I have a 18.1" Viwesonic at 1280x1024 that seems to ne the sweet spot for me.

LOL! Now, I have great eye sight and I own a 21" CRT monitor. It is just that I don't sit slap bang in front of my PC. The PC is on a computer desk, but I sit on the sofa, a good legs stretch away from it. If I was sitting right in front of my monitor, I would work at a higher resolution full time.