PDA

View Full Version : Is DirectX 8 scaring you?



12-28-2000, 02:33 PM
Hello,

I was wondering if you guys are going to move on to DirectX 8 ? I mean OpenGL is begining to age. I heard the SDK was great but didnt want to download it (too large). Hmmm Mr.Man is having a feeling of doubt ....

I used DirectDraw with Visual Basic in the DirectX7 version but now they have combined Direct 3D and Direct Draw into DirectGraphics
well that pretty much sucks.

Well thanks for the time. Bye.

http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/frown.gif

XBCT
12-28-2000, 02:43 PM
Look here: http://www.ronfrazier.net/apparition/index.html?appmain=research/index.html and youŽll see that you can do all that "Register Combiner" stuff and the other D3D8 features with OpenGl as well and WITHOUT learning a new API for every new feature set like it is the case with those DirectX releases....

Greets, XBTC!

[This message has been edited by XBCT (edited 12-28-2000).]

12-29-2000, 05:34 AM
Hi there,
I for one dont plan on moving to DirectX8, simply because I find it a bit daunting ( it took a 146mb download for the API, and I am having difficulty understanding the docs, let alone getting it to link), but thats probably me being a mediocre programmer ( and Im sure Im not alone :-), Opengl on the other hand 'clicked' with me quite quickly, I didnt need to download anything, and it was vaguely similar in fashion to how I used the Allegro Graphics Library.
However to get back to the point I wont change coz I do 3d Graphics and OpenGL is a very good 3d Graphics engine that does everything I need, and as the saying goes 'if it aint broke dont fix it'
Regards :-)

Deiussum
12-29-2000, 07:55 AM
Sometime I plan on learning the new stuff in DirectX 8 a bit better but only so I can be more objective when I say that OpenGL is better. http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif

As to them combining DirectDraw and Direct3d, I can see good points and bad points. It now appears that using either 3d or 2d is much like doing them in OpenGL. It's kind of nice that you don't have to fall back to GDI functions for doing stuff like loading a bmp. However, it kind of sucks that people who have gotten used to the surfaces of DirectDraw (like myself) will now find that there is no real DirectX 8 equivalent. It makes me wonder how many people will spend the time to learn Dx8, only to find that Dx9 will force the way they have to think again. Then they need to change with Dx10, Dx11.... Granted, other releases might not differ as dramatically as Dx8 did from previous releases, but there's no guarantee that they won't.

OpenGL may be older, but it's got a stable API, and there are always new extensions to use. And in my experience it's faster, which is a big plus in itself.

Suvcon
12-30-2000, 10:56 AM
Oh~~I am dying...the game "Microsoft MechWarrior: Vengeance" has depended on Dx8. but it still performs slowly,very slowly.... 8( I missing my "Homeworld" and "quake" ....

[This message has been edited by Suvcon (edited 12-30-2000).]

ninja770
01-02-2001, 01:46 PM
im a pretty new programmer and ive just found the dx7 and dx8 sdk too hard to understand. I guess I understood openGL a lot faster than DX. well i still havent understodd directx. maybe im doomed to never do so but openGL is waht im gonna stick with until a get soem real 3D experience.

Julio
01-02-2001, 02:22 PM
DirectX 8 is actually made DirectX programming much easier. They've combined functions so loading audio has never been easier. Also with the use of D3dx Direct3D programming has been made as easy as OpenGL. I still prefer OpenGL though. http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif

RobertSI
01-03-2001, 10:14 AM
Humans have a short life span. It is nice to be able to spend a fews months learning something say...OpenGL and be able to build beautiful worlds. DirectX is an ever changing
piece of crap. I downloaded version 8 and now Unreal Tournament won't run. By the way after you spend how long learning DirectX you will never, ever be able to keep up with all the changes and still produce fully functional programs. Do you realize that Microsoft has some 2,000 plus engineers, how the hell can any sole individual ever learn all of DirectX in such a short lifespan? No less do something useful with it before the next version comes out!

outlander78
01-03-2001, 11:45 AM
If DirectX's API is ever solidified, and incorporates "DirectGL" I think it will be excellent. However, shooting at a moving target is almost as frustrating as their using COM as a base! I think I'll stick to OpenGL for as long as possible!

El Jefe
01-04-2001, 07:39 AM
The main thing I always hated about DirectX was that the architecture was just crap. Nothing was apparently very easy to do. And then they were very eager for people to use their product. But then of course, these things are sort of in opposition....why would people be eager to use it if it isn't easy to set up? I mean, when I write my GL type apps, all of the crazy stupid code is the code that handles creating my windows/threads/message pumps/message handlers...blah blah.

The final coup de grace was the fact that they have to use annoying terminology and make their documentation tedious to interpret...I mean, why call something "x" when you can call it "arctan(2x + y) * log((x + y) * y)". Naturally, the writers probably write it in this fashion to bolster their pseudo-superior-intellect ego. None of this makes their product easy to use.

So, in short, the lesson should be...Make it easy to use, make it powerful and flexible, make it portable...and people will come.

Unfortunately, Microsoft only seems to have gotten the powerful and flexible part mostly right. GL on the other hand has more or less achieved all of these things...

So, the only thing that frightens me about DirectX is that it has the money backing and that Microsoft has employed a push-it-in-your-face-and-use-it-or-die mentality to get people to use it. People should use an API because it's good...not because, someone is twisting their arm.

...sigh..back to work..

XBCT
01-04-2001, 08:29 AM
Hehe....Exactly my opinion El Jeffe....
Why did M$ always push inferiour stuff down
the customers throat with the power of their money?

Greets, XBTC!

ekas78
01-06-2001, 12:51 PM
I feel DX8 (and previous rel.) are just to wierd. The whole "com" thing just makes me look in another direction. GL on the other hand got me from the first time.

The fact that Microsoft OWNS Dx technology is also something that really makes me feel uncomfortable. How much are theese guys going to controll in the universe anyway??

I'll stick with GL.

01-06-2001, 03:14 PM
what i love in dX is it's great portability. As soon as you want to render very complex graphic simulations, you need some power, and so you need to distribute the scene rendering in a cluster of powerfull stations which run ... Unix... PC under windows are neither powerfull, nor architectured to run the one with each other. So, m$ plays in the first age school, and i'm pleased that he stays there.

coco
01-06-2001, 09:36 PM
It's this simple: I wont spend time learning (and money and effort) in an API every time its creator decides it needs new ways to control the market. This is DX case since its begining.
On the other hand, OpenGL is carefully designed toward stability, consistency, speed, protability, etc, and its design decisions are only driven by engineers who want to squeeze video cards' power more and more, not make money or force industry control.
In fact, the newest, most interesting DX8 features (pixel and vertex shaders) arent supported yet in hardware by any card, but OpenGL can expose card functionality immediatly. For example, DX8 pixel shaders dont work on HW on the GeForce2 cards (actually, in no current card), yet GeForce2 based cards expose very, very powerfull pixel shading capabilities in OpenGL since mid 2000.

All that without taking into account cool things like portability, ease of learning, documentation support, independent, works on NT, etc, all features unrivaled by DX.

Well, in my country theres a saying about girl taste for boys: money beats handsome. I think M$ is trying to do this with DX, pay $$$ to developers so the use DX only, and thats *bad* for developers and users (of course, M$ can recover its investment latter when he gets control).

Well, enough of boring, repeated stuff.

DalTXColtsFan
01-08-2001, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by Mr.Man:
Hello,

I was wondering if you guys are going to move on to DirectX 8 ? I mean OpenGL is begining to age. I heard the SDK was great but didnt want to download it (too large). Hmmm Mr.Man is having a feeling of doubt ....

I used DirectDraw with Visual Basic in the DirectX7 version but now they have combined Direct 3D and Direct Draw into DirectGraphics
well that pretty much sucks.

Well thanks for the time. Bye.

http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/frown.gif

Hello Mr. Man.

Out of curiosity, why exactly do you say "OpenGL is beginning to age"?

Just curious.

Thanks
Joe

coco
01-10-2001, 12:18 PM
OpenGL ageing process has only made stronger the fact that OpenGL was extremelly well designed, easy to use, consistent, extensible, etc... I agree that maybe OpenGL is not pushing the industry forward as rapidly as direct3D (which introduced in dx8 some really good, forward-looking features), but for what I car about (coding), OpenGL gives me numerous, unrivaled advantages over Direct3D. Still, all functionality and more of directx8 and later versions can be implemented as extensions in opengl, and I find OpenGL extensions to be very easy to query and use.
In fact, OpenGL already exposes cards pixel shading features since long beforce directx8 (for ecxample GeForce2 cards)! So why worry about age, if it hasn't limited OpenGL use and capacity in any way? I worry about DirectX direction in the future, since it's completelly dependant on one company's interests, and that has proven to morph so fast that your code can as fast be left obsolet. thats only one of directx drawbacks...

DaMangz
10-30-2002, 06:41 PM
Haha, it's funny.

I started with DirectX and migrated to OpenGL.

I have never regretted my decision to do this. I am learning 3d programming now, not a n aweful junky API that is impossible to figure out.

Now that I am using SDL and OpenGL, I am writing code so much faster and able to experiment with new ideas and learn much quicker. All of the bull**** windows crap is gone from my program. It looks likes a normal C/C++ program that is easy to read and follow.

I will never go back to DirectX again. I only code on Windows because it still has better 3D drivers and I like Visual Studio's help features (the only thing Microsoft did right in my opinion).

For GUIs I use C++ Builder. Best tool in the world. Just as easy as Visual Basic and it's real C/C++. And they are porting it to Linux I think. Forget about MFC. Piece of ****.

I think Microsoft likes to make their software hard to program on purpose. It keeps them in business. Programming isn't hard. It's programming Microsoft junk that's hard.

1000_Monkeys_Typing
10-30-2002, 07:51 PM
There is more functionality exposed right now via extensions, and incorporated directly into v1.4, than are available even with DX9. This is not even including v2.0, which is still probably closer than DX9. Not to mention that OpenGL has a diverse community of people deciding which direction it should take, not a single organization with a history of short-sided and hostile-to-developers decisions.

vladk
10-30-2002, 10:11 PM
Tell ya a secret. All those big games running on DirectX are using same functionality as found in OpenGL. But their phylosophy is thus: one engine (DirectX) covers all aspects: graphics, sound, interface...

I consider myself to be an advanced C++ programmer. Still, DirectX gives me alot of headache. Starting from the function and variable names: too long. Too indistinguishable. Too many lookups in the manual which lowers my learning FPS http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif

On quality graphics adapters there is almost no difference between OpenGL and Direct3d.

Heck, compare a simple "triangle" demo written in OpenGL against the one written in DirectX. See the difference?

*Aaron*
10-31-2002, 08:09 AM
I'm curious how this old thread got resurrected after being dead for over 21 months.

dabeav
10-31-2002, 09:35 AM
<Looks at his collection of 6 DirectX books on his shelf, and CRYs like a little *****>

Opengl is SOOOO much easier to learn, to use, to read. I dont know why ANY one, let alone everyone (as it seems some times in the game industry) is using directx.

And i dont buy that crap about using it because it wraps everything up in one package. BULL. I have my own package, and the entire package dosnt cause me to change my way of thinking each 6 months. Like the direct x releases.

Whatever happened to, sometimes the simplest answer is the right one.

Opengl = graphics;
OpenAL = sound;
Glut = input;
devIL (formerly OpenIL) = image loading;
OpenML = even a video library;

AND THEY ALL USE OPENGL STYLE SYNTAX. Learn ONCE, and you learn them all. Why cant people see this??

zeckensack
10-31-2002, 03:09 PM
I use DirectSound ... version 5.
and sometimes even DirectInput5.

Spiffy http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif

(if only OpenGL could match DXG's buffer management ...)

Old GLman
10-31-2002, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by DaMangz:
Haha, it's funny.

I started with DirectX and migrated to OpenGL.

I have never regretted my decision to do this. I am learning 3d programming now, not a n aweful junky API that is impossible to figure out.

Now that I am using SDL and OpenGL, I am writing code so much faster and able to experiment with new ideas and learn much quicker. All of the bull**** windows crap is gone from my program. It looks likes a normal C/C++ program that is easy to read and follow.

I will never go back to DirectX again. I only code on Windows because it still has better 3D drivers and I like Visual Studio's help features (the only thing Microsoft did right in my opinion).

For GUIs I use C++ Builder. Best tool in the world. Just as easy as Visual Basic and it's real C/C++. And they are porting it to Linux I think. Forget about MFC. Piece of ****.

I think Microsoft likes to make their software hard to program on purpose. It keeps them in business. Programming isn't hard. It's programming Microsoft junk that's hard.



NVIDIA's Linux drivers are far superior to their windows drivers. I may be wrong, but in every test I did, the linux drivers outperformed the windows ones.

Old GLman

DaMangz
10-31-2002, 08:09 PM
Actually my tests with Linux have also confirmed what you said, with a Rage 128 Pro.

On Windows XP on a P4 2.0ghz system, I got about 0.3 fps with OpenGL software mode.

On Linux on a P2 450 Dual system same video card I got 10fps.

Goes to show you Linux is better!

zeckensack
11-01-2002, 06:36 AM
Originally posted by DaMangz:
Actually my tests with Linux have also confirmed what you said, with a Rage 128 Pro.

On Windows XP on a P4 2.0ghz system, I got about 0.3 fps with OpenGL software mode.

On Linux on a P2 450 Dual system same video card I got 10fps.

Goes to show you Linux is better!While I do agree that Linux has by far the most efficient mem management of any consumer OS, this is IMO just a case of Mesa being better than the five year old MS software implementation. Come to think about it, Mesa does support a lot of modern extensions that certainly help performance.

IceDagger
11-01-2002, 07:14 AM
DX8?

I only started coding with OpenGL last week. So I guess I'll stick with it for now.

I agree with most of what you guys said. Why bother learning a new API that's bound to be replaced within the year? It doesn't make sense.

Zork
11-04-2002, 03:36 AM
Cut the MIcro$oft crap!
For drawing you've got:OpenGL.
For sound you've got:OpenAL.
For input you've got:Glut.
For loading images you can use devIL.
As for OS better using Linux.It's the best!

Chalnoth
11-04-2002, 08:00 AM
I just have to say that I'll never use Direct3D. First of all, OpenGL just works. Since I currently only plan on developing programs for limited (or no...) circulation, I'm essentially only going to develop for nVidia hardware, which means there is no problem attempting to support different vendor extensions.

Additionally, I do want to make the move to Linux soon, making the case for using OpenGL with nVidia hardware even stronger (Plus, it seems that nVidia's OpenGL drivers are better, anyway).

Deiussum
11-04-2002, 08:09 AM
It's always fun when these old threads somehow pop back up to the top. They just never die! http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif

DaMangz
11-04-2002, 09:13 AM
Well the linux crowd will shoot me, but I use Windows over Linux. Why? I'll tell you. I don't know how to use all of the Linux tools to write programs. I don't have a year to spend time learning all the GNU tools. Linux has no concept of an IDE, at least a good one. I've been trained on Microsoft development programs. Sorry. I have 5 years of experience on MS stuff, so I can get my work done 100 times faster than trying it on Linux. Everytime I try things on Linux I get library errors, things won't compile and link because I have the wrong libraries, things don't work, etc etc. If people want everyone to use Linux, they need to make it for average users/programmers to be able to come up to speed quickly with it, with standard libraries that always work and not change every 5 seconds on you. Everytime I upgrade to a new version of Mandrake or Red Hat everything breaks. Linux is still just a hacker's playground. I don't have the time to learn all of it inside and out to use it for prototyping. It's fine if all I want to do is Python scripting. But it's just too wild for me to want to spend the time to tame. I am just telling my honest opinions of trying to use Linux to develop on. I wind up going back to Windows because it's faster, easier and I get results done relatively quickly. With XP it is very stable and even better than 98. But I will use OpenGL over D3D anyday.

nexusone
11-04-2002, 09:21 AM
Halloween is over....

Chalnoth
11-04-2002, 02:55 PM
Linux has no concept of an IDE, at least a good one.

I just have to say, that if you want to see a good C++ IDE, check out Borland's C++ Builder. It's far, far beyond what Microsoft offers with MSVC++, as far as ease of development goes.

DaMangz
11-04-2002, 04:52 PM
I use C++ Builder and Delphi frequently. I checked out Kylix and it is amazingly cool.

I like Linux I am all for it. It just really pissed me off the other day that's why I was all out against it. And I have screwed it up royally several times to the point I had to reinstall everything. I can get around pretty good now but I find it really hard to make programs with. I learned to program on IDEs. I never wrote a makefile in my life. I tried to use KDevelop but I couldn't figure out how to use SDL in my config file. Nobody would help me out either. So that is why I was so pissed off the other day with Linux.

Deiussum
11-05-2002, 05:28 AM
I usually don't let myself get pulled into these debates, but Borland's IDE better than VC++!? Muahahahahahah. Maybe if you want to pretend you are programming in VB it's better for you. Personally, when I was trying out Borland, I found the lack of the class viewer that VC++ has frustratingly annoying.

I also tend to agree that I can write programs much faster in VC++ than in Linux. How to do things in Linux just isn't as obvious. Like, how do you step through your code? It's not necessarily obvious to everyone that you need compile your app with the right options and run your app through an extra program in order to get that functionality.

Anyway, I'll stop ranting now. http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif

11-05-2002, 10:01 AM
I've been banging my head against D3D for years now. Starting with D3d 3, when for who knows why, They were promoting this retained mode crap and had no useful documentation on immediate mode. All I wanted to do was throw some triangles at the screen for cripes sake!

I'm happy with DX8, but I've started learning OpenGL. And mand do I feel dumb for not doing this sooner.

HERE'S MY QUESTION:
I picked up DX vertex buffers and started using them as soon as I saw them. I used to write my vertexes one at a time, but sending a whole model's worth at once has got to be faster! In all the OpenGL code I've seen so far, vertexes are written one at a time, each one a seperate function call.

Is this some extension I haven't found docs or examples for yet?

Also, I am looking to reach every windows PC (Win98 and up) with at least some 3d acceleration with my software. I used to think that meant using D3D, but I'm beginning to wonder if I was completely wrong about that.

Every card on the market now comes with GL drivers, and it's integrated in the OS. I'm wondering if I can reach 95% of the same audience by using OpenGL instead.

11-05-2002, 10:12 AM
Oh, vertex arrays. None of the tutorials I've looked at yet have these.

*sigh of resignation*
I'm going to start reading the API reference.

11-05-2002, 01:13 PM
Did not read the posts, but I am sure that all these monthly DX vs OpenGL posts are done by people who earn their living by working for the 'dark side'.

Old GLman
11-05-2002, 01:54 PM
I've been programming in Linux for only a couple months now, but I find it quite satisfying. At first, not having an IDE was like not having toilet paper to wipe your ass! Programming in Linux is, in fact, simple. The learning curve is steep, but once you have it down, its amazing quick. I can adapt just one makefile to compile all my OpenGL programs. Your source directories remain clean: no microsoft generated crap. You learn how to use the tools, and the process behind compiling, linking, etc.. gcc is an excellant compiler and gdb is an excellant debugger. I encourage everyone to have a go and not give up.

Old GLman

DaMangz
11-06-2002, 06:04 AM
Hi old man,
I love Linux, it's just such a learning curve and I'm impatient. I learned how to do Mickey soft stuff, so I can get stuff done fast on it. But on linux I am banging my head how to do a AutoConf script. I mangled my Linux setup to with this new update. Argg.

I finally got some cheap books on programming Linux. Not really deep, but at least now I can read how to do some of this stuff. I learned to program with Borland Turbo Pascal and Turbo C, so I never worked with makefiles and stuff. I don't think makefiles are hard to write, but autoconf stuff I don't understand at all.

The reason I like LInux is because it's free. Free as in beer. I like the whole philosophy. But I have very little background in Unix. I learned on Dos. So I am really a Dos programmer who was forced to write Windows programs. I like Linux as it is close to Dos in many ways. The only thing I don't like is they use AT&T syntax for assembler, it's all backwards.

See yah

Chalnoth
11-06-2002, 07:20 AM
I usually don't let myself get pulled into these debates, but Borland's IDE better than VC++!? Muahahahahahah. Maybe if you want to pretend you are programming in VB it's better for you. Personally, when I was trying out Borland, I found the lack of the class viewer that VC++ has frustratingly annoying.

There's a class viewer in Boland's C++ Builder that works great. It's also got better debug information (One sort of plugin that ships with C++ Builder 5 called CodeGuard detects memory leaks for you...a very nice feature).


Is this some extension I haven't found docs or examples for yet?

You can use Vertex Arrays and Display Lists in OpenGL. Check the specs. In the GL specs v. 1.4, vertex arrays are in section 2.8, and display lists are in 5.4.

A vertex array is exactly like it sounds, just a simple array of vertex data. It's quite easy to figure out what to do.

Display lists are also quite easy. The essence of a display list is as follows:



glNewList( n, mode );
//n is a unique number that you assign this list
//mode is either GL_COMPILE or GL_COMPILE_AND_EXECUTE

//Put lots of rendering code here
glEndList();

//Then, later, execute the entire list with the simple command:
glCallList( n );

[This message has been edited by Chalnoth (edited 11-06-2002).]

mm_freak
11-06-2002, 05:50 PM
I'm gonna stick with OpenGL as well, since it's easy and clear.

The COM+ interface is a concept by Micro$oft of making programs not portable. So they can be sure, that programs developed using COM+ cannot be compiled on other operating systems. People, wake up! M$ is gonna get full control over anything.

Well, another question... does anyone know, where to get devIL for Win32 and an OpenAL tutorial (not example source)?

Deiussum
11-07-2002, 05:13 AM
First of all, DirectX uses COM, not COM+. Second, COM is has a binary specification that was developed with the idea that it could be used by any language, and any system. It simply has been used on Windows primarily, though I have also heard of an implementation that was being worked on for Linux at one point. Dunno what ever came of that, though.

rosentzp
11-07-2002, 05:24 AM
here it is - DevIL: http://openil.sourceforge.net/

for OpenAL tutorials - google.com is the right way...

Turbo_Pascal
11-07-2002, 11:50 AM
Hi,

I was trying to learn direct3d since version 5 but i always give up, it was too hard to understand for me, too much to write, too much to understand.

With i learned Opengl quicky, i was able to write my gl app in about 2 days!.

My complain about Opengl is not geting able to bind the texture inside a glbegin-Glend, that force me to sort by texture id my polys for optimize the glbegin-glend crunch.

Another problem that i get is that i have severals opengl problems with some hardware video cards (expecially some ATIs), my pograms run great in some computers but crapy in others.

Also, i found that the Opengl picking method run so slow in hardware accelerated video cards!, almost 60% slower tht in software opengl mode.

Few days ago i have checked DX8, it is now very redesigned, setuping the viewport and the application can be done with just few lines!!, and it allow me to change the texture inside a begin end (equivalent).

However i don't found any easy picking support, i found a kind procedure to "trace a ray" and see if polygon is intersected, but this rutine is so hard to understand and i think it is a very stupid picking method.

Other things is that i don't found a displaylist equivalent in DX8, and this feature is one of the best feature is the heart of my opengl app.

Turbo Pascal.

aggregate
11-07-2002, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by Deiussum:
I usually don't let myself get pulled into these debates, but Borland's IDE better than VC++!? Muahahahahahah. Maybe if you want to pretend you are programming in VB it's better for you. Personally, when I was trying out Borland, I found the lack of the class viewer that VC++ has frustratingly annoying.

I also tend to agree that I can write programs much faster in VC++ than in Linux. How to do things in Linux just isn't as obvious. Like, how do you step through your code? It's not necessarily obvious to everyone that you need compile your app with the right options and run your app through an extra program in order to get that functionality.

Anyway, I'll stop ranting now. :)

Lack or class viewer? Hmm... *stares at that little thing he has docked next to the editor widget* You mean that thing, aye? :) *Right clicks it* whoah... look at all those menus.

Sorry - little rant. C++Builder has an excelent "classviewer." It also offers the same productivity you'd except to find in Visual C++. Just so you know, it's wise to give a product time before you cut it down. It's just like this thread.

As far as cutting RAD goes, you appear to know nothing about development. RAD isn't "l4m3", especially when it has a lot of power behind it. It can dramatically increase the productivity and the quality of your application. But hey, if you want to shrug tools like C++Builder and Qt Designer off, that's your call. However, don't take smarter developers down with you. ;)

I do enjoy ranting. :)

stodge
11-07-2002, 01:48 PM
Yes DirectX scares the hell out of me.

*Aaron*
11-07-2002, 07:19 PM
So, is DirectX 6 scaring you guys too?

zeckensack
11-07-2002, 07:32 PM
Computers scare me all the time, I don't need any extra software for that ...

igel74
11-08-2002, 04:49 AM
Hello,
since i start to programming in OpenGL, programming is wonderful. Last i had this feeling on programming the good old AMIGA.

(First i have a look on DX, and think: What get this **** on earth!)

Deiussum
11-08-2002, 05:43 AM
Ok, maybe I was wrong about no class viewer in Borland. http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif I just remember having to write a Windows app in it for school, and I looked all over for something that let me jump right to a specific method of a class. I had to end up resorting to just scanning the file, or using ctrl-f to find what I was looking for. Maybe it was just the version that the school had.

I will say this, though. I did not like the wrapper classes that much. But then I didn't work with them much either. Most of the MFC wrappers are fairly thin wrappers for Win32 API functions, which I know fairly well. It seemed that the Borland classes tended to try and abstract that a lot more.

I've never heard of those other tools you are talking about. Most of my Linux development involves makefiles, gcc, and gdb. I know how to use them, but my point was that it's not always immediately obvious to new Linux programmers how to use them. If you think it is, well, I guess you've never talked to some of the programmers I have. http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif

One other thing before I go. Thinking that the tools you use can somehow be used to judge how "smart" you are, is pretty nieve.

[This message has been edited by Deiussum (edited 11-08-2002).]

Zork
11-08-2002, 05:50 AM
Originally posted by DaMangz:

I like Linux as it is close to Dos in many ways. The only thing I don't like is they use AT&T syntax for assembler, it's all backwards.

See yah

You don't need AT&T syntax to do some assembler stuff in Linux.Just use Nasm (nasm.sourceforge.net) who knows the Intel syntax.

mm_freak
11-08-2002, 07:34 AM
Deiussum: What's the difference between COM and COM+ and how should it be implemented in Linux? Does Linux have the namespace of Windows? No. Linux is another world... better yet, another dimension.

rosentzp: Thanks.

Deiussum
11-08-2002, 10:57 AM
COM+ is an extension to COM. I haven't done a lot with COM+, but I believe it offers distributed programming like DCOM and is integrated with MTS.

And so far as COM on Linux, I haven't looked at it much, but I know it's been done. I remember it being mentioned it in the book Inside COM. I just did a quick search and while COM for Linux isn't real productive due to so many .coms, if you search for DCOM for Linux, you find a lot.

Edit: Found some links about COM on various flavors of UNIX.
http://www.tru64unix.compaq.com/com/

http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/products/dcom/

http://www.microsoft.com/com/resources/solaris.asp
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions/com_body.html

[This message has been edited by Deiussum (edited 11-08-2002).]

aggregate
11-08-2002, 08:22 PM
Deiussum,

Sorry. Those last few comments were simply sarcasm. I didn't really mean it.

Yes, VCL aims to be very high level. It also utilizes many Delphi extensions to make it this way. For example, you may see someone manipulate a member of a label like this: label1->Text = "Hello, World!"; Since this member is a property, it'll be safely assigned, and then the control will redraw properly (hopefully :P).

However, basing itself on high level OO, the idea of deriving from widgets, using layout widgets, etc., VCL still doesn't forget the low-level needs. As you mentioned earlier, you liked how MFC was very thin and you could manipulate it with the pure API (or using the appropriate wrappers). Well, VCL allows the same. Of course, the API isn't wrapped because this makes no sense whatsoever here, since the toolkit is designed around Delphi ideas. What it does give you, however, is properties returning these low level handles. Such as the Handle property on widgets that have windows or device context associated with them. Also, if you need finer control, you can easily subclass a widget (using VCL or the API routines) or assign message handlers (in a manner similar to that of MFC).

Tools, tools, tools. Just use what you know best and work best with. http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif For some people, this may be Visual Studio.NET, for others, this may be a display full of adjacent vim instances and a few terminals/consoles. One person may decide that C++ is all he needs, while another decides to Python may be the best for a certain job. It's all about choice, aye? http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif

----------------------------------------

DirectX versus OpenGL... These types of discussions really need to disappear. OpenGL is certainly better for a beginner; mostly because of the learning curve is shorter and communities like this. But, it does truly depend on the person. I know a lot of people that got along with it just fine. It's certainly more painful to setup and initially use, but beyond that, atleast since 7.0, it hasn't been extremely painful. I still prefer OpenGL, and I'd certainly recommend it over D3D anyday. http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif

Stack Overflow
11-14-2002, 01:10 PM
I prefer OpenGL. It's really easy. I just created a 3D Rotating Cube in one week with GLUT. DirectX is Hard!!!

[This message has been edited by VC6-OGL (edited 11-14-2002).]

11-14-2002, 05:17 PM
This thread just...won't...die!

Stack Overflow
11-14-2002, 06:07 PM
I think it is because DirectX is scaring us!!!

kaysoft
11-15-2002, 12:08 AM
Look at me.. I'm shivering!!!!!!!

MickeyMouse
11-15-2002, 01:04 AM
hi people!


Originally posted by Turbo_Pascal:

My complain about Opengl is not geting able to bind the texture inside a glbegin-Glend, that force me to sort by texture id my polys for optimize the glbegin-glend crunch.


It can't be the truth.
glBegin() and glEnd() give almost no slowdown, ok gives some but not reasonable.
After you ordered your faces by texture ids it's faster because of another reason, that is speed of glBindTexture() function, which is really slow because it copies whole texture into memory http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif
glBegin() and glEnd() shouldn't have really anything to do with noticable speed slowdown...

djbuzzkill
11-16-2002, 10:03 PM
eventually and hopefully once a standard shading language has been established, the api argument will become a moot point.

Stack Overflow
12-02-2002, 04:18 PM
DirectX Programming Is Complex!!!

Halcyon
12-02-2002, 10:05 PM
Hey the only thing happening for DirectX 8.1 that openGL doesn't have build in as it stands is the internal shading language. I'm assuming OpenGL 2.0 isn't out as an official release yet. But i mean you have Cg to take care of that...so...well..DirectX 8.1 isn't anythign that scares me. I keep wanting to check it out only because of the encapsulation in classes. BUT, when i look at how much more elegent OpenGL is...i wonder WHY i even care about DirectX.

I'm sure it has it's advantages, but not enough to make me think about switching from OpenGL. But enought to have me consider learning both. And i guess both should be learnt, because it's a lot like Java and C++. They are usefull in different situations. Have fun trying to make an equivalent to a java applet in C++. That takes some nasty work with activeX controls.

-Halcyon

prashantgp
12-03-2002, 12:13 AM
Hi all,
i hope i am not sounding rude.
i've just started my life as a programmer and doesn't have experience like u great guys. what i would like to tell all of u is instead of debating on some wasteful stuff
( what to use either OpenGL or Directx)
, u people could have spent time in replying many posts which remain unanswered,which would have been of great help to begineers like us.
hope u all understand,

it's just a thought.

regards
prashant

prashantgp
12-03-2002, 12:15 AM
Hi all,
i hope i am not sounding rude.
i've just started my life as a programmer and doesn't have experience like u great guys. what i would like to tell all of u is instead of debating on some wasteful stuff
( what to use either OpenGL or Directx)
, u people could have spent time in replying many posts which remain unanswered,which would have been of great help to begineers like us.
hope u all understand and expect the best things in future and trying to serve the meaning of this discussion forum,

regards
prashant

it's just a thought.

Stack Overflow
01-01-2003, 06:39 PM
Oh No, DirectX 9 is out.

Run for your lives!!!

- VC6-OGL

MrShoe
01-01-2003, 08:07 PM
Yer, DX9 is out, looks like all the DX coders out there now have alot of obsolete knowldge and now have to go and relearn a new graphics API, hooray.

Halcyon
01-01-2003, 08:16 PM
Actually, I heard that DX9 isn't really that much more different from DX8. I mean from DX7, DX8 was a HUUUUUGEEEE change. But I think that with that change, DX improved a lot in general. Andre LeMonthe (or some name like that...he's on the back of OpenGL Game Programming...and is the CEO of Xtreme Games)...well he likes dx now with the release of version 8. I mean as it stands i just don't think one is DEFINETELY better than the other. I'll tell you one thing OpenGL has going for it that DX doesn't....this AWESOME forum!!!

- Halcyon