PDA

View Full Version : OT: NVidia, plz don't be so windows-centric :/



Julien Cayzac
06-13-2002, 07:54 AM
I was looking at the new Cg website, willing to download the Cg compiler and play a little with it, when the cruel truth badly hit me: The so-called industry-standard compiler was a Windows executable ! :p

Can't you only realize some of us are not running Win XP 4000 ? What does it cost you to compile the thing for Linux (unless, of course, the "thing" is badly written and not portable) ?

Julien.
quite disguted, one more time.

Julien Cayzac
06-13-2002, 08:02 AM
Hmm... I just read on the community site a Linux version should be available tomorrow. Any confirmation ??

Julien.
already less disgusted http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/tongue.gif

Gorg
06-13-2002, 08:29 AM
I want a linux version too!!!

jra101
06-13-2002, 09:29 AM
There will be a Linux version, should be out "soon".

Korval
06-13-2002, 11:49 AM
You have to accept the fact that today, and for the near future, the industry-standard OS for PCs is Windows. Linux is making good inroads on the market, but most computers, and most PC developers, work on Windows boxes.

Julien Cayzac
06-13-2002, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by Korval:
You have to accept the fact that today, and for the near future, the industry-standard OS for PCs is Windows.
(...)


This is the same kind of meaningless statement / flame invitation as in the thread about D3D vs GL, to which I prefer not to respond.

Anyway, thanks jra101 for the info! That's great!

Julien.

MikeC
06-13-2002, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by deepmind:
This is the same kind of meaningless statement / flame invitation

No, be fair. That's just a statement about the numbers as they currently stand. There was no value judgement implied in the phrase "industry standard".

dorbie
06-13-2002, 01:21 PM
NVIDIA is possibly the least Windows centric of all the graphics vendors. They produce better fully functional drivers for Linux that any other and they STILL manage to produce the best drivers for Windows at the same time.

NVIDIA please continue doing exactly what you've been doing on OS support.

Julien Cayzac
06-13-2002, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by dorbie:
NVIDIA is possibly the least Windows centric of all the graphics vendors. They produce better fully functional drivers for Linux that any other
(...)
Yup they do a great job. But I would like to see more RPMs for their "standard" tools, such as their effect browser, etc.
While I agree it should not be profitable if Linux was such an outsider as Korval thinks, that statement gets wronger as many "major" industry actors are switching to Linux as their 1st development platform.
But anyway, NVidia does a great great job as I previously said, and this whole thread's motivation was my big frustration while I was thinking Cg was a Windows only technology...

Julien.

zed
06-13-2002, 09:16 PM
the more i think about it (cg) the better this could be for gl, + if this could be intergrated into opengl2.0? the skys the limit

davepermen
06-13-2002, 09:30 PM
integrated to gl2.0? what about the gl2.0 shading language and its own shading compiler? you forgot these? this IS gl2.0, just the nvidia-copy of it..

at the weekend i'll take a look how good it works..

zed
06-14-2002, 12:21 AM
integrated like
existing side by side eg u can choose one or the other
eg like vertex arrays or immediate mode both exist u can choose the one which fits what u want better (flexibility over speed)
ie opengl2.0 shaders seem more powerful but the hardware support maybe isnt as good as the cg ones
(hmmm doesnt that sound a little bit like opengl vs d3d back when d3d was version 3 http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif )

CopyCat
06-15-2002, 12:07 AM
Originally posted by zed:

ie opengl2.0 shaders seem more powerful but the hardware support maybe isnt as good as the cg ones
)
Uhm sorry ? hardware support of ogl2.0 shader isn't so good as cg ? Are you mad or somthing ?
First off ogl2.0 spec are still under work.
Second....cG is only Nvidia ( industry standard - right - I can see that I will be working for all new desktop board - non NVidia , and other stuff like SGI boards etc ).

zeckensack
06-15-2002, 01:34 AM
Originally posted by zed:
ie opengl2.0 shaders seem more powerful but the hardware support maybe isnt as good as the cg ones
(hmmm doesnt that sound a little bit like opengl vs d3d back when d3d was version 3 http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif )

Why do you people always have to get this wrong?

Implement this kinda pseudocode:
out.color=tex0.sample(tex0.coords)*tex1.sample(tex 1.coords);

1)With GL1.3 Multitexturing
2)With ARB_texture_env_combine
3)With NV_register_combiners
4)With ATIX_texture_env_combine3
5)With ATI_fragment_shader
6)With NVIDIA's shader extensions
7With "Cg"
8)With OpenGL2 shading language

and then you can explain to me how a language defines anything about hardware capabilities. Aargh!

edit: I feel I should clarify

You can implement this stuff with the OpenGL2 shading language just fine. Given the right drivers (I doubt they will come out though), a RivaTNT would be able to run the GL2 version in hardware. Haha. So GL2 raises the bar for hardware requirements. Hmmm.

[This message has been edited by zeckensack (edited 06-15-2002).]

dorbie
06-15-2002, 02:17 AM
You should append question marks to your rhetorical questions.

Omaha
06-15-2002, 12:04 PM
Until the Linux community stops being such an anarchy, and the "wisened few" stop getting their jollies insulting and making fun of those that DON'T know the 4,000 command line parameters for the various Linux commands, Linux will never achieve any sizable power in the computer world.

Frankly, I agree with John Carmack: A company can do perfectly well only providing Windows versions of consumer software. (be it game or driver)

jwatte
06-15-2002, 12:37 PM
You can't argue with 97% market share.

I tried, once; spent several years doing it, but learned that it was futile (in addition to learning many other, more useful things :-).

zed
06-15-2002, 08:36 PM
>>Are you mad or somthing ?<<

i am but thats beside the point, i fail to see what u + zeckensack mean (perhaps use a simple example with simple words)

>>You can implement this stuff with the OpenGL2 shading language just fine. Given the right drivers (I doubt they will come out though), a RivaTNT would be able to run the GL2 version in hardware<<

i dont understand, so given the right drivers a tnt will be able to do dot3 on the board in hardware? i fail to see how this is possible, please explain.

>>hardware support of ogl2.0 shader isn't so good as cg ?<<

true opengl2.0 isnt final at the moment but from what ive read (it being more advanced than cg with branches etc) the percentage of stuff that can possibily be done on the card in hardware is lower than with cg where the abilities are less.

im very confused what did i say wrong?

Gorg
06-15-2002, 08:54 PM
Originally posted by Omaha:
Until the Linux community stops being such an anarchy, and the "wisened few" stop getting their jollies insulting and making fun of those that DON'T know the 4,000 command line parameters for the various Linux commands, Linux will never achieve any sizable power in the computer world.

Frankly, I agree with John Carmack: A company can do perfectly well only providing Windows versions of consumer software. (be it game or driver)

All good points, though you don`t need to touch the command line *EVER* to use linux. KDE and gnome are functionnal enough. Maybe for configuration, but this should technically be done by someone who knows what he/she is doing. Just like windows.

My friends calls me for problems or to some new hardware installed or even software under windows. They would do the same if there were using Linux, and I would touch the command line, not them. Anyway, it`s beside the point. I don`t want to start a war.

The world does not end with consumer applications. Some people do graphics under Linux with Nvidia cards and that`s why Nvidia said they would provide a version the tools for it. I can wait a few days, even few weeks. As long as we can be equal in features with windows at some point, I will be happy.

Ysaneya
06-16-2002, 03:12 AM
> i dont understand, so given the right drivers a tnt will be able to do dot3 on the board in hardware? i fail to see how this is possible, please explain.

I fail to see any DOT3 instruction in his example :)

I think his point is that hardware capabilities are completely independant of what language you are using. The OpenGL 2 shading language (as well as CG) will be able to implement his example in hardware on a TNT, because it's very simple. What's interesting is that you will obsviously not have to write a different shader for different cards. If the shader is not supported in hardware, then fine, it won't run. But all the cards that support it in hardware won't require you to write a different code. That's why i support Cg, as well as the OpenGL2 shading language. I just have a small preference for Cg, because i'll get D3D support with no additionnal cost.

Y.

zed
06-16-2002, 10:03 AM
>>I think his point is that hardware capabilities are completely independant of what language you are using.<<

oh i see how they misunderstood me with this line

>>ie opengl2.0 shaders seem more powerful but the hardware support maybe isnt as good as the cg ones<<

i meant the hardware that exists now (+ in the near future) is much more likely to support more functions in the cg language than in the gl2 language, in fact from what ive seen new cards will be able to do practically everything in cg in hardware this is not the case with gl2. actually the d3d vs opengl of a few years ago anology i wrote is spot on.

.............basically it all comes down to what the card can do