PDA

View Full Version : Call to Action: Ensure that OpenGL remains a first class API under Windows Vista



Pages : 1 [2]

glAppDeveloper
09-03-2005, 07:47 PM
:( as i stated on page 6 of this forum:
it is VERY IMPORTANT to be able to write 3d applications (NOT GAMES) to run in multiple windows. i do know what i'm talking about. if ms stops gl from working well in the windows environment, that WILL make a serious problem for future apps! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

V-man
09-04-2005, 06:53 AM
Originally posted by A Developer:
Korval may jump in to bash and ridicule the importance of some very critical industrial applications. However, the undeniable fact remains that those industrial applications are critical to the long term welfare of every human on the planet. Those apps design machines, oil refineries, industrial plants, run medical imaging and diagnostic devices, etc.
SNIPYour argument is ridiculous because it's always possible to have an alternate solutions.
The most obvious is to not upgrade to Vista.
Even if they are running Vista, why would Vista's visual effects matter for designing machines?

We don't need arguments at all.
Do you want Vista's effects to work while a GL app is running? Yes or no?

It's as simple as that. You are a customer of MS when you buy Windows, you are the boss.

Nickolay Kolchin
09-04-2005, 09:13 PM
Just a question: Will disabling composite futures of Aero stop some application working? Or it is completely transparent and the only thing that I loss in OGL mode is screen fancy effects?

Having "old-looking" desktop is OK. But if I can't run Maya and some other App at same time --- this is a huge problem.

EG
09-04-2005, 11:19 PM
As long as you can render with OpenGL in an off-screen buffer, and then have this copied without too much of a penalty to a DirectX/WGF/whatever texture/bitmap, then there is theoretically no issue about Aero or MS limiting capability or not, no? (this copy only has to happen at VSync's rate).

I mean, you don't really have to have Windows (the OS) manage the ICD stuff, IHVs could agree amongst each other and provide that ICD mechanism (IIRC this was discussed in an ARB meeting around the OpenGL 2.0 release). Would also give an opportunity to clean up the current pixel formats interface mess and have something cleaner/simpler to load and initialize OpenGL.
Developpers would change the dependency to 'OpenGL.ARB.DLL' instead of 'OpenGL32.DLL' and adapt the initialization code, bypassing MS OpenGL support completely. For IHVs, the issues would revolve around getting OpenGL to run alongside DirectX, and getting some efficient pixel data transfer between OpenGL buffers and whatever constitutes MS's latest texture/API in whatever is the day's fashionnable presentation layer.

I'm all for severing the ICD & OpenGL mechanisms from MS's control, and I'm pretty convinced this whole "let's cripple OpenGL and DirectX9" is not something MS can be influenced about. It's part of their new strategy of obsoleting development tools and APIs on a regular fashion.

A Developer
09-05-2005, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by V-Man
-----------------------------------------
Your argument is ridiculous because it's always possible to have an alternate solutions.
The most obvious is to not upgrade to Vista.
Even if they are running Vista, why would Vista's visual effects matter for designing machines?
-----------------------------------------
Oh dopey me. Not upgrade to the latest OS? Gee why didn't I think of that? Lets see that would mean: no upgrades, no new drivers for new hardware, no up to date SDKs, no security fixes, etc. New machines which may come with only the new OS could not be used for the product. Drivers for new hardware are not always available for the older OS's. Orphan your software product on an older OS so that it dies and your entire investment is lost. Great idea! (Not).

As far as the eye-candy special effects, they don't matter to business users. But, the point is why can't the two features co-exist and why isn't Microsoft sharing the information with the IHV's so they can make it work?

Comments on your previous posts: the comment about "just execute a different code path" if the feature is not available, indicates that you didn't understand (perhaps deliberately) the point of trying to keep software development, maintenance, certification, support and documentation costs down while still keeping the product consistent, full featured and fully usable by most users across a wide variety of hardware. Sure, you can always write the code yourselve. But, the "other code path" has to be designed, developed, implemented, tested, documented and supported. The expense of this process can really add up. The point of providing the best possible API, like OpenGL 2.0 as the base version supported natively by the OS is that all features would be available to all users regardless of their hardware. Some users would not get a hardware accelerated feature, but they would get the feature. All they have to do is upgrade the OS not all the hardware. The cost consideration for the end user is important to business users who are typically on a 3-4 year hardware, replacement cycle. For schools the replacement cycle is even longer, 4-5 years. Money for hardware upgrades is difficult to come by. Some of the older hardware may not be upgradeable to the latest and greatest addons. (Wrong bus, no slot on the motherboard, card won't fit in the case).

Your previous comment that "Microsoft wants everyone to have a good card" raises two questions:
1. Since Microsoft "wants" everyone to have a good card, is Microsoft going to buy one for each of the 100 million or so PCs on the planet? And certify and support every single PC on the planet so that it works on Vista? That's mighty generous of Bill but then Microsoft does have deep pockets...-)
2. Since you "know" what Microsoft wants, does that mean you are a Microsoft employee?

glfreak
09-05-2005, 08:14 PM
I heard of DirectGL, J.Carmack in one of his interview, and I think this is the proper name for what's MS implementing as GL on top of Direct3D.

One goodie about OpenGL is it's lower overhead in terms of programming (elegant API) and in terms of it's implementation (direct to the metal).

One goodie about DirectX is it's clean (no nead for extensions) and most importantly consistency, that it's guaranteed to behave similarly across different cards/hw.

I'm now considering switching to OpenGL, sorry but I left with no choice.

V-man
09-06-2005, 05:19 AM
A Developer, those are valid choices. There are some people/corporations/schools that don't need the latest.


Originally posted by A Developer:
As far as the eye-candy special effects, they don't matter to business users. But, the point is why can't the two features co-exist and why isn't Microsoft sharing the information with the IHV's so they can make it work?Maybe you should ask them. That's the point of this thread.


Originally posted by A Developer:
Comments on your previous posts: the comment about "just execute a different code path" if the feature is not available, indicates that you didn't understand (perhaps deliberately) the point of trying to keep software development, maintenance, certification, support and documentation costs...That's what some companies do. If the HW doesn't support MMX, then use another path.
If the HW doesn't support cubemaps, then use another path.
It is my understanding that you want a software emulation for your clients that don't have the right HW.
Korval suggested that you use Mesa in this case.

Is there anything I misunderstood here?

V-man
09-06-2005, 05:25 AM
Originally posted by glfreak:
One goodie about DirectX is it's clean (no nead for extensions) and most importantly consistency, that it's guaranteed to behave similarly across different cards/hw.It's not clean. You need to check caps bitfeilds.
Beeing extensionless prevents a programmer from using specific features of the HW.

ctophil
09-06-2005, 11:24 AM
Hi everyone,

I believe that OpenGL will be around as long as Linux, Macs, Sony, and John Carmack support the API. I just started programming in OpenGL, and I think it's fantastic--extremely powerful with a decent learning curve. Without it, Direct X would be a piece of crap by now if it wasn't for OpenGL setting the standard.

With that in mind, what does Xbox 360 exactly support? I know it uses something called XNA. But is that basically Direct X or WGF? What about the Nintendo Revolution? Since it uses the IBM processor, perhaps it uses OpenGL as well. Thanks!

-ctophil

pashamol
09-06-2005, 10:53 PM
Strange.
I install Windows Vista (TM) Beta 1 (Build 5112).
After installation 'Install Supplemental Drivers' automatically starts and install nVidia drivers 71.84.
Aero style by default still activated.
Driver says that I have DirectX version 8.1
OpenGL Renderer: GeForce 6800 GT/AGP/SSE2/3DNOW!
OpenGL Version: 1.5.3

N64Marin
09-07-2005, 10:14 PM
Continue OpenGL support
> Important component of the Windows platform, particularly for high-end workstation applications
In-box hardware accelerated version of OpenGL
> Uses WGF 1.0 as common graphics pipeline
> Upgraded API support compared to XP
> OpenGL 1.4
Continue to support OpenGL ICDs
> Can be shipped by OEMs
> New ICDs required for LDDM
> Old XP ICDs work with XP driver model in Longhorn

The Information is from:

http://download.microsoft.com/download/9...t#273,16,OpenGL (http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/8/f/98f3fe47-dfc3-4e74-92a3-088782200fe7/TWPR05007_WinHEC05.ppt#273,16,OpenGL)

Is that true?

actionGL
09-07-2005, 10:26 PM
The key word here is support - I mean what kind of support, certainly not 100%.

Yes you can have "support" for IHVs driver ICD - the same way it works on XP - BUT as soon as ICD is activated by some application (this concerns mostly windowed apps since then it is visible) you will loose Aero composing. It will look like you turned Vista to "old" XP style windows.

Also some guy on Aero forum wrote that OpenGL ICD can be used but only with one application? I am not sure about that, it does not make sense, so if someone knows more about this it would be great to post reply.

haust
09-10-2005, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by croky:

Sure the OpenGL/Vista/Aero problem is still here but I hope IHVs will be able to get valuable info on how to make OpenGL and Aero work together. For now it's up to Microsoft to make this happen. Of course, this is the most reasonable level of action, but where is the OGL community in this scene ? After all, aren't we here to Ensure that OpenGL remains a first class API under Windows Vista ?

The community can organize and start mailing IHVs and M$. I will predict a more open attitude from IHVs and i believe that should be the main concern as for now. IHVs can then persuade M$ to change its plans and shift this situation to a more favorable position for OGL, a "real" OGL.

It is a fact this is a problem, it is a fact that M$ originated the problem, it is a fact that M$ does not want to solve the problem with IHVs, it is a fact that the best that M$ came up with will cripple OGL, it is a fact that Win developers working with OGL will be negatively affected, it is a fact that due to OGL portability, other OSs will also be hit as OGL is their main 3D API, and i assume - with a high degree of certainty - that without developers, there's no future but only a decaying API.

How many more facts do we need for people to stop assuming a heavenly M$ attitude towards OGL ?
Such possible attitude is obviously clouded due to such facts.

CrokyOk, you've got a point on the fact that we have to make our voice heard :)
If some moderator could post a email list for each IHV + Microsoft, and a mail example so we can send it to them it would be more constructive :) Maybe this has already be done but I must admit I didn't take time to read all the posts....

redarrow
09-10-2005, 09:27 AM
Whew! all this nonsense just makes me glad that I switched to Linux a few years ago!

I'm not here to "bash" Microsoft.. :p

IMHO,
Anyone who thinks this is going to affect us Linux users is nuts.
At the most this might affect Linux users who run "commercial" software... I seriously doubt even that.

The people who are going to suffer most is Windows users.. (duh!)
They might even lose some great GPL'd windows software, most GPL software starts on Linux till someone comes along and ports it to Win.
I imagine that very very few "open-source" dev's would drop Linux in favour of Windows..
Seeing as most open-source dev's don't do it for the money, MS can do what they like but they'll never manage to "squash" them, as a result Linux or OpenGL won't die!

As far as I'm concerned MS is like a huge warship that has a small but irreparable hole below the waterline - they're going down! :eek:

glfreak
09-13-2005, 07:48 PM
Check this:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/games/gameadvisor/default.mspx

I have seen "... Recommends Windows XP in many sites and even the TV," but to see that ATI is recommended as well it's unbelievable. Why not recommending NVIDIA cards which beat the hell out of any gaming card ever created.

Tell you why it's because ATI have good support for DirectX right? And NVIDIA dones not? No. Both have good support for DirectX and probably the later has much better out performing drivers.
It's the fact that ATI does not support OpenGL as NVIDIA does and if they have supprot their OpenGL dirvers lack behind their Direct3D counterpart on Windows. On Linux it's still infancy.

It's clear that MS is monopolizing not only the business but also the gaming desktop.

DirectX sucks performance
DirectX sucks API
DirectX sucks direct hardware access
DirectX is not direct it's a wrapper by itself and now they are going to wrap it. Making a nasty swissroll to kill the perfomrance and the elegant true direct API """""OpenGL"""""

We all wish that DirectX die.

bobvodka
09-14-2005, 03:06 AM
If I can just cut thru the FUD,ranting and generally OT bollox floating around in this thread (ie most of the pages here infact) for a moment, I'd like to draw your attention to the following;


...Currently, the implication of using the IHV-supplied OpenGL driver is that the Aeroglass desktop compositor will be switched off for the OpenGL application going through an OpenGL ICD. This means that the borders of the application window will be opaque instead of (potentially) transparently composited with underlying windows...
...Other running apps are unaffected.- Randi Rost, 3DLabs.

So, everyone can put down their flaming torches for now as things arent as bad as they seem; you can still get ICD acceleration for your windowed apps, they just wont be under the control of the compositor for blending etc.

actionGL
09-14-2005, 07:57 AM
Can you post the whole text instead of quote? I was unable to find complete post. Thanks

Visentinel
09-15-2005, 12:54 AM
Hey guys im following this and compiling a small to the point news coverage on my site visentinel.com

So it seems to run windowed apps the aeroglass will haveto close first, that could be slightly annoying having to wait for it shutdown first sigh, but any information for fullscreen apps like games ?

lgop
09-17-2005, 03:19 AM
I think some Developers/Vendors should act like in the past when D3D wasn't very useful:

http://www.geek.com/techupdate/opengltc.htm

But now the main reason would be s.th. like:


We want any 3D API competition to happen on an open technical playing field, with us [...]

I think the problem is, that most people use DX and don't care about competition.

Robert Osfield
09-17-2005, 05:41 AM
Originally posted by lgop:
I think the problem is, that most people use DX and don't care about competition.The majority of Games developers under Windows may use Direct3D, but this does not equate to most graphics developers, its only one part of the games market, let alone the rest of the computer graphics market.

The professional graphics application has always predominately used OpenGL and continues to use OpenGL. The professional graphics application market isn't standing still, it now adopting OpenGL 2.0 and they very much do care about peformance. I know, because I serve this sector, over 1100 application developers use my middlware that soley runs OpenGL.

Microsoft's OpenGL 1.4 implementation for Vista, without support for extensions, and using a wrapper that will envitably lead to a significant reduction in peformance simply is not acceptable.

Disabling the desktop compositor to use OpenGL applications is not acceptable either. Yes its a work around, but its far far from a professional solution. Are we not supposed to be moving forward with technology? Not making integration and peformance worse with each new generation of software.

There is a simple solution to this problem. Provide the specs for integrating with the desktop compositor, and actively engage with the industry to make a killer OpenGL 2.0 implementation that works seemsly with OS and its desktop environment. We all know its technically possible, its just a matter of will, and the humility required to actually listen to what application developers want.

lgop
09-17-2005, 07:37 AM
Originally posted by Robert Osfield:

Originally posted by lgop:
I think the problem is, that most people use DX and don't care about competition.Microsoft's OpenGL 1.4 implementation for Vista, without support for extensions, and using a wrapper that will envitably lead to a significant reduction in peformance simply is not acceptable.

Disabling the desktop compositor to use OpenGL applications is not acceptable either. Yes its a work around, but its far far from a professional solution. Are we not supposed to be moving forward with technology? Not making integration and peformance worse with each new generation of software.

There is a simple solution to this problem. Provide the specs for integrating with the desktop compositor, and actively engage with the industry to make a killer OpenGL 2.0 implementation that works seemsly with OS and its desktop environment. We all know its technically possible, its just a matter of will, and the humility required to actually listen to what application developers want.I absolutely agree with you. And we should also
let MS know about our displeasure. An we should
keep the topic in the foreground.

Objective
09-17-2005, 07:17 PM
I suspect this issue will ultimately become an opportunity for the hardware vendor that devises a workable solution. Unless the display driver side of the house has changed dramatically in Vista, there are at least a couple viable approaches for merging OpenGL with D3D without performance issues or Window Manager/Compositor artifacts.

I’ve got a favorite vendor in mind, hence I won’t elaborate. Clearly, the vendor that has consistently invested in OpenGL and D3D equally will mostly likely get this right.

If MS decides not to play, MS will ultimately loose control. In other words, if you want MS outside of the OpenGL household DON’T EMAIL them or complain about their strategy. They’ll come knocking on the OpenGL door with hat in hand if we let things progress as they have been. There are some games you don’t want to play by yourself and this is one of them.

Have faith in OpenGL and the vendors that support it.

tosa
09-17-2005, 07:28 PM
Do you really think that IHVs are going to hate writing ONE driver for their products? Think again!
You are making hype without a clear or argumented
reason. I've read so many things here that fall
under the category of uninformed like:
"No multiwindow apps with DX"
"Bad performance"
"Monopolistic behaviour" etc...

Don't know about you, I'm using DX since v3.0 and
I'm happy I didn't have to learn all those
extensions and other time consumers from the
"wonderful open source" community.

General advice: learn about your "enemy" before
you take it for granted!

bobvodka
09-18-2005, 01:08 PM
@actionGL
That quote is all I have to work with, I'm happy to trust the source that the rest of the infomation wasnt important.

@tosa
maybe you should do the same;
For starters OpenGL isnt Open source.
You also mention 'learning all the exentsions', well you dont have to, just stick to core opengl. and I tend to think that learning a few extensions is less of a time consumer than dealing with MS changing the API every year or so ;)

actionGL
09-18-2005, 02:27 PM
Instead of extensions in DirectX you have 'caps'. You need to check if hardware supports the stuff you want. Also GL has many free tools that handle extensions (glext - GLsdk library and such), so there is no need to panic about extensions. The same way you ask DirectX if some cool FX is supported, you do for GL. The only difference is that GL extensions are available as soon as IHVs make them (driver update), and DX users need to wait for next version/update of DirectX. So do the math.

glfreak
09-18-2005, 03:45 PM
I don't beleive that DirectX is suitable for CAD/CAM/VR/Simulation applications. It's much more suitable for games.

And the fact we have to create a buffer, lock it, fill it, and unlock it to draw a single primitive is something breaks the rule of a good API design, and incurs more overhead. Reflects less Direct interface to the hardware. Direct3D is layerd by itself and layering another API on top of it is a disaster.

It's not our responsibility but the ARB who arte supposed to take some legal action.

V-man
09-19-2005, 03:50 AM
And the fact we have to create a buffer, lock it, fill it, and unlock it to draw a single primitive is something breaks the rule of a good API design, I guess you mean a vertex buffer. You do the same with GL :
glMapBuffer, get a pointer, write your data, glUnmapBuffer.
You can use glBufferSubData but that does the lock/unlock for you.

"breaks the rule of a good API design"

Damn straight! DirectX sucks!

Ghazi
09-19-2005, 05:53 PM
Smart move by MS but i hope it is strongly contested.

glfreak
09-19-2005, 08:56 PM
Well it's not. It's actually a dump backward step where they can show that D3D outperforms OGL on their platform.

actionGL
09-21-2005, 04:53 AM
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenGL
----------------------------------------
Future in Microsoft Windows

On August 6, 2005, Microsoft's intentions for OpenGL support in Windows Vista were revealed on in an Opengl.org news announcement:

Microsoft's current plan for OpenGL on Windows Vista is to layer OpenGL over Direct3D in order to use OpenGL with a composited desktop to obtain the Aeroglass experience. If an OpenGL ICD is run - the desktop compositor will switch off - significantly degrading the user experience.

In practice this means for OpenGL under Aeroglass:

OpenGL performance will be significantly reduced - perhaps as much as 50%

OpenGL on Windows will be fixed at a vanilla version of OpenGL 1.4

No extensions will be possible to expose future hardware innovations

It would be technically straightforward to provide an OpenGL ICD within the full Aeroglass experience without compromising the stability or the security of the operating system. Layering OpenGL over Direct3D is a policy more than a technical decision.

As a result, the future of Microsoft Windows support of OpenGL as a mainstream library for computer and video games looks precarious. Microsoft have taken the decision not to release the information necessary to allow third parties (such as those at NVIDIA, ATI or the other large graphics card manufacturers) to develop replacement drivers, leaving no way to avoid the 50% speed drop. A 3Dlabs employee states in the same Opengl.org thread:

This information came from the OpenGL BOF held at Siggraph 2005 in LA this last Wednesday evening. This was confirmed at the BOF by NVIDIA, ATI and us (3Dlabs).

As soon as an [installable client driver] is loaded the composited desktop is turned off on Windows Vista. If you want the composited desktop Aeroglass experience, you will need to make your application go through Microsoft's OpenGL implementation, which is layered on top of DirectX. As pointed out earlier, this layering can have performance implications. Their implementation supports OpenGL version 1.4 only, without extension support.

We believe it possible to provide an ICD with full composited desktop support while adhering to the stability and security requirements in Windows Vista. But we need Microsoft's help in doing so.

Therefore, as mentioned before, please let your contact in the ISV or IHV or OEM community know how you feel about this and spread the word.

For some more information, you can browse these Microsoft WinHEC slides:

"Windows Graphics Overview [WinHEC 2005; 171 KB]" http://download.microsoft.com/download/9...07_WinHEC05.ppt (http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/8/f/98f3fe47-dfc3-4e74-92a3-088782200fe7/TWPR05007_WinHEC05.ppt)

"Advances in Display and Composition Architecture for Windows [WinHEC 2005; 422 KB]" http://download.microsoft.com/download/9...05_WinHEC05.ppt (http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/8/f/98f3fe47-dfc3-4e74-92a3-088782200fe7/TWPR05005_WinHEC05.ppt)

Regards, Barthold 3Dlabs

An installable client driver is the glue provided by a card manufacturer to connect your operating system with your graphics card.

Clearer
09-22-2005, 01:00 AM
First post is seconded. I don't know that much about how Windows drivers work, and I don't care. I do care that if the mayor OS is to be supported, DirectX will be the only viable solution if Windows Vistas version of OpenGL is just a wrapper around DirectX - since, this will mean that OpenGL is likely to be unsupported by most commercial products in the future. This, I fear, would lead to an increasing monopolising of the Operating System market for IBM PC compatible computer platforms. Therefore I strong encourage Microsoft to not let OpenGL become a wrapper around DirectX in Windows Vista, but let it stay the way it is now, in Windows XP and previouse versions. I also strongly encourage all hardware developers, manufacturers and OpenGL developers to lay pressure on Microsoft, to drop the current implementation of OpenGL on Windows Vista and change it.

EDIT: I have created a petition that people can sign. It can be located at OpenGL in Windows Vista (http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/openglvista)

bobvodka
09-22-2005, 10:47 AM
*sigh* didnt you bother reading the rest of the thread?

In perticular the bits saying that a hardware non-wrapped version of OpenGL will be there to use, in both full screen and windowed modes? (see my first post on the other page)

Clearer
09-22-2005, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by bobvodka:
*sigh* didnt you bother reading the rest of the thread?

In perticular the bits saying that a hardware non-wrapped version of OpenGL will be there to use, in both full screen and windowed modes? (see my first post on the other page)If you bothered to read the message just before my first one, you would know what the issue is. Apparantly MS won't allow people to write such drivers.

actionGL
09-22-2005, 02:42 PM
You can't have drivers that work with Vista composer - Aero (FX, transparency, etc). But you can load manufacturer OpenGL ICD, like you can now in Windows XP. You will loose 'cool' Aero FX but you will be able to run GL at full speed, and use newest version, extensions etc. So, games (most of them are full screen) will not be touched by this, windowed apps will (Modeling software, windowed programs, windowed games, tons of other software). I think that one of the most important Vista features, well visible one for end user, is new look of Windows - and just imagine when you start openGL app and Aero turns off (again windowed app, not full screen) -> end user will think something like: "Ahhhh, GL sucks, it killed my cool looking windows!".

As said before, MS just need to give data to IHVs so that they can make drivers that work with Vista window composer. But MS doesn't want to do this. So the best way is to write to IHVs, ISVs and keep this issue active... It can be solved (and we should all ask MS why they suck, why it has to come to this).

bobvodka
09-24-2005, 02:49 AM
Originally posted by Clearer:
If you bothered to read the message just before my first one, you would know what the issue is. Apparantly MS won't allow people to write such drivers.I had, its old infomation dating from the start of this thread, the infomation I'd posted further up the page gives a clearer picture of the current state of play, namely that you can have the ICD running but it will switch of the desk top compositor for that window only while in use.

actionGL
09-24-2005, 09:34 AM
I am not sure that only window (application) that has GL ICD loaded will not have Aero. I have read that ALL windows will loose transparency (Aero FX). If someone can confirm this it would be great.

Barthold from 3Dlabs said:

As soon as an [installable client driver] is loaded the composited desktop is turned off on Windows Vista. If you want the composited desktop Aeroglass experience, you will need to make your application go through Microsoft's OpenGL implementation, which is layered on top of DirectX. As pointed out earlier, this layering can have performance implications. Their implementation supports OpenGL version 1.4 only, without extension support. So according to this, it is the whole desktop not just GL window.

bobvodka
09-24-2005, 01:54 PM
yes, and that infomation is old, I got hold of mine about 48h before I posted it here...

actionGL
09-24-2005, 03:46 PM
Well, then it is not as bad as it seemed at first... It would be better if it worked seamlessly with Aero. I hope that MS will give required info and that IHVs will stop sleeping and apply required pressure to MS.

Btw, could someone close to IHVs, ARB members or OpenGL.org give us more up to date information about OpenGL behavior under Vista? Are there any news?

Objective
09-25-2005, 07:36 AM
If Microsoft chooses to cripple OpenGL it will effectively force high end software developers to abandon their GUI in favor of either in house solutions or some consortium driven solution. Given that the high end of the market place is where a lot of the GUI innovation comes from, Microsoft will effectively be shooting themselves in the foot, if not somewhere in the torso area.

There is already a significant trend of movement away from the standard windows GUI. Most high end content development applications (any 3D centric content creation tool) tend to implement their own look and feel as it is. Partly to differentiate themselves from the competition, but mostly to protect themselves from having to constantly re-engineer the GUI to fit in with the latest GUI trends a given OS dolls out.

If Microsoft forces OpenGL out of its house, vendors that rely on it will simply operate as though they own the house, that is, their apps will go full screen, effectively crippling all of the wonderful new features of Vista. So the crippling scenario goes both ways. How long do you think it will take before Microsoft starts to feel the impact of the bullet holes?

This is one instance where it might be best for vendors that rely on OpenGL to do nothing except encourage capable ICD implementations and start going full screen if the VISTA GUI is an impediment. When every major content creation tool is locking out the VISTA GUI, Microsoft will quickly adjust their strategy, since it’s the VISTA experience that is supposed to be a key selling point of the new OS. If key industry innovators are not using your cool new GUI, but are opting for some other solution, whatever your power position might have been going in, it becomes greatly diminished as a result.

Taking a biosphere point of view, OpenGL will take care of itself because it is fit enough to do so. Either Microsoft will adjust, or vendors creating VISTA drivers will figure out a way to make OpenGL fit in seamlessly.

This is an opportunity folks, and one of the biggest Microsoft strategists have come up with in a while!

actionGL
09-26-2005, 02:39 AM
Fullscreen option would be fine if you use only one app at the time. When I work on game graphic, I use 3D Max, Photoshop and other 3D Texture Paint tools at the same time. Sometimes VC7 is running in the back so that I can include it in the game instantly and test the result. So, switching between fullscreen and desktop isn't an option.

If Aero is turned off only for GL window, then it is not big issue for professional apps, but still it is not a good solution for variety of other consumer software that require good interface look (it sells them).

V-man
09-27-2005, 05:36 AM
From reading this

http://www.longhornblogs.com/bleblanc/archive/2005/07/31/14321.aspx

the guy says his screen flickers and the glass effect stops. I'm pretty sure he means for everything.

So there is 2 problems :
- screen flickering momentarily
- no glass effect at all

bobvodka
09-27-2005, 10:28 PM
The question ofcourse becomes, what drivers is he using?

The updated infomation I posted was what 3DLabs have managed todo with their drivers and cards, this might not be publically availble as yet and doesnt mean that ATI/NV have done the same themselves as yet, they could still be working on it and/or have an internal build which does the same as the 3DLabs drivers.

There really is too little infomation in that blog entry to be usefull and judge the current state properly...

V-man
09-28-2005, 04:17 AM
I'm guessing it's a common graphics card and not a card from 3DLabs. It is possible that 3DLabs cards have there own unique behavior with the right driver.

There are things to check out like if a non GL window is over the GL window, does the glass effect work for the parts rendered behind the window using GL? Can Vista read the graphics of GL?
I don't have Vista or a 3DLabs card, so I can't check.

dejf
09-28-2005, 06:58 AM
Originally posted by Anitox:
We should fight back.
Now, I know the average user probably cannot take Linux and use it. Therefore, we should also encourage developers to make things easier on the average consumer. Take OS installation for example, you put in the Windows CD, and it does it for you. Linux is usually not so easy.
Well, it's much easier. There are people really using computers to do something, in most cases, they do not use windows right now. The are people, who play games, they are moving to konsoles, because, it's more convenient. There are many people, who play with their computer, in fact, they would save much time, by changing the computer for typewriter and copymachine. These deserve windows, because their incompetence is just based on their own stupidity. They should buy windows, buy special windows made hardware and so on...
There are machines, that are really computers, they are not PCs, they are not Intel based anyhow. After you buy a Computer, you need Operating System, and because windows abandoned PPC, Alpha and Mips platforms, M$ acnowledged, that despite the help of Digital top OS designers signed under VMS and TRU64, they weren't able to be better than native UN*XES. People shou hear this again after 7 years.

dejf
09-28-2005, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by joshua_falken:
I slapped together a quick logo for the cause, so people might put it on their homepages and link to this page:
You work for M$? Their logo works passively, and this is in first advertisment for M$!

Objective
09-28-2005, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by actionGL:
Fullscreen option would be fine if you use only one app at the time. When I work on game graphic, I use 3D Max, Photoshop and other 3D Texture Paint tools at the same time. Sometimes VC7 is running in the back so that I can include it in the game instantly and test the result. So, switching between fullscreen and desktop isn't an option.

If Aero is turned off only for GL window, then it is not big issue for professional apps, but still it is not a good solution for variety of other consumer software that require good interface look (it sells them).That's exactly the point! If GL apps required full screen operation under Vista in order to operate, users would quickly start to wonder why this was a requirement.

If they understood that GL operated slowly or was crippled in Windowed mode because of a design decision made by Microsoft, you can expect that Microsoft would begin to hear about it.

They best way to resolve this problem quickly is to force GL apps into full screen mode under Vista and identify to the user in a switching dialog why this is being done.

Just imagine all the CAD/3D Animation/GIS/etc. users having to deal with that on Vista. It would be a significant disincentive to make the switch and the best way to make Microsoft take notice.

If there is a campaign to be waged, it should be to force full screen mode on Vista until Microsoft or a display card vendor addresses the issue.

Coconut
09-29-2005, 04:03 AM
If you force your app to be full-screen only, your users are not going to call MS first. They will call you, and ask you why all your competitors can do in window-mode, but not your app. Go ahead and tell your customers because you are pissed off and refuse to support window mode. You basically dig a hole for yourself.
Whom do you think will be forced to change?

actionGL
09-29-2005, 05:07 AM
End user really doesn't care if it is done in OpenGL or DirectX -> if everything works fine... but this "new" move from MS just makes GL look bad in the eyes of average Joe. Nobody cares whose fault is that, if something doesn't work he will buy the product that works...

Aeluned
09-30-2005, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by Coconut:
If you force your app to be full-screen only, your users are not going to call MS first. They will call you, and ask you why all your competitors can do in window-mode, but not your app. Go ahead and tell your customers because you are pissed off and refuse to support window mode. You basically dig a hole for yourself.
Whom do you think will be forced to change?What competitors? Most graphics apps (that aren't games) rely on OpenGL rather than DX. They'll likely face the same limitations. It's no news to any of us here I'm sure, but most PCs run Windows. DX for gaming makes sense since 9/10 times game manufacturers are targeting Windows platforms.

I've decided to stay out of debates between developers - but Objective's comments seem lucid and practical to me. I agree 100%.

actionGL
10-01-2005, 10:07 AM
What competitors? Most graphics apps (that aren't games) rely on OpenGL rather than DX. Exactly

OpenGL is dominant in this field and with 2.0 specification, power of portability, and mature cross platform/game console tools it will start to "eat MS money" in other fields (game industry) also. So MS is really trying to force developers of most powerful graphic applications to go D3D instead OpenGL... Vista is just the "new idea" how to achieve this. MS is simply bullying ISV to adopt DirectX on Vista, and try to keep by force their current position in game segment.

Mac OS X has full implementation of OpenGL, Linux has OpenGL, bunch of consoles and mobile devices will have OpenGL, so 2 + 2 makes 4 -> software companies will use OpenGL to make their products available on more systems, thus getting wider market and eventually better sales. MS needs to find way to stop this and protect their technology, and here comes Vista.

Ask yourself, what if you could have the best 3D games and graphic software on all platforms? What would stop you from installing, let’s say free and stable Ubuntu Linux or Mac OS X? Why would you stick with Windows? Or perhaps Microsoft would have to lower the prices to remain competitive? Hmm

glfreak
10-01-2005, 11:45 PM
I think we've gone a bit out of topic comparing both OGL and D3D which is better nad more dominant.
This is out of question. OGL rules in terms of:

Quality
Performance
Visual Quality
API design
Flexibility
Extensibility
Low level, closer to the hardware
Exposing the silicon features directly
More straight to the metal
Uniqueness
Power
Portability
Stability
Useability

However, let me say that D3D roles in terms of:
Suckness
Malformed API
Performance killing
Quality suckness
and many things to add, any thing bad u can think of

And the glory boga boga Serious Sam game now changed it's favourite only and only API from opengl to d3d for the same reason, reliability and stability hahahahahahahahah

ATI now is recommended for most of the games because they make OGL suck and D3D ****

muxec
10-07-2005, 01:41 AM
I'm not proffessional developer, I learned OpenGL for fun and what I can say is at least for newbie OpenGL API is much more intuitive than DXAPI. As gamer I do not see difference in quality and performance between OpenGL and DirectX games. I think that not only developers but gamers/professionals must e-mail nVidia and ATI with Vista OpenGL requests.

Looked at vista screenshots from microsoft.com. Looks like KDE Theme :) Looked at "MS why buy Vista". In fact the only reason is better support for hardware newer than Vista. That's why I moved to WinXP, Win98 just lacked new hardware support. But the security of WinXP is below any curses. Unpatched WinXP is extremely buggy and laggy. So the Vista situation is about to be XP-like. Vista will become de-facto standard only about 2 years after the release, not earlier. Imagine ordinary mr. Smith user. Does he really want to pay 150$ for Vista Home starter edition or even twice as much for Vista Pro? Gamer will not upgrade his OS as he knows that Vista takes much more RAM. That's why some gamers still use Win98 and compatible hardware. Unlike Win95 to Win98 or even Win98 to XP upgrade Vista upgrade does not boost stability as WinXP SP2 with security center disabled is stable enough.

People reading this post please answer the following question: Are you really going to spend $$$ to upgrade your desktop XP to Vista? Do you really need KDE-like themes and symbolyc links under windows?

Also DRM stuff. Independent polls say that most of the users use warez copies. Most means about half of USA and Japan users and much more in the rest of the world.

Albert Einstein (Key scientist of 20th century) said:

The prestige of government has undoubtedly been lowered considerably by the prohibition law. For nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase of crime in the United States is closely connected with this. Do not forget that "prohibition" is not only alcohol law, but ban on branch of market.

So for ordinary user Vista's Digital Restrictions Manager is not good thing and he is not very enthusiastic about upgrading. And independent (independent=not entirely bought by MicroSoft) economical studies show that hardware manufacturers benefit from copyright piracy.

BTW some FSF enthusiasts fear that DRM is MS way to disable blue-ray disks under Linux.

So, developers, do not panic, you have almost two years till Vista becomes de-facto standart desktop-OS and you have enough time to develop great OpenGL 2.0 games with visual effects much better than these of DirectX9.0 or even DX10.0. And MS will have time to think about OGL under Vista.

My reply to all those who said "We must switch to linux and go cross platform and **** M$ this way": To install nVidia OGL drivers on Windows you just point-n-click. To install nVidia drivers under Linux you need to manually edit config files, think about kernel headers and so on. When and if software and driver installations for linux will become as simple as Win we can say that linux is desktop system.

Key OpenGL games were ported to Linux. Key 3D proffessional programs are available for linux. But do not forget that warez % worldwide is much higher than 50%. And Linux warez game ports are available via eMule with tens of sources at avg speed of 0.3KBps and the same Win game is available from Bittorent at avg speed of 20KBps. So de facto as home platform for games Windows is freeier than Linux. And please do not play ostrich with head in sand saying "warez is evil so we neglect it". Keep your analysys real world based.

BTW DXSDK user-friendly documentation and tutorials are free while OGL Red/Blue/Orange book is not free. It's great disadvantage of OpenGL as small enthusiastic developers do not see good openGL tutorials.

It's another disadvantage of open compared to MS. Open stuff learning is manual based, MS and Windows stuff is tutorial based.

Finally:
Forget your "Fuco the M$". You are not strong enough to **** microsoft. And Google+nVidia+ATI+Sun+OSDL+FSF are not strong enough.

Create good cross-platform software using OpenGL 2.0. But please be polite and do not say others what API they must use to not be evil.

Improve availability and freeness of good openGL documentation.

And, the most important, DO NOT PANIC!

glfreak
10-07-2005, 02:03 AM
It's pretty obious that your views are mature and objective. This is what we call a professional reply, maintaining a balance between the different points. And at the same time explaining how OpenGL can defend it's self in the market to be the top-notch API in the CG realm.

wpr
10-10-2005, 06:12 AM
Hi,

If they really won't support OGL, couldn't we simply try to do the same the Europeans did regarding the Media Player ?

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24218

It would force M$ support OGL in one windows flavor at least.

wpr.

Plüss Roland
10-11-2005, 06:32 AM
Originally posted by muxec:
To install nVidia drivers under Linux you need to manually edit config files, think about kernel headers and so on. When and if software and driver installations for linux will become as simple as Win we can say that linux is desktop system.just stumbled across this post and had to say 'bull****'. pro-linux oriented distros like Gentoo or even LFS do need this editing of config files. common user distros like Mandriva and many others are even simpler than windows in installing those kind of drivers. open package manager, place a check mark next to the driver you want, hit install, restart x-server, there we go. under windows you insert cd-rom, click away tons of DO-NOT-COPY screens, bang your head over what additional crap this installer installs and trying to prevent it, hit reboot, and if lucky it works the first boot and otherwise you are invited to visit the roll-back feature. wow... now which one is easier i ask?

glfreak
10-11-2005, 06:28 PM
It is no doubt that Linux rules the computing realm, and this is out of question. :D

Windowsis not bad at all but some times it acts stupidly and immaturely. This is due to lack of good design which causes alot of stability problems.

Anyway we are here to defend OpenGL. DirectX is good and we all agree that MS has something good in their platform, but to compare it with OpenGL and make it the kernel to implement it, this is crap. No way out. It's the same as trying to implem,ent a Formula one engine using a motorbike. Or even worse emulating PS3 with 480 old PC. :D

LogicalError
10-12-2005, 10:01 PM
I'm wondering.. some people in this thread mentioned that Aeroglass will only turn off for the window that runs opengl..
I suppose they ment application?
Otherwise you could simply put an opengl window without borders inside an Aeroglass window with borders..
Which would solve everything

Plüss Roland
10-12-2005, 11:47 PM
nope... it's the same problem as if you would try to run an x-server with propriatary ati-driver and framebuffer with kernel-prefab-ati driver. both want to access the hardware in raw-mode and conflict with each other. the same for directx-vs-opengl. if directx goes fullscreen mode no other 3d api can run besides as it grabs full ownership of the screen, blocking the memory space it needs. if now opengl runs that aero-crap has to kill the opengl window (window, not app, opengl hooks into a window context handler) as directx needs the full screen ownership.

this is my understanding of the problem and hence there will be no solution to run opengl besides aero-crap unless directx receives a 'gentle' fullscreen mode, which i doubt.

Choong Hong Cheng
10-13-2005, 04:28 PM
I just wondering why MS can not try to be neutral in this case ? Why not they seperate windowing manager from the OS itself ? much like how X-Window implemented ?

For me DirectX is just a API that allow extended drawing capabilities and it should be intergrated so tightly in the OS for Vista ! like IE tightly intergrated into Windows !

OpenGL is just another API that can be plugable into the windowing manager much like X-Window. Actually X-Window has a better design compare with Windows itself. Is platform indepedant among the UNIX oses including Linux. I just wondering whether all the decisions in MS are marketing oriented instead of from a software archtecture and engineering point of view. Still remember my lecturers keep telling us when designing a system all the modules should be decouple as much as possible.

Plüss Roland
10-14-2005, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by Choong Hong Cheng:
I just wondering why MS can not try to be neutral in this case ? Why not they seperate windowing manager from the OS itself ? much like how X-Window implemented ?

For me DirectX is just a API that allow extended drawing capabilities and it should be intergrated so tightly in the OS for Vista ! like IE tightly intergrated into Windows !

OpenGL is just another API that can be plugable into the windowing manager much like X-Window. Actually X-Window has a better design compare with Windows itself. Is platform indepedant among the UNIX oses including Linux. I just wondering whether all the decisions in MS are marketing oriented instead of from a software archtecture and engineering point of view. Still remember my lecturers keep telling us when designing a system all the modules should be decouple as much as possible.if ms would decouple directx from the system, hence not enforcing it on any game dever on the world, they would loose their dominant position of directx compared to opengl. it is simply about not loosing grip of the cash-cows: the game market.

J.C. Coelho
10-15-2005, 04:48 AM
Anyone else waiting for Apple to market OS X for Intel separately from their machines? :D
Now wouldn't that solve all problems?

Except maybe MS wouldn't like losing total control of the OS market?

Now really if you use your workstation mainly for Maya, Lightwave or XSI what do you need Windows for?
I personally keep hoping MS listens to others and allows for "transparent" installation of proper OpenGL drivers.
A bit like current Java?

I wonder if this is realistic.

glfreak
10-18-2005, 06:22 PM
Talking about module separation and software engineering stuff, let me say it's academic crap.
Useless in practice and to implement a competetive operating systems, like Windows based on such academic views then we will edn with Linux like very slow OS. This time I cannot help but deffend MS.

OpenGL does not even implement such things. These are helpful in business oriented highlevel applications.

In OS, gaming, CG, APIs there is not such thing called deep hierarchy or software architecturing.

And BTW how can we help OpenGL from MS plans if we cannot protect the copyrighted software from pirates and hackers. Look around the world how such people from specific regions in this world are hacking and cracking others work and technology. We first should stop them doing so then we can talk about changing MS (LEGAL) plan from layering OpenGL. :D :D :D

muxec
10-19-2005, 09:03 AM
Originally posted by Plüss Roland:

Originally posted by muxec:
To install nVidia drivers under Linux you need to manually edit config files, think about kernel headers and so on. When and if software and driver installations for linux will become as simple as Win we can say that linux is desktop system.just stumbled across this post and had to say 'bull****'. pro-linux oriented distros like Gentoo or even LFS do need this editing of config files. common user distros like Mandriva and many others are even simpler than windows in installing those kind of drivers. open package manager, place a check mark next to the driver you want, hit install, restart x-server, there we go. under windows you insert cd-rom, click away tons of DO-NOT-COPY screens, bang your head over what additional crap this installer installs and trying to prevent it, hit reboot, and if lucky it works the first boot and otherwise you are invited to visit the roll-back feature. wow... now which one is easier i ask?Khm. You can not install nvidia OpenGL graphic driver as package on most distros as it is not free as in "freedom" so violates the policy of almost all linux distributives. Conclusion: you can not point and click nvidia driver installer for linux.


And BTW how can we help OpenGL from MS plans if we cannot protect the copyrighted software from pirates and hackers. Look around the world how such people from specific regions in this world are hacking and cracking others work and technology. We first should stop them doing so then we can talk about changing MS (LEGAL) plan from layering OpenGL.a. If you want an unaccomplishable task, than go move some mountains.
b. Microsoft enocouraged software piracy in countries where Windows is absolutely unaffordable to make Windows standard "the only" OS.
c. Pirates and hackers are the strongest competitors of Microsoft. Yes, much stronger than GNU and Apple Mac. Without them Microsoft would be an untimate monopoly and will care about other standarts even less.
d. Again (see my previous post). As copyright law in its curent form is not supported by more than 50% of men it is not democratic at all.

Plüss Roland
10-19-2005, 06:51 PM
@muxec:
Khm. You can not install nvidia OpenGL graphic driver as package on most distros as it is not free as in "freedom" so violates the policy of almost all linux distributives. Conclusion: you can not point and click nvidia driver installer for linux.is

emerge nvidia-driversfor you fast enough? ok this is the pro-way, not the easy way. but yes, you can point-click install nvidia. just because it is linux does not mean you can not taint your kernel. hence your statement is rather bs.

@glfreak: you have no idea of software engineering don't you? modulation, reusability and alike are anything else than academic crap. and linux is many times faster than windows if setup correctly. it's only beaten by beos beeing even faster than that. furthermore has that 'moddlarity' you hate on linux systems brought one of the most vital, stable and usable systems around. windows can only do a small subset of what unix derived systems can simply because it is anything else than developed in an intelligent way.

muxec
10-22-2005, 05:52 AM
Originally posted by Plüss Roland:
is

emerge nvidia-driversfor you fast enough?
[/QB]Please include time spent on emerge manuals and howtos. Thank you.

As for faster OSes many benchmarks show that OpenGL games under linux provide higher FPS.

Plüss Roland
10-23-2005, 05:55 AM
Originally posted by muxec:

emerge nvidia-driversfor you fast enough?
Please include time spent on emerge manuals and howtos. Thank you.

As for faster OSes many benchmarks show that OpenGL games under linux provide higher FPS.[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">that's why i said it's the pro-way. the easy way is running the package-manager, placing a check-mark next to the nvidia-driver, hit install, wait a couple of seconds, restart x-server. that's the mandriva way. no howto and no manuals needed as it has a config manager. all newbie oriented distros have config managers where you do not need howtos or manuals at all.

Blue_dup1
10-26-2005, 04:25 AM
Just some comments from a part of Europe.

Some one have say D3D is better. I want to ask, better when? If you have put a vertex buffer in card and send to reneder, dont mater what api you use, the card will do the job same for all. As for easy of use, OpenGL is very nice and friendly, when D3D is a pain. At last the OpenGL coding sintax and general use are not changed how D3D is. If you code for D3D at almost every new SDK version you need to change something or something more.

May i ask respectable peoples who keep they hands with MS, how do you expect developers will still use DirectX tehnologies in the future, after zillions of api changes? Can i remeber DirectPlay, who today dont exist? and DirectSound who is about to be wiped from SDK? This are the nice surprises coding with DirectX? I agreed, the DirectX team must justify they salary some how in the MS concern, but nobody take care about developers here, they just draw directions, and i most of the cases they abandon them. Hehe...

Some people have say OpenGL is an old api, and not good. The facts that still exist today prove it as a very good api.

Here, the real problem is MS, who is really in trouble this days, and they know that very well, that they try diffent tricks. The moment is crucial. Just some nig houses need to switch to Linux, and MS finish is here. If the balance will be changed, MS will die with very fast, they can promise Vista Bis, nobody will beleve then.

About Vista, the market decisions is clear, they need something new, the problem is that in Vista is nothing new. They can do almost all minor improvements in XP, but they need it becouse they must fight Linux somehow.

As for me, and rest of peoples i know, we all coding for Linux now, and most of the EU seems to begin love Linux and OpenGL.

When most of the game developers will realise they loose money supporting MS tools for nothing good, the MS will loose OS war.

Thanks for reading and escuse my language mispelling and errors.

glfreak
10-30-2005, 06:28 PM
I agree with you.

D3D can be promising in its own platform. But is that platform getting any better? I dopubt it. Especially with the .NET thing and the virtual machine crap (like Java, C#, .etc) invading good old os's. It is a hype more than a real technology. The main problem is the platform trends not the API's themselves.

Windows 98 is good. Windows XP is better. Linux is cool. but when we want to address something like OpenGL or even OpenAL they are sciences in their own. DirectX is more an interface rather than an API.

OpenGL rules this is out of question.

DirectX may only rule under its platform.

Can we compare GDI with X Window? No way both are different things and true under their native platforms.

Another thing. Please stop the Wine project for the Linux sake. Promoting Linux should not be achieved by creating crappy tools and emu's that can run Windows native apps. It should be by proting the source and re-compiling those great applications instead. Otherwise Linux will suck.

Trolltech Qt is a good example for a well designed GUI API, much better than MFC. But it should be a free standard as well, otherwise people with stick to MFC, and never consider porting to Linux.

I'm expecting that OpenGL 2.5 or 2.x will be kick off, with many features that game developers will really love. And this is one reason MS took a pre-caution step to protect their own API from being spared by many developers like EA :D

:p

Hellmark
11-01-2005, 12:44 AM
Originally posted by zed:
D/ somehow convince apple to allow their OS to be installed on generic computers, (though one of apples pluses is its limited range of hardware it runs on thus writing drivers is easier, but hardware standards are much better today than they were say 10years ago, ie less conflicts etc)
im pretty sure if apple done this their market share would rise from 3% to 10-20% in a year + ultimatly they would make more profits for apple, im sure a lot of companies will preinstall the apple os on their computers (esp laptops)
the main things stopping this is mr X is a twat + will not admit he was ever wrong, good example check out apple have finally gotten around to releasing a multibutton mouse recently, until now multibutton actions (eg rightclick) were performed on the keyboard, how was that simplier, me no understandoOk, Apple is unlikely to do that, because their profits come mostly from the hardware sales and not software. Also, on the mouse issue, you could use a multibutton mouse, just the stock mouse that they offered only had one button. I got a 5 button hooked up to my mac, and I've had it since way before the Mighty Mouse came out.

knackered
11-01-2005, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by Apeluier:
OpenGL is a hardware API and should not be a software emulation. We developed a large C++ library based on OpenGL so software emulation would be a huge problem for us. We need the speed !!!!Then you were pretty foolish, I'm sorry to say.
That's as mad as someone writing a large C++ library based on d3d - the api changes dramatically with each revision, therefore nobody puts d3d code directly inside their application code.
They abstract it.
You haven't.
Your problem.

Denon
11-01-2005, 05:06 PM
I received a reply from NVIDIA with regards to my request for NVIDIA to "force" Microsoft to properly support OpenGL within Vista.

Jeff's reply:

++++

Your email was forwarded to me. Thank you.

We are well aware of the situation with respect to the plan for OpenGL
on Longhorn. NVIDIA intend to support OpenGL as a first class citizen
regardless of OS. We are working with Microsoft closely on plans to
enable this, and end user input like this from you is a very effective
way to let Microsoft understand your concern.

Regards

Jeff

++++

For NVIDIA, send your e-mail of concern to Jeff:

Jsbrown ( at ) nvidia.com

As expected, I haven't received any reply from ATI...

glfreak
11-01-2005, 06:05 PM
Nothing will stop MS from their plans. It's their own platform and API either win or lose.

Why do we care about the stinky Windows? We have other better alternatives around, Mac and Linux.

ze moo
11-01-2005, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by glfreak:
...
Why do we care about the stinky Windows?...Because we have to ... most computers come with windoze preinstalled
so our customers expect our programs to run on windows

Denon
11-02-2005, 05:28 AM
Originally posted by glfreak:
Nothing will stop MS from their plans. It's their own platform and API either win or lose.

Why do we care about the stinky Windows? We have other better alternatives around, Mac and Linux.If Microsoft "kills" OpenGL for their Windows Vista OS, then chances are future commercial growth and support for OpenGL would be non-existent. This potential has a disastrous consequence with Linux and other Non-Microsoft OS users that rely on OpenGL.

glfreak
11-02-2005, 04:37 PM
I'm really confused with you guys what to say. When I defend OpenGL some pop ups and start fighting my arguments, and when I say something good about MS and their platforms, you start critizing my words.

Ok thenm Good Luck Microsoft, kick any stinky API out of you platform, and make the XNA shine. It's really impressing to see the latest versio of their neat well developped and supported API. Who cares about other platforms like nix things, thye are toys.

Are you happy now? :D

actionGL
11-05-2005, 01:11 PM
glfreak: It is not important what you or I think is better. It is simple economy. If you look google statistic, about the number of OS-es that access their service -> you will see that Mac and Linux have around 5% each, and MS 90%. So if you write comercial application in OpenGL this situation has really great impact on your future.

---------

Just to point out some facts previously said:
- OpenGL will work on Vista
- Games and fullscreen apps will work without problem on Vista
- Windowed apps, when started, will disable AeroFX (Vista composer). That means that windows will loose some of their cool look effects - transparency, blur etc. But, will work.

-MS is responsible for this situation. IHVs (Nvidia, Ati, 3D Labs) wish, and are ready to invest and support seamless OpenGL implementation in Vista. MS on other hand does NOT wish to give them technical data required for OpenGL integration.
-The OpenGL.org has posted message calling firms and individuals to "encourage" MS to provide such information. The best way is as said:

"Write to your preferred software developer, hardware developer and video card manufacturer and tell them to make sure Microsoft solves this problem before release and fully supports OpenGL ICDs within Aero. Hardware and software vendors listen to developers. Don't be passive - send those emails and keep the topic in the foreground"

----
My opinion: MS is forcing their technology. Not because it is better or worse -> just because it is their. Recent events:
- Mac OS X uses OpenGL 2.0 for games and apps
- bunch of new handheld devices and mobile phones use OpenGL ES
- Linux uses OpenGL,
- Sony Playstation 3 uses OpenGL
- Java is about to implement OpenGL and make it available on mobile phones.
- Most powerful 3D professional software use OpenGL
- Some of the best game engines use OpenGL (Doom, Quake, Starbreeze Riddick, etc.), and are portable.
- Lot of stuff missing to make complete cross platform development (game) solution based on OpenGL is there or comming. Collada, OpenAL, OpenML, OpenVG, OpenMAX etc...

Those facts will have/currently have great impact on MS. OpenGL is growing, and aside of that, it is portable! Companies will want to write their software for all platforms, and thus maximize income. If other platforms get more quality software, games etc. in the same level that Windows has, then their share in market will jump from 10% to something much higher. This is why MS is trying to "kill" any technology that is not their own. OpenGL is just one on the list.

If you think that this didn’t happen in the past, please read:
http://www.gaminggroove.com/blog.php?id=11

Also this article is written by someone much more professional than me :) . So, I hope that he knows what he is saying... and that he is right in his optimistic view of situation.

glfreak
11-05-2005, 07:48 PM
Interesting article. But it's a bit defending MS plan.

OpenGL is now officially 2.0, why do some people cannot think beyound 1.4?????

My argument is that Direct3D in its current satate cannot implement OGL 2.0.

Anyway who cares? 99% of games are DirectX. And linux is heading to mysql and myperl and mypython and myjava and my scripts, and my servers, and my bash shell. Mac OS X still not decided on where to go.

Windows is great! Lets stick with it and face the reality, DirectX rules.

One solution is not to program Direct3D applications or games, and this is somehow hard.
BTW is Lightwave, softimage, maya goign to work under vista? how? they are only OpenGL?

actionGL
11-06-2005, 09:22 AM
glFreak: I use OpenGL for game programming, and will continue to use it. I think that it is much more intuitive and better API than D3D, and that is main reason I am still using it. Microsoft is Monopoly and this is why this is all happening. Soon large clients such as: governments, corporations and companies will put on paper the amount of money they spend on security, office, and OS from Microsoft. On other hand they have mature Linux solutions. Then we will see the results.

glfreak
11-06-2005, 05:43 PM
I agree with you, but Linux can serve better in the server enterprise side, as opposed to what is expected that Windows is more business oriented.

Unless Linux has different editions; for example, Linux Enterprise, Linux Desktop, Linux Games ..etc then there will be no chance for its success in the desktop/casual user/gaming market.

It has a good reputation in the (e)business arena however.

Windows is more desktop oriented from the ground up. And I see the directX technology is much superior over the X Window and OpenGL. Take for example the unified way to handle queries and no need for extensions. Ofcourse OpenGL API looks better and elegant. But Direct3D works, ad it's not that ugly. :p

Count the games that runs OpenGL?

Why Serious Sam switched from "only and only OpenGL" to Direct3D?

Why Unreal Trounament ... uses Direct3D?

I agree the openGL runs faster and sometimes more stable, but is it's recent verison available on every card?

glfreak
11-06-2005, 11:04 PM
It's exactly the same as what's going on in Linux. Forcing a very old os into a higher technology is not the solution. It may be a conceptually good practice from the software engineering perspective, but not for keeping up to date with the hardware very fast paced advance.

DirectX changing and it's not a problem, it's actually adaptation rather than unstability in the API design. There is no design that can work for centuries for all up coming technologies. It's totally wrong to assume so. OpenGL design is great but has limitation though. At least not all hardware vendors are skilled enough not provide a full woprking OpenGL 2.0 implementation.
Even the recent addiotn sto OpenGL with the extenstions available are still limitted by the boundaries of the basic core OpenGL pipeline which relies heavily on the begin/end pairs. I dunno but it makes sense to change as the hardware changes.
One feature in OpenGL and it qwill become the superior even MS will adopt it. Just get rid of the extension, and use a unified architecture where the hardware driver implementors will have to only provide a basic drivers, the same as DirectX works :D .

V-man
11-08-2005, 03:46 AM
I agree the openGL runs faster and sometimes more stable, but is it's recent verison available on every card? It seems that 2.0 is available on every card that that can handle SM2 and up.
I don't know about Intel. I think their 915 could support it.


One feature in OpenGL and it qwill become the superior even MS will adopt it. Just get rid of the extension, and use a unified architecture where the hardware driver implementors will have to only provide a basic drivers, the same as DirectX works [Big Grin] hw vendors are not obligated to create extensions. They do it because they want to and quite a few companies use them.
This is why NV became so popular. They had great hw plus the GL extensions.

Unified drivers are already done by NV and I think other companies do it as well. There is significant code reuse.

Direct3D works in a different way. MS implements a kind of top layer and this lib of theirs talks to a special low level driver of the manufacturer.

Any company that wants to enter the GPU business can easily write D3D drivers, but doing a GL 2.0 driver is a big pain.

glfreak
11-08-2005, 08:29 PM
Direct3D in its current state is more integrated and that fact as you mentioned that hardware vendors don't need to be superior in programming to provide good working OpenGL 2.0 drivers, means that Direct3D is much more reliable and stable as well. And in the end talking about ugly interface, games use other DirectX such as input and sound, so the ugliness exist with or without OpenGL, so why not make it one big ugly code, at least it looks more cosistent.

OpenGL is great, it's out of question as I said before, but it needs better support by hardware vendors. :D

ze moo
11-09-2005, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by V-man:
...Direct3D works in a different way. MS implements a kind of top layer and this lib of theirs talks to a special low level driver of the manufacturer.
...Actually Apple's GL implementation is similar
GL layer on top of a low level hardware driver

ajmas
11-14-2005, 08:00 PM
Any company that wants to enter the GPU business can easily write D3D drivers, but doing a GL 2.0 driver is a big pain.What factors make creating a D3D driver easier than creating one for OpenGL 2.0. Would something like an open source OpenGL 2.0 reference implementation go anywhere to change this?

Run
11-16-2005, 05:20 AM
Just a thought!

I am new at Opengl but I was thinking:

With Vista would it be possible to run Opengl
in Dos(console) mode without degrading Windows(Aeroglass)?

If so then We and Gameproducers can still use 100% Opengl disregarding Vista?

Or am I wrong?

actionGL
11-16-2005, 06:54 AM
You should really read the whole topic, at least my previous post. OpenGL has full speed/power on Vista if you use it the same way you use it on today WindowsXP/2000/98 etc... That means that hardware manufacturer provides driver - ICD for OpenGL ... that is all, everything works the same.

The issue here is that if you use ICD (as you do now for OpenGL - it installs with your graphic card drivers), you will lose cool looking windows in Vista, most games are fullscreen so this does not concerns them... Shortly, if you start windowed OpenGL app under Vista, you will loose transparency, blur and other FX that new windows have. Instead, all will look similar to current XP.

And yes, this can be changed, but Microsoft doesn't want to cooperate (btw. all work and investment will be done by hardware vendors, MS just need to give them data how windows composing work, so that IHVs can write proper drivers). If you are unsatisfied please:

“Write to your preferred software developer, hardware developer and video card manufacturer and tell them to make sure Microsoft solves this problem before release and fully supports OpenGL ICDs within Aero.”

V-man
11-16-2005, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by ajmas:
What factors make creating a D3D driver easier than creating one for OpenGL 2.0. Would something like an open source OpenGL 2.0 reference implementation go anywhere to change this?Like I said, MS creates the top layer. They code a great part of D3D, even the memory managers. They also provide the HLSL compiler.

For GL, I think the same methods would be better, but IHV have already invested a lot of energy for their Win driver. I think a common GLSL would be nice.

actionGL
11-23-2005, 07:33 PM
That’s why DirectX/Windows is not used for high risk applications - such as avionic displays, real time medical visualization etc. It would be really sad to have that kind of MS "stability" in airplane on 10 000m :) . Maybe it is cheaper for driver manufacturing, but on long run it is always better to have properly written driver.

glfreak
11-24-2005, 09:37 AM
After experimenting with Direct3D and compared some features to OpenGL, it's obviously a bit more powerful in terms of feature integration and device capability queries.

However one way OpenGL could be much much better is to unify the context managment and make it integrated into the OpenGL API rather than being OS dependent. Exactly the same as what OpenAL has for context, aclXXXX

Think about glcXXXX and let the API be resposible for creating surfaces and inqueries the adapter caps.

OtherWorlds
11-30-2005, 07:45 AM
glfreak wrote:
"However one way OpenGL could be much much better is to unify the context managment and make it integrated into the OpenGL API rather than being OS dependent. Exactly the same as what OpenAL has for context, aclXXXX"

Good point! To disbale the VISTA desktop, or avoid it entirely maybe a way to get the bets of both worlds with this new OpenGL unfriendly OS.

In the thought of what 'Ran' and others who have posted previously:
==================================================
OPENGL GAME MACHINE OS
==================================================

Imagine if an OS, just for OpenGL gaming was created, could in the worse case, run over the top of DOS. Call it something like "OGOS" ;)
It would be like programming a OGL 'GAME MACHINE' OS that doesn't require windows, MAC, or Linux even.
If I have to dual boot to play OGL based games past, or future, so be it.

So I mention, is basically an OPENGL gaming OS.

Might be good to start on this now, instead of waiting to see if the OGL does suffer greatly under VISTA. Get started on it -=ASAP=- I say.
So how can this come to be? Maybe we can form a group within the community to work on such a project?

Thoughts???

glfreak
12-01-2005, 01:49 PM
I noticed the interest in this thread is significantly decreasing as if it were ppl are not 100% sure of what is we are about.

First let me tel u about my new experience in Direct3D as opposed to my decent one in OpenGL. A thumb rule whether the I make the demo or some giant company creates it under OpenGL it runs fast like hell. Regardless of the quality since it has to do with how good the HW manufaturer skilled in programming the driver things, OpenGL in its current state the more or less the same functionality of Direct3D or even more at least using extensions which are available again at least under the two major gaming/professional solutions, NVIDIA and ATI. And of course 3D Labs.

However to make it a more perfect API that can survive specifically under Windows platforms, it must support render/draw surfaces created through the driver itself not using any DirectDraw stuff. Another thing is to have it's own rendering contect API standarized and unified for all platforms then the first suggestion is possible. Also the gl API should be able to query the HW caps exactly the same as D3D does. Last but not least the driver should be centered, if possible, or at least give this option when possible.

Imagine thing like:

glcGetContextCaps
glcGetAdapterFormat
glcSwapBuffers
....
glcUseManagedOpenGL

This function switches between a pure gl driver implemented by the HW vendor and a Mac OS X managed OpenGL, layered on top of a basic gl driver, the same D3D works.
This ensures that some HW vendors at least have good support and reliable implementations. And makes things much easier until they master the art of creating good stand alone drivers.

glcCreateRenderBuffer
....

Lets elaborate more and start working on it.

Good luck GL ppl.

glfreak
12-02-2005, 08:26 AM
The context API wil be centered in that there are two separate modules. One implemented by the OpenGL ARB, layered on top of the other module, which is HW specific impleentation. The later is low level surface/format/contex management driver.

The core GL API is vendor specific implementation exactly as the ICD. But it should incorporate the low level context driver.

OtherWorlds
12-03-2005, 04:52 AM
As we are working on a GL engine and eventual game as of lately. This sort of thing has our attention. Definately worth looking into. I may have 2-3 contributors(programmers) on my side. Let me talk to the others and see how much we can contibute. But it would be good if we could get more people(or course). And set up a team structure, etc. We need some serious talk about this, hopefully more people sounding off with their ideas. Brainstorming if you will. Then this table of discussion can get us to where we can start designing it much further. Although you still can begin some project managment (DOCs, charts etc.) I can post a website for the time being (after securing an official name) At some point Setting up a secure 'source forge' style account, and soon, hopefully, getting a few more peoples contibutions. Even those who don't officially contibute to the team, as many are too busy for such a project. Simply posting some ideas is good.
Then at some point, maybe posts on Gamedev.net, devmasters 'help wanted', and other websites about the idea. When the project/plan is ready for PR and can be outlined better to those interested. That will lure in more members.
Right now things of course need to be ironed out.
But...The wheels are turning.
A plea to the others: Please reply, post your thoughts in the least.

CrazyBillyO
12-03-2005, 10:43 PM
Sounds a lot better to me than sitting around twiddling my thumbs waiting for a supernatural act by the Vorlon god Booji. I've been meaning to get my hands dirty. Not that they're really clean in the first place.

OtherWorlds
12-07-2005, 05:53 AM
:)

Ideally, to be able to force windows vista to run GL at 100%.
DX unloads the windows desktop as to be more efficient, as I have read. (Likley because the OS is so demanding on system resources.)
But, why can't it unload DX as well? Or be force too? Hopefully done without having to reboot afterwards. We all would like to avoid having to reboot to test your OGL game that was developed in a windows enviroment. And how many of us can go and but Linux or MAC version of all the programs used in the game creation? Not practical. :(
If one writes a special 'gamers OS', we would be re-inventing the wheel. One one have to sell developers into a new development enviromnet that runs no other software. And since there are OS's build around 'Linux', that are not nearly the resource hog of even windows 98. It would be sensable as the only second choice to build something over LINUX, which is not necessary.

I guess the task at hand should first atempt to in the least tweak or patch VISTA as so it doesn't layer OGL over DX. Sadly, a tall order.
Else, we are asking others to switch to a new os like linux. If we develope a windows game we need to be able to play it on windows, including VISTA.

The task at hand is to still have it both ways.
Full OGL support and Windows VISTA.
Or be force to develop under linux or OSX.

In thinking, what can one do now anyways?
We will eventaully all be forced to have VISTA as so many apps and games now will run on only XP.
Might be a matter of a trick like 98LITE did to unload IE browser. (Or better)

Rather than go to the Command prompt and then have to reboot windows all over again. Something that can run from the Desktop.

recap:

Follow the need to develope games in windows VISTA and also be able to test or play a GL game as painless as possible with GL running at 100%.
Do whatever it (legally) takes to accomplish.
We may have to wait until the final version is out, Install and start working on a program that does what we seek.

I am getting redundant here, sorry...
(brainstorming ;) )

fluppeteer
12-08-2005, 11:08 AM
May I remind the game developers in this thread that there is not, and has never been, any suggestion that Vista won't support a full ICD in full screen mode? This is a non-issue for games, other than those which want to run windowed.

The only issue here is potential interaction between OpenGL and the Aero Glass desktop compositor. This is a significant issue for a lot of people, but it won't affect your favourite games, unless you like to game in a window (and even then, you'll just have the desktop downgrade around you - it won't stop working). I'm sure driver changes will be needed for the Longhorn device driver model, but hopefully not ones which will impact on the user.

Not that I'm uninterested in the "gaming OS" discussions - I just wanted to ensure that people knew they were going off-topic.

--
Fluppeteer

laconic75
12-12-2005, 05:12 PM
I would just like to reply to some of the statements I've heard & give some observations. The quotes I'm giving are from A Guided Tour of Windows Presentation Foundation from the MSDN Library (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnlong/html/wpf101.asp) and is worth reading IMOP because it give some good insight on why Microsoft is doing what it is doing.

The first thing I hear people say is "Why should we care if OpenGL works in Aeroglass if programs will still work without all the "fancy effects". Without all the "fancy effects" means its using GDI Microsoft old 2D renderer. Hears a quote from Microsoft about its renderer in Vista:
"All rendering in Windows Presentation Foundation takes place through Direct3D (indeed the Windows Vista hardware logo program will require a DirectX 9-level GPU). By moving more graphics processing to the GPU, we release the CPU for other work, increasing performance while simultaneously improving graphics quality. These benefits aren't limited to the 3D world, however—2D graphics also take advantage of the same services; GDI is not used within Windows Presentation Foundation except for integration with legacy elements. For machines with Windows Vista, the new display driver model offers superior output with higher performance characteristics for media-intensive applications."

In other works GDI is on the way out, and is only being kept for compatability.

The other interesting thing in this quote is that all graphics, including the windowing system is done though DirectX, this would mean in theory that if OpenGL drivers were provided a truly cross platform GUI would be able to be made that would be native code for windows. That combined with .NET would make an almost completely crossplatform application API that would run extremely fast and well on Windows Vista. I realy think this is the reason why Microsoft made this decision.

talyrond
12-14-2005, 09:16 AM
Hi, well I am just about to start programming my 3D Cad system using OpenGL and C#. I am new to OpenGL but it seem far more suited to Cad than DirectX. So I am now left confused as to what to do, use OpenGL or DirectX??

An open ended question I know, but I don’t know enough yet to make an informed decision, any comment appreciated.

Talyrond

actionGL
12-16-2005, 10:47 AM
I'll go with OpenGL, especially because you can port it for Mac and Linux.

Some say that this is not big market segment according to google stats (I thought that initially) , but what people do not know/see is that google stats say ONLY what OS was used to access google... now, thing is that most of that stats are those crappy PCs in: banks, public offices, hospitals etc... a lot of places where PC is used for document printing, internet access and excel documents. That's why stats are not correct.

Actual number of people that buy software for serious work or home gaming is very different, since all those "office" machines don't come into that statistic. I would focus especially on Mac, since it has incredible expansion in last years, and it is not so heavily packed with available software (also you exactly know what to expect in terms of hardware/speed).

Linux and Mac have great potential for earning bucks. MS Windows is the leader, but then the real question was OpenGL or DirectX... if you want to cut other OS from your current/future plan than flip the coin... otherwise use OpenGL.

3dtime
12-16-2005, 02:55 PM
We have developed an OpenGL based application for several years. One thing particularly bothers me in Windows platform is that OpenGL cannot get accelerated without allocating an actual window on screen, that means:

1. You cannot use the acceleration in rendering scene off screen;
2. You cannot render a scene larger than the curently display setting;
3. You cannot integrate OpenGL graphics with other Windows graphic output unless you use software emulation.

I do not understand why OpenGL in Windows cannot share the same drawing context. There is no such problem in Mac platform in which OpenGL drawing context shares the same drawing context with other Mac drawing utilities. If it is due to some legacy reason in old Windows OS, I understand. But Vista is new and the graphic foundation is developed from scratch.

I was hoping that the new Windows will solve this problem. But from what I read here, my hope is probably in vain. This problem is the same in nature as the conflict of OpenGL with Aeroglass. This is not an unresolvable problem - as long as Microsoft provides IHVs low-level interface.

This is not just an eye candy thing. It will open a door to many more possibilities for OpenGL-based applications.

CrazyBillyO
12-17-2005, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by talyrond:
Hi, well I am just about to start programming my 3D Cad system using OpenGL and C#. I am new to OpenGL but it seem far more suited to Cad than DirectX. So I am now left confused as to what to do, use OpenGL or DirectX??

An open ended question I know, but I don’t know enough yet to make an informed decision, any comment appreciated.The company I'm with has done some great things with OpenGL. Their most recent 3D visualization of Earth from space and stuff in orbit looks real good.

It's been discussed somewhat earlier in this thread that OpenGL is indeed more suited for CAD applications. Also, OpenGL applications can be run on more systems than others, which can increase the user base. As a Linux user, that point is very important to me, and to others who use similar systems.

glfreak
12-20-2005, 12:45 PM
Lets be practical. 99% of games are Direct3D and 1% supports OpenGL, and a couple of games outthere use only OpenGL.

I'm wondering why some games started with OpenGL as the only reliable and stable API of choice and then moved to only D3D or includd D3D to the "of choice?"

Why some video boards factories are relectant to create their own specific APIs. This will not hurt at all. At least it will make it easier to "wrap" OGL around their "Glide's" instead of letting some companies wrap it around D3D.

D3D is good. But it's never been stable because of its rapid change nature. This proves one thing that it's mal-designed that it needs to be re-designed to reflect the new changes in HW caps. OGL is not bad at all by providing the extension mechanism which can be easily supported by many HW vendors as soon as a feature is out, and very easily integrated into the core API, even if we require additional core functionality, it will never break the rules.

OGL, and as I said before, needs one thing, a standard context-specific API, that makes it as low as engraved transistors on the silicon of the tiny chips of the VGA.

ARB do it and start a draf/standard of the glc (GL context 1.0)

Lets be serious abou it and lets see how it will benefit many many applications out there. Let the HW vendors giants make express the silicon functionality instead of the "office" appliations programmers.

actionGL
12-21-2005, 10:27 AM
@glFreak:
Can you please keep to the subject - That is "Call to Action: Ensure that OpenGL remains a first class API under Windows Vista"... I don't care about context stuff since I put it once in a framework class and it works fine. Also there are many ways and examples to setup everything you need for OpenGL in Windows... if you don’t wish to write (copy/paste) Windows stuff, use freeGlut or whatever. I don't see the issue there.

However this topic is about VISTA and OPENGL, not DirectX vs OpenGL or what is better. If you like to discuss that, you can open a new post. Personally I am visiting this topic to find news, not to read someone opinion about GL or DirectX, or personal attitude about percent of games and engines that use GL... if you think to know all that and wish to share your wisdom, post a new topic or write a blog.

CrazyBillyO
12-21-2005, 03:41 PM
Microsoft could probably put a spin to their favor on such a case though. Most people don't know much about operating systems. The public at large may see that as an affront to their only access to PCs, if the company chose to market it in the media as such.

I don't think we're going to have much success in the courts, at least not now, and not in the US. I believe there have been some successes in Europe though, so maybe something can happen there. There was a setback in France though, as it appears there may be a law passed that could ban all free software there. Microsoft's partially behind that, as is Sony.

Still, Sony is a big competitor, so it may be better (though not perfect) to support them. (They are using OpenGL afterall) OpenGL does need to remain competitive though, and I think some of the suggestions here might help. If it becomes attractive enough, more developers may put more pressure to have OpenGL work with Vista.

This is indeed corruption, and those few who do care are paying the price for the many's ignorance.

actionGL
12-21-2005, 09:15 PM
Thank goodness Sony are supporting OpenGL ;)Not just Sony... go to the OpenGL ES home page and look for OpenGL ES Adopters (http://www.khronos.org/opengles/adopters/adopterslist/)

Btw, next year, Apple will release new Mac with Intel processor... for developers it means that every OpenGL/OpenAL game will *almost* work without porting. It will be so easy to deliver the same PC product for Mac, maximum one month of work. Applications will follow, especially one that use cross platform GUI solutions.

All that events tend to shift trend of making only Windows games/apps, in only windows available 3D API... so MS had to do something dirty.

Brolingstanz
12-22-2005, 12:22 AM
hehe...

to whom it may concern,

just for the fun of it, and for your edification, ask yourselves a simple question: what would i do if i had my own operating system, and i wanted to tightly integrate graphics in my operating system in such a way as to make development a breeze, and the end-user experience a dream? would i, out of the goodness of my heart, see fit to include some external api(s) in this scheme, possibly incurring all manner of design and security implications, if i didn't have to? in other words, why would i want to design my system around the need--need--for another graphics api, if it weren't strictly necessary or even desirable? would i spend the time and money and headache, design my system so that its inner workings are exposed, all so that i can provide a path for other apis that i don't need, or want?

you delight in the fact that opengl is cross platform, implying that you intend to target the very operating system that in the same sentence you condemn; the very operating system that has achieved its height of success in no small part through its good design philosophy, rapid evolution and ease of use (and shrewed business practices). if linux had the market share that microsoft enjoys, you wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place. indeed, it is unlikely that you would be entertaining the notion of a directx implementation for linux, in such an event of role reversals, just for the sake of what someone's notion of the ideal api is. hehe...

personally, if it were my os, i'd be rid of opengl altogether; that is, if it didn't mean loosing a an application base and alienating a considerable if not cantankerous developer base. the latter impetus seems a lost cause, imho, though i realise that those posting here represent a rather small and insignificant portion of the opengl developer population, with the exception of a notable few (you know who you are).

i feel no particular allegiance whatsoever to one api or another. to me, an api is just a way to communicate with hardware--a necessary evil, if you will. directx is great under windows because it evolves quickly and is wired into the os, which in turn makes certain things nicer, especially when you look at .net and d3d10. sure, like all apis, it has its shortcomings, but i don't mind pointing out that the list is getting shorter all the time.

anyway, as korval so eloquently stated, and i'll reiterate for your convenience,
i would find all this microsoft bashing rather embarrassing, if i were you, from the perspective of a development community, and as a matter of course. you're shooting yourselves, and indeed the community, in the foot with this sort of ridiculous rhetoric. you guys (you know who you are) sound like a bunch of end-users, rather than developers. heck, you sound like a bunch a hay seeds, really. hows about a little imagination on your part? hows about showing a little mental girth, else you are liable to get microsoft's unlubricated "10 foot experience", from behind.

what's the harm in learning a new api? i just don't get what the big stink is about. sounds like a lot of lazy developers to me, for the most part.

but do go on. it is entertaining, if not clinically absurd.

happy holidays,
bonehead

glfreak
12-22-2005, 03:49 AM
I think I have a solution! Why not implementing OpenGL 2.0 instead of 1.4 under Vista but still layered on top of the geek API????

What do you think???

Lets change our attitudes and intentions in this thread to suporting the current version of OpenGL. This way the problem is solved. And since D3D is superior in performance under Windows, as experts said, then there will be no performance problem wrapping things. :D

actionGL
12-22-2005, 04:32 AM
what's the harm in learning a new api? i just don't get what the big stink is about. sounds like a lot of lazy developers to me, for the most part.If I wanted to code only for single console called Windows Vista PC, I would not argue... so then, MS should not implement OpenGL 10 years ago in the first place. I mean, we should draw with windows GDI... So it implies two things:

1) MS does what it wants, without any regard /respect for developers that actually work on their system, and some of them made PC very popular as gaming platform (ID Software for example), others as professional CAD, 3D modeling platform. The real question is what to expect from them in future?

2) There is no FREEDOM of choice. Really, MS doesn’t need to "invest time and money" - it just needs to provide mechanism to draw to window canvas/texture without, or directly trough, Direct3D (it can provide, for instance, texture or memory image place in specified MS format, which then will be drawn by Vista composer, without limiting what people use to draw on it). Instead, MS develops/invests money in out of date "version" of OpenGL to make things look nice...

---

Just wondering... say, tomorrow some suit at MS decides that free DirectX is very stupid, not in best interest of MS corporation - after all MS pays people to develop it. And sets the price to 100 000$ for SDK. Well what can you do, no other solution... also in addition “no uncertified D3D driver" can be installed, "for your sake, and sake of security" - like they invented the first driver and it was used never before, and every IHV need to pay - let's say 1 000 000$ for driver certification (stamp policy - like in many dictatorships before)...

That's why we need other APIs, that's why monopolies are bad thing. That’s why healthy competition is necessary for proper advancing in any segment, including DirectX future. That's why this MS move really stinks. Your freedom of choice will not go away all the sudden, it will go step by step... but hey, enjoy while it lasts.

And... the only thing that is not quite clear to me is IHV position. Are they blind? They need emails/letters to decide whether or not to take action? I think that they are the ones shooting them self in the foot if this pass. And yes I would like to know their official position regarding the subject OpenGL - Vista. IHVs you could indulge us and post on OpenGL.org your position?!

Brolingstanz
12-22-2005, 09:06 AM
The last thing I want to do is develop Direct3D, cause it is just strengthening a massive monopoly.there's no logic in this. by developing applications that target windows, you're supporting windows, regardless of the api you use. if you want to hurt microsoft, stop developing for them, and stop buying their products. of course, you're hurting people by doing this, but who cares? they're not real people; they're just microsoft employees...

nobody cares what api you use, navgen. and the microsoft monopoly issue, real or imagined, is not at issue here.


If I wanted to code only for single console called Windows Vista PC, I would not argue... so then, MS should not implement OpenGL 10 years ago in the first place. I mean, we should draw with windows GDI... So it implies two things:frankly, your logic escapes me. if there's a crescendo in your reasoning with this statement, i missed it.


2) There is no FREEDOM of choice.you do have a choice, actiongl: don't develop for windows. the notion that it's opengl's god given right to exist on all platforms equally is ridiculous on the face of it. i understand, as a developer, that its aesthetically appealing and convenient to have a single api for all occasions, i just don't see this as a logical guide and end for all endeavors, particularly ones the hold the end-user in the highest regard, not the developer. i know that may come as a blow to you, but i'm sure that you would have to agree, at least on a fiscal basis.

anyway, this issue isn't without precedent. for instance, if you develop applications under windows, chances are you use the win32 sdk, or one of its incarnations. you don't need a choice, though you do actually have some, each with their respective strengths and weaknesses, and each an api that sits atop the win32 api. most use the win32 api directly, because it's there, it works, and it allows you to access the entirety of the windows gamut while offering the best performance.

now, as graphics becomes more of an integral part of the operating system experience, it's going to be increasingly difficult to abstract the graphics provider in such a way that assures performance, security, and stability, and all in a way that microsoft can control. vista rises and falls on, among other things, the performance and consistency of the graphics. they can guarantee the desired behavior by enforcing a degree of compliance at the hardware level. but at an abstracted software level, where things get out of their hands, there's the potential for some crumby opengl implementation to make windows look bad, as an os. with the compositor disabled, microsoft has effectively given themselves a disclaimer: "if things get screwy, it's not our fault", or "we're sorry for the inconvenience, but we have to change security policies and graphics capabilities because we're switching over to an api and driver that we have insufficient control over". hey, if i had some external api in my system that was responsible for the intended look and feel of my os, you can bet your bottom dollar i'd be more than a little concerned, probably reluctant in the extreme to allow this to happen. wouldn't you?

as has already been said, all this can be made to work. this is just a reminder that microsoft is under no spiritual, ethical, or moral obligation to do this--a reminder that seemed strangely necessary.


Just wondering... say, tomorrow some suit at MS decides that free DirectX is very stupid, not in best interest of MS corporation - after all MS pays people to develop it. And sets the price to 100 000$ for SDK.microsoft already charges us for the use of d3d... it's called "windows". your insinuation is amusing, but preposterous!


That's why we need other APIs, that's why monopolies are bad thing. That’s why healthy competition is necessary for proper advancing in any segment, including DirectX future. That's why this MS move really stinks. Your freedom of choice will not go away all the sudden, it will go step by step... but hey, enjoy while it lasts.you're clearly not taking the long view on this one. want to give microsoft a run for the money? then create an os that competes with it! quibbling over a graphics api ain't going to get you there, buddy. try as you might. create an os better than windows, better to the people that matter... the people that buy operating systems. but that's another matter entirely. and frankly, i don't think it's a very interesting one, least not from where i sit. honestly, the myopic view that the world begins and ends with graphics apis is a bloated self-centered delusion, and has no basis in reality.


And... the only thing that is not quite clear to me is IHV position. Are they blind? They need emails/letters to decide whether or not to take action? I think that they are the ones shooting them self in the foot if this pass. And yes I would like to know their official position regarding the subject OpenGL - Vista. IHVs you could indulge us and post on OpenGL.org your position?!by all means, send letters, emails, flowers and candy. a friendlier and more cordial attitude will get you further than dispirited tirades and melancholy.

the debate here could/should be a technical one, but who has enough information to say something intelligent in this area? those that could inject some useful inside information are probably not at liberty to discuss it; those that can discuss it probably keep on going after reading all the inept microsoft bashing and otherwise inert commentary. some of us might be interested in hearing some pertinent information, but where's the motivation in contributing to this thread now? the few good folks that have attempted to contribute useful information have been met with either outright ignorance, or have been browbeaten and stonewalled by on-high wannabees, who view this as nothing more than an exercise in creative writing, or an opportunity to express some deep seeded frustration with life, in a kind of sad, half-assed death match.

sorry.

btw, i want to port some stuff to linux. and guess what? i have to learn opengl! am i pleased? well, i've actually learned a thing or two and i think i'm the wiser for it. so yes, i like it!

i wish you the very best the season has to offer,
bonehead

actionGL
12-22-2005, 10:41 AM
Firs of all, most of your reply doesn't have necessary logic behind it to make it even worth answering. But that is only my opinion and you have right to write whatever you want. To clarify some things for you:

What I find annoying about MS is that it created windows with many qualities - such as, that you can use OpenGL, have all those professional GL apps, good games... allowing that in Windows OS, lot of companies use OpenGL and provide products for Windows. It was developer friendly environment. Now, somebody at MS has decided that MS would earn much more money if GL was dead. But hey, those people won’t stop coding it, even if by default there is no hardware support for it... that is, you have no acceleration until you install ICD from IHV.

Hm, now we have to do something even more "constructive", even though hardware companies and developers still support it. Let’s forget all those companies and developers and FORCE THEM to program in D3D -> that is if they wish to continue to use Windows (Vista). That's it, first we create big pool of developers for Windows, and then -> we force them to adopt our technology, by cutting OS system functions and usability. That's great, 5 stars... maybe this kind of behavior passes in US, but certainly not in Europe (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4552214.stm) .


microsoft already charges us for the use of d3d... it's called "windows". your insinuation is amusing, but preposterous!Windows OS gives you right TO USE software that use DirectX technology. It's a completely different situation when you wish to DEVELOP software. These things are very different. DirectX is free for developers (right now...)


btw, i want to port some stuff to linux. and guess what? i have to learn opengl! am i pleased? well, i've actually learned a thing or two and i think i'm the wiser for it. so yes, i like it!
Here is the main issue... which you fail to see. Nobody prevents MS to develop DirectX version for Linux -> so, you are not learning OpenGL because of Linux vision of perfect OS, you are learning it because MS didn't develop DirectX version for Linux. If MS want to do so -> IT CAN. If OpenGL developer wants his windowed application to seamlessly integrate with Vista -> IT CAN'T... if IHV want to make proper driver, it can't! Why, because microsoft prevented it. These are two different things:
1) Having OS capability to do something, and not using it.
2) Having no OS capability, even if you wish to do so, because OS vendor decided after 10+ years to change its policy toward graphic standards.

Happy holidays :cool:

Roady
12-22-2005, 02:36 PM
I find M$'s interests questionable when they forsake open standards like OpenGL.
Direct3D isn't a better API provided by M$ for our benefit, it's soley for their benefit.
Anyone who thinks that M$ won't leverage Direct3D to make more money is deluding themselves.

There's no good reason why Windows Vista can't support OpenGL ICDs.
Mac OS X has a composite desktop that implements OpenGL just fine.

For those who like Direct3D, keep using it.
The rest of us demand that OpenGL is intergrated to the same extent as Direct3D in Windows.
M$ is trying to use the ignorance of new users to drive developers toward Direct3D.
New users don't want to hear that their new, fancy OS has to look like last year's OS because the game/software developers are using OpenGL.
And you can bet that's how M$ will explain it, "It's the developer's fault for choosing OpenGL, not ours for refusing to support OpenGL in Windows."

CrazyBillyO
12-22-2005, 03:31 PM
nobody cares what api you use, navgen. and the microsoft monopoly issue, real or imagined, is not at issue here. This statement is incorrect. That is the very heart of the issue here. If they didn't have the market position they have today, then they couldn't get away with what they are doing. If more choices were available (as the monopoly issue is very real), they would have to make their systems more compatible with other APIs.

What some seem to forget is that one of the primary goals of an OS is to give access to the system's hardware and devices. It enables things to be done, but by no means is it an end in and of itself. If it prevents access, or severely degrades it, then it is not doing its job.

In the end, though, all we ask is that Microsoft give the people the necessary information in a timely manner to help OpenGL work with Aeroglass. That seems like a reasonable request.

Brolingstanz
12-22-2005, 11:27 PM
Now, somebody at MS has decided that MS would earn much more money if GL was dead.who exactly is this person at microsoft? and pray tell, how is eliminating opengl good for business? why would you want to eliminate a large application and developer base that happily keeps cranking out software for their os? an os is nothing without good software to run on it. that's where you guys are missing the boat on this one.


Windows OS gives you right TO USE software that use DirectX technology. It's a completely different situation when you wish to DEVELOP software.again, what is microsoft interest in making their api unreachable to the average programmer? there's no business sense in this. and if there were, so what? it's there right to do whatever they want with their sdk's. lot's of companies make money on sdk's. microsoft charges for their ddk, but that's a fairly small, professional crowd. you don't hear a lot of pissing and moaning from them.

the rest of your post is seasonal blend of misinformation, mixed with half-thoughts and clumsy ruminations. you'll forgive me if don't respond to all your delightful comments.

my heart goes out to you, actiongl, really. and i thank you kindly for the warm holiday wish.


I'd still like to enquire if anyone knows of a unified API on top of OpenGL and DirectX?i thought you were kidding.

i'll write you one, if the price is right. say 100,000 euros? that was actiongl's figure.


That is the very heart of the issue here. If they didn't have the market position they have today, then they couldn't get away with what they are doing. If more choices were available (as the monopoly issue is very real), they would have to make their systems more compatible with other APIs.i see. well, this is clearly not the subject of this thread, according to the topic title, though at this point i guess it's all for naught anyway...

besides, you proceed from a false assumption, that microsoft is some sort of evil empire, out to destroy opengl and its users. where do you guys get this stuff? and what are they "getting away with"? they have the right to do things the way they want to, just as you or i would expect certain freedoms in our own private enterprises. yes? or does that make too much sense?

my good friend grady once asked me what i got out of the "items of importance" forum. after some deliberation, i replied, "pain, my dear grady, pain and delight!"

grady is a good guy, but he's overyl inquisitive at times.

happy permutations, and a warm holiday collective integration,
bonehead

actionGL
12-22-2005, 11:45 PM
Bonehead, I have nothing more to tell you. You seem to know it all. I suggest you read my last post few times and try to find out what it was all about.

Also, do some research about other technologies that MS has destroyed in similar fashion... I am not asking MS why? Is it good or not for them? It is a fact.

Read about MS monopoly legislations etc... and after all, try to find more what "monopoly" really means, how it makes benefit for company and what it does to economy, competition, progress etc.

Brolingstanz
12-23-2005, 04:10 AM
Bonehead, I have nothing more to tell you.i am saddened to hear this, and, if i may say so, somewhat relieved.


You seem to know it all.it's not that i know that much, i don't. rather, it's that you know so little.

it doesn't take a great deal of thought to find logical holes in your arguments. and in the absence of fact, there's little to do but theorise and pontificate, to the indeterminate bemusement of all concerned.


Also, do some research about other technologies that MS has destroyed in similar fashion... I am not asking MS why? Is it good or not for them? It is a fact.what fact? i see no facts. microsoft can no more destroy technology than monkeys can fly out of my butt. if you mean they have "acquired" certain technologies in their bid to be the biggest and best software house in the world, then you're right, and i suspect you'd do the same, if you had half the business savvy they posses.

what's wrong with wanting to succeed? do you honestly think you'd be any different in their shoes? i find this entire argument intellectually disturbing and profoundly irritating on several fundamental levels, not least of which is the base implication that microsoft has proceeded any differently than any other business would have, given equal opportunity and skill. the point here being that there may be no one to beat them at their own game, but that's not microsoft's fault now is it?


Read about MS monopoly legislations etc... and after all, try to find more what "monopoly" really means, how it makes benefit for company and what it does to economy, competition, progress etc.yes, yes. microsoft's monopoly and ...zzzzzz.....zzzzzz.......zzzzzz. huh? oh yeah, the monopoly thing. right. well, it seems to me that society is trying to come to terms with what to do when a business becomes "a bit too big for its britches". naughty microsoft for being so successful... for shame, for shame. what about all those companies that can't seem to get a leg up in microsof't long, menacing shadow?

hey, where there's a will, there's a way. enough people with enough smarts willing to make enough of a sacrifice could make a play. but i'm not going there; you're on your own.

and i suppose you'd be happier if there were 50 operating systems to develop for, each with an equal share, each with its own peculiar nuances, pitfalls, and incompatibilities. wouldn't that be great! heck, why not 100, 200, 1000! oh yeah!

i do wish you luck, actiongl, but i'm plum tuckered...

CrazyBillyO
12-23-2005, 11:21 AM
i see. well, this is clearly not the subject of this thread, according to the topic title, though at this point i guess it's all for naught anyway...

besides, you proceed from a false assumption, that microsoft is some sort of evil empire, out to destroy opengl and its users. where do you guys get this stuff? and what are they "getting away with"? they have the right to do things the way they want to, just as you or i would expect certain freedoms in our own private enterprises. yes? or does that make too much sense? I tend to disagree about it being so off-topic. The kind of discussion I presented there listed one of the reasons why OpenGL might not stay a first class API under Vista. In order to address a problem, one must identify its causes. One way to possibly remedy this situation is to participate in reducing Microsoft's huge market share from its current monopolistic state.


and i suppose you'd be happier if there were 50 operating systems to develop for, each with an equal share, each with its own peculiar nuances, pitfalls, and incompatibilities. wouldn't that be great! heck, why not 100, 200, 1000! oh yeah! In such a competitive environment, each OS maker would most likely have to adhere to certain interface requirements in order to survive. I think such requirements work in everyone's favor, as it allows the people to choose what they would like to use, and at the same time have compatibility with most software. That would most certainly help in the current situation.

I believe we need good, constructive ideas on how to change things, after identifying the inherent problems and a good discussion. If you have any thoughts on how to do this with the current topic, please let us know.

Brolingstanz
12-23-2005, 04:31 PM
I don't think politely asking Microsoft will change their minds.how do you know? bashing them most certainly isn't going win their hearts and minds.


So, primarily I think Microsoft should be challenged with the European Commission.how is the eu going to help here?

the eu action is about opening certain systems to developers, not how the systems themselves should actually operate. you can't legislate an api. you can argue that developers have a right to know enough about a system to write good software for it, but you can't dictate the use of that software. people have the right to use netscape instead of ie, but microsoft isn't forced to use it or bundle it with its distribution. and with apis, i imagine the ice gets even thinner.


Then, if we fail to change their policy we should have plenty of workarounds in place.what are all these other workarounds?

actionGL
12-23-2005, 06:19 PM
the eu action is about opening certain systems to developers, not how the systems themselves should actually operate.Well, for start, MS could provide IHVs info how Vista composer works -> that is, how it comunicates with D3D... I am sure that workaround for OpenGL wouldn't take long.


Data demand

Microsoft was also ordered "to disclose complete and accurate interface documentation which would allow non-Microsoft work group servers to achieve full interoperability with Windows PCs and servers". EU could apply this to Vista composer also...

Brolingstanz
12-23-2005, 06:32 PM
I believe we need good, constructive ideas on how to change things, after identifying the inherent problems and a good discussion. If you have any thoughts on how to do this with the current topic, please let us know.touche, my good man. you may indeed be right. i'd be the first to admit it if you are, and the last to say i told you so if you aren't.

i've precious little to offer your cause, other than what i've already alluded to. but if i think of something, you'll be the first to know.

Wertigon
12-23-2005, 06:56 PM
Bonehead:

If I may say so myself, your ignorance scares me. Rarely have I seen someone miss the point so thoroughly, and miss the obvious so well. I will try and keep this brief:

First off, Microsoft is not an "Evil Empire". I'm not claiming they are, and I acknowledge that they've done much good for the IT industry as a whole. However, fact remains that their main tactics up until now has been bullying their way through, using next to every dirty trick in the book to get to where they are today.

These tactics has cost them a great deal of (public) goodwill, and it is one of the primary reasons they're so disliked by the general geek populace. Time and time again, they've sent the very same message: "We'll do everything in our power to keep our monopoly, and if anyone doesn't agree, we'll just dispose of 'em."

You only need to look at the recent MA ODF debate (http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20051216153153504) to see how Microsoft is actively taking measures to prevent interoperability.

With this history in mind, do you really trust Microsoft not to try everything in it's might to prevent interoperability? Because that's what this question is all about; trust.

Microsoft isn't stupid. The easier you can port programs, the easier people can switch to other OSes. If enough people run Linux/OSX/Amiga/Whatever, then the Windows monopoly will be broken.

Any software company wants as huge a target audience as possible, so for them it's much better to write OpenGL-based apps instead of apps based on Direct3D. The reason? Why settle for 90% of the market when you can reach 99% of the market for basicly the same development costs? Especially if it looks like the 90% market share will shrink, and if you look around at Linux development and deployment in the world, it looks like it will indeed shrink.

And that's why it makes business sense for Windows Vista to not fully support OpenGL. It's also the same reason why it will be a cold day in hell before DirectX comes to Linux and/or OSX. I believe, however, that this tactic won't save them in the long run.

So, I ask you again: Do you trust them? Because I sure as hell don't.

'Nuff said.

Brolingstanz
12-23-2005, 07:14 PM
that's interesting, actiongl.

i'd be curious to know if that fits the bill legally. if so, could be a back door. don't ask me why, but i'm having my doubts. even if they find a way to make this stick legally, i don't see how they can force microsft to use a particular api for a given device, which would seem to entail some fairly hefty implications.

this has got to involve some rather complicated dependencies on the exact nature of the system in question, various legal definitions, and all sorts of other relatively uninteresting but important stuff. i dunno.

Brolingstanz
12-23-2005, 07:42 PM
pardon this brief digression, but i got a hair.


However, fact remains that their main tactics up until now has been bullying their way through, using next to every dirty trick in the book to get to where they are today.what you call "bullying" and "dirty tricks", other might term "business". i'm sure microsft would prefer the latter. in any case, both being extraordinarily subjective terms, and terms designed to evoke a negative emotional response, i prefer not to use them, and i don't see how they add to the discussion. furthermore, the powers that be at other os companies would surely love to see microsoft fall, and anything they can do to facilitate this end is of course good for them, never mind their/your tactics, no matter how dirty they may be.

as the rest of your tirade progresses along essentially the same line of reasoning, i'll summarize for brevity. i think it's all a non-issue. you want a better operating system than windows, create one. you don't like windows, don't use it. it's simple. no muss, no fuss. i realise of course that this is a simplification, but i like things simple. the simpler the better. if want them complicated, that's up to you.

Brolingstanz
12-24-2005, 02:35 AM
They've all been killed off by Microsoftno, they've seen a reduced market due to competition. need i remind you that free enterprise is legal? hehe...

maybe i should break out my old atari, and in the hour or so it take to boot up, i'll stick my head in the sand, in tribute to ignorance, as a stupid, useless gesture. what do you think, navgen?

Ondras
12-24-2005, 04:08 AM
I better don't want to make any comments on how is Microsoft doing it's "business". The problem is about interfaces which Microsoft should provide to let other APIs interact wih Vista composer. Officially they said there are security reasons why they keep these interfaces hiden. I could not find many technical informaion here, so maybe I am wrong. I just wonder if these interfaces are that complicated und could be source of OS instability. The Vista composer should get access only to the final stage of whole graphic pipeline which is an OpenGL frame buffer. I think if Microsoft won't provide interfaces to Vista composer then the IHVs would find the way how to keep OpenGL the first class API under Vista. Maybe they will have to do it in a bit complicated manner and use DirectX for the final stage when interacting with composer. I hope it won't hurt the performance. I don't like it to be done like that but I am optimistic about windowed OpenGL under Vista. OpenGL will find it's way.

Wertigon
12-24-2005, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by bonehead:
what you call "bullying" and "dirty tricks", other might term "business". i'm sure microsft would prefer the latter.Ah yes. Just as you can describe "Rape" as "A way of expressing your love". I know the comparisions are ridiculus, but Microsoft has been convicted of Anti-trust charges several times in the past, and they still keep at doing what they've always done. Which is why the EU recently fined Microsoft (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4552214.stm) for breaking antitrust law.

Sure, bad things happen, and some companies have done real suicides (like Netscape - NS4 was crap compared to IE4 which lead to IE winning the browser wars). I actually applaud Microsoft if they make an excellent product that beats the crap out of the competition, since that's what Free Markets are all about.

However, since Microsoft more often than not resort to other tactics such as spreading FUD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fud) or using their desktop monopoly to leverage sales instead of competing on their products own merits, well... Let's just say I don't trust them. But I digress.


Originally posted by bonehead:
as the rest of your tirade progresses along essentially the same line of reasoning, i'll summarize for brevity. i think it's all a non-issue. you want a better operating system than windows, create one. you don't like windows, don't use it. it's simple. no muss, no fuss. i realise of course that this is a simplification, but i like things simple. the simpler the better. if want them complicated, that's up to you.I personally don't like windows, and if I have a choice I don't use it. But as a game developer I cannot ignore the fact that most people are, in fact, using Windows. However, many people are slowly turning away from the allmighty Redmond giant - Mostly in Asia but also in Europe.

To return to the heart of the matter, as it is now I can code an OpenGL app and with very little extra work port it to just (http://www.bsd.org/) about (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/default.mspx) any (http://http://www.apple.com/macosx/) platform (http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/) that (http://www.sgi.com/products/software/irix/) supports (http://www.us.playstation.com/consoles.aspx?id=2) OpenGL. Heck, even the AmigaOS (http://www.amiga.com/amigaos/) supports OpenGL, if only a small subset of the standard. That's if not 100% atleast 99% of the market.

However, if Microsoft gets their way, I'll only be able to reach maybe 10-15% of the market with my OpenGL app, and I have to put down a whole lot of extra work to use an API which also has been known to change from time to time. Which one would you rather prefer?

So, bottom line: Microsoft, share your information god dammit! :p

Regards,
Per Ekström
College Student, Sweden

fooguru
12-24-2005, 05:23 PM
Originally posted by Wertigon:
if Microsoft gets their way, I'll only be able to reach maybe 10-15% of the market with my OpenGL app, and I have to put down a whole lot of extra work to use an API which also has been known to change from time to time. Which one would you rather prefer?

So, bottom line: Microsoft, share your information god dammit! :p Amen!

V-man
12-24-2005, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by navgen:
I'd still like to enquire if anyone knows of a unified API on top of OpenGL and DirectX? I know this is not the best solution to Vista, but can be a backup for writing portable applications.
Depends on your definition of API. A lot of people/companies have created a wrapper for GL/D3D
You can do it as well.
I find that it makes the code cleaner and organized, even if you only support GL.

Brolingstanz
12-25-2005, 12:39 AM
a very merry christmas to you, navgen.

and a happy holiday to all of you.

:cool:

V-man
12-25-2005, 07:05 AM
navgen,
I don't have an extra machine to do beta testing of OSes. For sure, you would be putting your data at risk by installing any OS, beta or not. I have had trouble with Linux. I think it was due to the grub boot loader.

Did you get Vista to run?

Oh yes, happy xmas and season's greetings to everyone!

V-man
12-27-2005, 09:39 AM
navgen,

I had a bad experience once when I installed Linux on my dual boot Win2k/XP machine. I could no longer boot either of the Windows. Luckily, I backed up everything but restoring wastes hours.

Now I can tripple boot, so I'm happy. I don't want to attempt a quad boot :)

V-man
12-31-2005, 07:59 AM
I'm surprised they let us delete the icon on Win2k, XP, etc.

Oh yes, I posted a link many messages ago about a user that was running Vista. He says when he runs iTunes, the glass effect turned off. I think he meant for the entire desktop.

Not much detail because I think he is non-techie.

Zak McKrakem
01-04-2006, 05:55 AM
Has anyone tried the last Vista (december) release?
if so, has it the same OpenGL support?

Thanks.

damian
01-05-2006, 02:33 AM
Microsoft has provided a feedback page for beta versions of Vista

Microsoft Feedback Page for Windows Vista (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/sentiments/default.mspx)

So you can now let Microsoft know what you feel about this issue directly.

glfreak
01-05-2006, 08:23 AM
Here we go, every time we end up with a new useless discussion of off-topic issues. Unrelated! Nothing can be done!

Why do we really care about Windows XYZ??? Is not it that we are Windows lovers is the purpose behind the existence of this thread? Ok users, adicts, have-no-choice, or lovers are all the same.

How many time we freaked out about some MS decision and later we found ourselves forced to do it whether we liked it or not? Save your energy nothing will gonna change a giant decison.

OpenGL is for Linux, Apple, and now PS3. MS has the right to choose whatever APIs they find more suitable for their own platform. Can someone stop you from implementing DirectX under Linux? Ok I want to layer XYZ API on top of ABC API for my own benefits, if you don't liek it dont use it. Move to another platform. Try another API. or you know implemnt it yourself.

But one thing, if the ARB does care then they should hurry up. It seems that after 2.0 they have been sleeping while DX is now about to become 10.

Many suggestions and no one from the ARB takes any serious action. Hey you guys are you beign paid to stop OpenGL development or what?

I can imagine Maya crashes for weird DirectX bug - looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool :D

V-man
01-05-2006, 05:59 PM
glfreak, take it easy.

I'm interested to know how/when/if things work as we want under Windows.

The ARB is developing extensions in case you haven't been paying attention. The superbuffer group is developing FBO's further.

actionGL
01-05-2006, 07:23 PM
This is what I found on gamedev.net forum... I find it interesting, although I can't verify is it actually correct. It was posted anonymously.



I think I can point out where the problem is from a technical point of view. The issue is that Vista shuts down the Aero system if you have an unsigned driver installed, it does so to defend the DRM enforcement system. The (ahem)problem... is that the owner of the computer might install a custom driver and try to capture video or potentially even try to use the video card to read system RAM. The owner of the computer is considered a security threat.

From Microsoft's point of view any code that can talk to the video hardware is a security threat to their DRM lockdown. They will not sign any driver that has not undergone an extensive security audit. (BTW, does anyone know how much Micrsoft charges for this testing and certification?)

This is why it is difficult but possible for the the video card manufacturers to create the required drivers. They would need information and assistance from Microsoft and the drivers would have to be completely locked down, especially no capability to pass on arbitrary extended commands to the hardware. It also means it is almost impossible for anyone else to create independant drivers. An interesting side note is that even if a driver is released under the GPL with full source code, that source is completely useless. Any attempt to modify and recompile the source - as the GPL requires the right to do - results in a nonfunctional driver. Windows will see that no valid signature and again go into braindamaged reduced functionality mode.

Another point that people have missed is that if you do load a nonsigned driver you do not merely drop to the basic Windows interface, you may also lose running applications. When Aero gets locked out I *think* the whole security system gets locked out. Dropping to the basic desktop is more than mere nuisance, any application utilizing the security system may be locked out for the duration. To say that this behaviour is "completely unacceptable" in commercial software would be quite the understatement. Other random software would freeze or die whenever your driver was loaded.

OldMan
01-09-2006, 06:23 AM
Informations are a little bit confusing right now.

Lets see:
I read that :

OpenGL would only run under a D3D wrapp.

OpenGL could be run but disabling whole Aero in whole desktop

OpenGL could be run but disabling aero only at application window

If the last one is true, not that BIG problem, if only the GL application window has the problem.

If the second one is true, is that deactivation controlled by the application? Or must be done manually by the user?

OpenGL will not die simply because of PS3. It is quite possible that many companies that were targeting both Windows and PS3 platforms now will face problems. Do you think any of them would drop PS3 to keep on PC game market that is much, MUCH smaller? Don´t think so.

Current game I work on is OpenGL, and we work on ideas like a bootable DVD with linux + game setup for direct sartup. Conventional windows with OpenGL and PS3. Never any idea on dropping OpenGL since we have hundred thousands code lines written and developer for years.

If our OpenGL applications have any type of issue, we WILL add an warning at start of application about the Windows Vista BUG that made us do whatever actions we need. Including simple instructions of how to use it by a bootable DVD if wanted.

Due to extra effort on developing for windows I already charge more on windows versions of my softwares, and that does impact the decision of the costumer.

Just hope NV ATI and 3Dlabs can , supported by PS3 game developers, handle that with MS.

actionGL
01-09-2006, 10:08 AM
In my opinion, OpenGL is far from dead. MS knows it, and that is why we all have this situation.

Currently you will loose Aero look of Vista for ALL windows, completely. This will happen automatically, if you load windowed OpenGL Application. For fullscreen apps (games etc...) there is no concern, they will work as they should (if you install IHVs drivers - as you do now for XP).

MS can fix this - only thing that they should do, is to provide necessary info to IHVs, how to build drivers that work with Aero... but for "unknown" reason that is not happening. MS says that this way of driver operation could be possible source of future security problems, some guy wrote about new DRM stuff that MS is quietly pushing with Vista… etc… but all that can be solved trough API and MS driver certification… I don’t see the real issue here.

So, write emails to IHVs and ISVs and let them know your opinion.

OldMan
01-10-2006, 06:22 AM
We made a few experiments. With NVIDIA cards and most sound cards we got it working in every test PC we got. We need a little bit more work on ATI cards and some equise Sound cards.

It could be even better if Windows didn´t used fancy closed file systems, so we would be able to store all needed stuff on windows HD while on the bootable DVD OS.

But we are working on solutions on that too.

Nest step is good network instalation, but for singla player games thinga are pretty good now.

V-man
01-10-2006, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by navgen:
[QUOTE]I looked at some "PC" games in the supermarket the other night and I realised that, instead of for "PC" they should be for "Windows", cause they all needed Windows. So the "PC" is now a "Windows" machine then :confused: Are you new to the PC?
It's been called the "Wintel machine" because most of the market was Intel CPUs with Windows.

Most commercial games use DirectX.
The few that use GL are top selling games (Doom3, Quake series, Neverwinter Nights, Star Wars series, Serious Sam (DX and GL))
Of course, there are some top selling games that use DX. It's a sad sad world we live in :p

V-man
01-11-2006, 05:53 AM
Hi navgen,

Then I think you know what I know.


Originally posted by navgen:
I think my previous comments about the "PC" were highlighting the current severity of the situation.
I'm fairly certain things will not change for the near future. Windows is *the* gaming platform for the PC. I don't think game developers are forced to use DX, but they do anyway.

I hope your testing goes well.

actionGL
01-11-2006, 09:51 PM
@Navgen

Speaking of cutting edge technology, you haven’t seen Killzone 2 or Unreal Tournament 2007 for PlayStation 3 ;)

KillZone 2 page:
http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?id=1668

Unreal Tournament 2007:
http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/748/748505/vids_1.html

And these are using OpenGL 2.0 ES. Also take a look at other PS3 games, XBox 360 looks like improved PC ("wintel") gaming experience, while PS3 is far, far away in another league.

I am looking forward to code for PS3, Mac and handheld/mobile devices, which in my opinion, will become more and more powerful -> requiring less investment in game production, especially if you use tools from Khronos:

OpenKODE (http://www.khronos.org/news/press/releases/rel51.html)

Also, OpenGL games will work on Vista, and apps can use version of Vista Aero skin (version without DX shaders, similar to XP)... so it would be fine, but much worse than it should be -> thanks to MS monopoly based business decisions (instead of making great OS, capable of many things, they are making it deliberately constrained).

Someone mentioned DirectX, well Khronos is doing all that as open standard and portable solution. Could you ask for more? Well guess who doesn't like the idea...

And what in the name of God is Khronos?!?
http://www.khronos.org/about/

Just member-funded industry consortium, consisting of every major company you might have heard of, minus (surprise!?) Microsoft... go figure... :cool:

V-man
01-12-2006, 06:52 AM
navgen, I understand your frustation with nVidia. I was following your thread on the Windows forum.

The thing is, nVidia is in part interested in gamers with their regular Geforce GPUs and in part the workstation class with Quadro GPUs.

It's their choice how they implement their driver. I suggest you make a exe that fixes the registry for your clients.

actionGL, thanks for the links. Epic is now forced to improve their GL path. :)
You lucky SOB. You get to code for the PS3!

CrazyBillyO
01-12-2006, 10:39 AM
I think you're just getting a bit depressed about the issue and giving in way too early. If we give in now, then things will never get any better. We need to keep pressuring others, keep mentioning it and its strong points whenever and wherever we can. The company I'm with still uses OpenGL for their graphics for their XP apps, and I'd bet there are many others out there as well. OpenGL can succeed, but we have to do everything we can to achieve that goal.

V-man
01-12-2006, 04:47 PM
Hi navgen,


Looks like Direct3D is going to be big business when Vista comes out $$$If you are in the games industry, you should know it regardless of Vista. If you know one or the other API but not both, then you are semi-pro.
I know D3D 8 and 9 and have done some jobs. I think my usage has been 50/50 between D3D and GL.
This depends on the clients.

But getting back to the topic...
I love GL and will support it. All my homebrew project are GL based. D3D is just business.

OldMan
01-13-2006, 03:12 AM
Originally posted by V-man:
Hi navgen,


Looks like Direct3D is going to be big business when Vista comes out $$$If you are in the games industry, you should know it regardless of Vista. If you know one or the other API but not both, then you are semi-pro.
I know D3D 8 and 9 and have done some jobs. I think my usage has been 50/50 between D3D and GL.
This depends on the clients.

But getting back to the topic...
I love GL and will support it. All my homebrew project are GL based. D3D is just business.I don´t agree. Every project I worked on until today had a first directive of " have a clear path for portability in the shortest time possible, to be used if the necessity arrives". Direct3D never ever was anyting close to be usefull for us, so not knowing D3D warms nothign our capability of being professional.

That would be the same to say that if you don ´t know Python, Lua, JAva, Eiffel, Ada, Lisp, Smaltalk and Pascal you are only half professional.

You are a more limited professional, but can be as professional as anyone else within this scope.

V-man
01-13-2006, 08:59 AM
Hi navgen and Oldman



Interesting :) In a few years Vista may have a negative effect on that 50/50 share you stated. And that would be unfortunate.
I doubt it because people have been spewing out dooms day messages since I started with GL. In my case, it's since 2000. It gets boring after a while.
When Win2k came out, everyone was saying that GL has a bug and the bottom border is all black.
Turned out the bug is in the MS's implementation. Installed drivers worked perfectly.
When WinXP came out, oh my god, GL is a wrapper for D3D. We are dead meat!

Only this time, Vista isn't out yet and people are going nuts.



I don´t agree
Semi-pro was too strong, but I see that a few places ask that you know both, even if they only release D3D games.

Perhaps this might interest navgen.
A thread from gamedev.net from dec 25, 2005
Basically, some company's big client dumped D3D9 in favor of GL.
http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=365941

OldMan
01-14-2006, 04:17 AM
Hope you are right V-Man. But even so It is better to prevent than to react. Send requests to IVH and M$ won´t harm us and it may be usefull.

I agree knowing both Gl and D3D is usually an advantage, specially now that we have the polarity Xbox360 and PS3. BTW, does anyone knows about revolution? API, proprietary?

I really think the console war is fundamental for the future of not only GL but many technologies involved.

V-man
01-14-2006, 06:11 AM
are you sure OpenGL was a wrapper for D3D in Windows XPYes, very sure and you can check it yourself.

MS hasn't officially dropped support. They simply refuse to provide ICD drivers on their Windows CD. That's something that needs to be changed.

V-man
01-14-2006, 09:44 PM
Search? Just uninstall the IHV drivers on your XP. That might not work since XP might reinstall them when you reboot. You could go into the SYSTEM32 folder and rename the IHV GL dll.

For nVidia, it would be nvogl....dll
something like that.

The wrapper is opengl32.dll and this is not something you download off the net. You might find info on it at www.delphi3d.net (http://www.delphi3d.net)

V-man
01-15-2006, 06:39 AM
navgen,

I can be more specific if you want...

I beleive this is the renderer on XP because those were the extensions and glGetString I had seen when I tested XP

http://www.delphi3d.net/hardware/viewreport.php?report=243

I beleive this is on Vista
http://www.delphi3d.net/hardware/viewreport.php?report=1566

Does this help?

If you want to try it yourself on your system, do what I said. When I did my test, I had a fresh install of XP. I ran Q3 and it worked fine. Other GL games that use glReadPixels to take a small screen shot like American Mcgee's Alice, would just give black box for the saved games section, but otherwise would run well and fast.

With previous Windows versions, opengl32.dll implements GL 1.1 but it's a software renderer.
Starting with XP, they implement GL 1.1 but offer GL_ARB_multisample so games that use 2 texture units would just work. Since this is a D3D wrapper that used hw, they would run fast.

V-man
01-15-2006, 08:12 PM
Maybe it allowed people to play Quake 3 etc. on a Direct3D card, so it help promoted XP as a gaming platform.I don't think. The market is split between nVidia and ATI. 1 or 2 percent have Intel, SIS, etc according to Valve's survey and probably these are 8-10 year olds playing on their family PC.



But it wasn't a threat to OpenGL, just a little helper for OpenGL for someone without a proper OpenGL card.~shrug~ Who knows. All I know is that I want bleeding edge performance and no middle man.

actionGL
01-28-2006, 12:28 PM
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:OpenGL



This entire section as it stood was, I believe, grossly misleading, and I don't have the time to fix it right now, so as a temporary fix I have removed it altogether. From more recent postings than those on opengl.org, the facts appear to be:

* The default implementation of OpenGL on Windows Vista will provide version 1.4 of the API, implemented as a wrapper to DirectX (an improvement on the existing software-only implementation of OpenGL 1.2 that is provided with Windows XP). Only the core 1.4 API will be provided; no extensions.
* Vendors will be able to provide their own OpenGL drivers as they have before, which can implement any version of the API and any extensions as desired.
* However, as a consequence of using such a third-party driver, the Aeroglass compositor will be disabled for applications that use OpenGL. All other applications remain unaffected. The worst possible consequence of this is that window borders that use alpha-blending will not display correctly; although this is bad, it is not IMO a show-stopper. For games, this should be a non-issue, since games are normally run fullscreen.
* There is some debate as to whether it would be technically possible to remove that last issue. It appears that Microsoft refuse to release specs that would allow driver vendors to easily do so.

Lastly:

* Installing Windows XP or Windows 2000 graphics drivers on Windows Vista, as some with access to the beta have already done, results in the graphics subsystem operating in an XP-compatibility mode. Consequently, in this case, Aeroglass compositing is disabled for the entire desktop (since XP drivers do not support the compositor). Native Windows Vista drivers will not have this issue. This is possibly the source of much of the confusion.

Since this is a developing story with rumors flying in all directions, it seems to me that the only responsible approach is to either keep silent on the issue until the facts are more clear, or carefully describe all conflicting speculation with a neutral stance, clearly labeling it as such. It would be nice if someone could give us mortals more info. I mean official info, or info from IHVs, not just speculations.

charon
02-26-2006, 12:50 AM
read this:
http://blogs.msdn.com/kamvedbrat/archive/2006/02/22/537624.aspx

The Windows Vista ICD supports DWM :)

Xiaoth
02-26-2006, 04:20 AM
Originally posted by norax:
read this:
http://blogs.msdn.com/kamvedbrat/archive/2006/02/22/537624.aspx

The Windows Vista ICD supports DWM :) Given path #3, it would seem to me that this is the best Microsoft should be expected to do. It is now up to the hardware manufacturers to come up with a DWM-compatible ICD for OGL. I don't see what the fuss is. I doubt nVidia and ATI will fail to produce the goods on this, if possibly delayed.

I can understand the concern about the performance drop by compositing the OGL device on top of the D3D-powered desktop, but I'm not sure what the concern is. Glass runs on D3D at full screen, and D3D and OGL cannot have true access to the video hardware at the same time, period. Nothing has chnaged. So what's the big problem? I think Microsoft has made an amazing commitment to OpenGL by enabling compositing within the DWM and at the same time giving video card manufacturers the ability to build new device drivers / ICDs that support full-speed double-rendering of D3D (Glass) and OGL without turning hardware acceleration on one or the other off.

selwakad
02-27-2006, 03:26 PM
well, 3d labs is out. This is bad news since they did a lot of work to help advance OGL to 2.0. Now, I wonder if OGL will still have the same momentum in upgrading its API. What will this mean for OGL on windows vista? will we get new drivers supporting SM4.0 on vista? ... will ATI and NVidia keep up the good work ?. Also, the ARB has been very quite lately, I hope they have something good cooking :)

glDesktop
02-28-2006, 08:20 AM
I've tested the following new Vista release:

Windows Vista CTP - February 2006 - Build 5308 (32-bit) (English)

And found it to behave the same as before, with regards to OpenGL (Microsoft OpenGL-D3D Translator & Version 1.4).

I then tested the following NVIDIA drivers:

ForceWare Release 85
Version: 87.15
Release Date: February 24, 2006
Beta Driver

And they were just the same (Microsoft OpenGL-D3D Translator & Version 1.4).

Generally, the performance was very poor for OpenGL (jerky and juddery with low frame frames).

I hope the situation improves somewhat.

I also hope that Xgl will become a big success:

http://en.opensuse.org/Xgl

selwakad
02-28-2006, 09:17 AM
why is the ARB so quite? it allows a lot of FUD.
SGI is about to go bankrupt. how will that bode for OpenGL on vista? does the ARB have a plan in case this happens? or will they call it quits?.

V-man
03-06-2006, 10:15 AM
I also hope that Xgl will become a big success:
http://en.opensuse.org/Xgl Interesting. Some guys over at rage3d.com are running it.

UrbanLegend
03-08-2006, 06:30 AM
SGI is now out of graphics

http://www.3drealtimesimulation.com/3dsceneBB/viewtopic.php?t=277

3dlabs is out

http://www.3drealtimesimulation.com/3dsceneBB/viewtopic.php?t=271

Thats 2 big contributors

And we have found that Opengl in Vista betas sucks bad

actionGL
03-09-2006, 04:22 AM
:)
and in other news, Friday will be THE last day on earth...

First, 3D Labs said that they are dropping hi-end 3D platforms and focusing on mobile devices. Guess what, these devices are and will be based on openGL 2.0 ES. So it is far, far away from dropping GL, I see it as a good thing. Since 3D Labs will push its efforts to mobile and other handheld devices thus making wider range of OpenGL devices. Look at Java - microsoft wanted to destroy it, but somehow my friends that code java have more and more jobs (thanks to mobile devices among other things). SGI on the other hand, is bankrupting for several years - I read few years back, the exactly same news as today...

Ask yourself:
Will industry drop OpenGL support -> the only cross platform, open, stable and performance comparable (better in some cases) 3D API -> to single platform, closed, microstoft DirectX solution?

I don't know, but I will bet 99.8% that there is no chance for that. Maybe there was a chance before, but not now anyway. Ask Apple (last year 20% increase in Apple computer sales), ask *nix users. These platforms are growing, and guess what grows with them. Sony PS3 is also "non important" - especially for big game development houses. Any game studio that wishes to have games on Apple and PS3 will have to do it in GL...

---

The above poster - charon, posted very interesting news:
http://blogs.msdn.com/kamvedbrat/archive/2006/02/22/537624.aspx

This means, if true, that there is no need for this topic anymore :)

It's all to IHVs now, microsoft has finally gave them the way to compose things with Aero, using GL or whatever. So it is actually great news.

Bottom line OpenGL today is far stronger than it was ~1999 when microsoft tried to destroy it (last time)... :)

UrbanLegend
03-09-2006, 06:46 AM
If what Charon posted is true then yep topic is over

But the tests we have done on the Vista Beta is that Opengl support sucks real bad for our applications is basically un-usable in its current state

Its all well and dandy that Macs. PS3 etc support Opengl well that does nothing for me as my customers are heavily windows based and they will NOT be changing

OGL might be stronger on some platforms which is great but on Vista it is currently a joke which for my company going forward is real bad unless they sort the issues out, but the beta's are not very promising right know

actionGL
03-09-2006, 08:59 AM
From nVidia site:


NVIDIA has made available the following drivers for Windows Vista February Customer Technology Preview (CTP) build 5308.FebCTP_Final.060217-2200. The current ForceWare driver is a preview release that will enable you to test the basic features and capabilities of the new operating system. This driver has no performance optimizations included and has received limited stability testing.

Installation Notes

* This driver does not include an Installshield. You must use the INF installation to install this driver by going to the Windows device manager and manually updating the graphics driver.
* Windows may default to 16bpp color after the driver install and disable the Desktop Window Manager (DWM). To work around this issue set the color to 32bpp and reboot the PC.
* Please view the Product Support list for all products that work with this driver.

Release Highlights

* These drivers are tested for use only with Microsoft Windows Vista February CTP build 5308.FebCTP_Final.060217-2200 only.
* The NVIDIA graphics control panel is not included in this driver release. @UrbanLegend
I understand you completely. I have developed (till now) only for windows, and leaving windows out of scope is not possible - in terms of revenue. However as you can read from above quote it is pretty clear that this is very first basic driver version for Vista. It (even) only works with specific CTP version! So, in my opinion it is too early to draw conclusions.

Also it is clear (from the blog, and from driver incompatibility between different Vista CTP releases) that MS is changing "internals". I am very confident that once they "stamp" final to vista, GL will be implemented as it should (as stated in the blog - path No. 3).

It is too early :)
and it is good that MS has given IHVs the way for proper GL implementation.

glDesktop
03-16-2006, 06:33 PM
OK, so we have an entry on a blog. I saw this a while back and even though it sounds good, where is the official word on it?

Unfortunately, I remain sceptical about this.

Can anyone explain to me in simple terms why this blog entry is so important and why it should be treated as an official statement. Am I missing the point somewhere?

I am not yet convinced.

glDesktop
03-17-2006, 05:41 AM
Come to think of it I find it very strange indeed after all the trauma and despair from hundreds of OpenGL developers all over the world worrying about Vista and OpenGL.

Then suddenly the whole issue has blown over with a tiny mention someone found on a blog!

For all the hundreds of people that have been highly concerned about this, I think we deserve something a bit more significant than that.

At least a single HTML page on Microsoft's web site! Or nVidia's or ATI's.

How do you know you can trust a blog entry from a project manager at Microsoft. Also, there is still the issue of raw OpenGL performance in Vista.

Microsoft seem to be pretending as if all this massive call to action topic never even happened and there never was an issue with hundreds of highly concerned OpenGL programmers.

Very, very strange indeed!

Frankly, I expect a whole lot more than this and I will only believe it when I see it.

zero0w
03-17-2006, 11:06 PM
I understand you completely. I have developed (till now) only for windows, and leaving windows out of scope is not possible - in terms of revenue. However as you can read from above quote it is pretty clear that this is very first basic driver version for Vista. It (even) only works with specific CTP version! So, in my opinion it is too early to draw conclusions.

Also it is clear (from the blog, and from driver incompatibility between different Vista CTP releases) that MS is changing "internals". I am very confident that once they "stamp" final to vista, GL will be implemented as it should (as stated in the blog - path No. 3).So, Vista-aware OpenGL drivers are still in development. Vista Beta testers cannot test this feature yet, I suppose.

nullsmind
03-21-2006, 10:28 AM
I see it as Microsoft's solution for OpenGL because there wasn't any solutions yet from the hardware developers. Microsoft has many businesses that use OpenGL and their operating system, so I doubt MS planned to kill business with them. I'm glad everyone e-mailed the hardware vendors and said we want full OpenGL support. I'm glad they're working on Vista ICDs now. Hopefully some will be finished when Vista releases. Btw, I think this ups the system requirements for some simple games til the new Vista ICDs are common in new systems. What do you think?

Korval
03-21-2006, 01:48 PM
Frankly, I expect a whole lot more than this and I will only believe it when I see it.For Microsoft to publicize this would be to suggest that, at one time, they weren't going to let ICDs play fair with the desktop. While this made the rounds of OpenGL developers, to some degree, for Microsoft to talk about it significantly would cast light into a place that they'd rather not have light cast.

Simply appreciate that we have a solution and let it go.

glDesktop
03-23-2006, 01:23 PM
Simply appreciate that we have a solution and let it go. So you are certain that everything will be alright when Vista comes out?

When I see the solution working, tested and fully bench-marked, then and only then will I be convinced of it.

I have a perfect right to express my doubts here. And I'm very sure there are also many others that have doubts too.

Korval
03-23-2006, 01:31 PM
I have a perfect right to express my doubts here. And I'm very sure there are also many others that have doubts too.I'm not impuning your rights. I have the right to doubt your doubts too. And to suggest that yourself and others who have doubts about the veracity of the information simply drop the issue and let it be resolved by market forces. You don't have to do it, but I get to make the suggestion.

glDesktop
03-23-2006, 01:48 PM
They have not really promised anything, and I am making a valid point about that.

actionGL
03-24-2006, 06:51 AM
http://www.gamedev.net/columns/events/gdc2006/article.asp?id=233

Well, nVidia and Ati wouldn't waste stockholders money if they really don't mean to proceed with GL :cool:


My two cents...

actionGL
08-03-2006, 04:00 PM
It's more than final
http://www.khronos.org/developers/library/siggraph2006/OpenGL_BOF/

read NVIDIA_-_OpenGL_on_Vista.ppt
http://www.khronos.org/developers/library/siggraph2006/OpenGL_BOF/NVIDIA_-_OpenGL_on_Vista.ppt

I know this is old news, but in case someone still read this... :)

Chris244
08-04-2006, 11:22 AM
From the siggraph OpenGL BOF slides about Vista:
--
* Hardware overlays are not supported
- Hardware OpenGL overlays are an obsolete feature on Vista
- ATI and NVIDIA strongly recommend using compositing desktop/FBOs for same functionality
--

Does anyone know the exact API that "compositing desktop" refers to? I'm interested in having 3D rendering that is composited with the desktop. What is the recommended method of doing this? I figure there should be a DWM and hardware accelerated way to do this, rather than reading data back from a FBO to use with a layered window or something like that. Shouldn't the DWM just be able to use an alpha channel in the color buffer to do this? I tried a couple things but it didn't seem to work as I expected in Vista Beta 2, but perhaps I overlooked something.

Michael Gold
08-06-2006, 03:40 PM
You wouldn't need to read back data from an FBO... the way to composite in OpenGL is to render the overlay to an FBO, bind the FBO color buffer as a texture, and render a blended quad into the target window. This is effectively what the DWM does, but you can do it within OpenGL, which has benefits including (1) non-dependence on the window manager (remember the user might disable Aeroglass for full performance), (2) avoids a context switch, and (3) is portable to systems other than Vista.

Chris244
08-06-2006, 07:29 PM
I'm actually interested in compositing OpenGL rendering with the desktop and the windows of other processes in a hardware accelerated way, rather than over my own content. I saw this note about overlays and thought that the people who provided the recommendation might know more about how to do this.

This is going to require cooperation from the window manager to work correctly (it is required to composite the result of the OpenGL rendering [the front buffer] with other windows in the system), and I would only expect it to work in the Aeroglass case. This task falls outside of the domain of OpenGL as currently specified.

I have been able to do this with both Direct3D and GDI rendering using the DwmEnableBlurBehindWindow DWM function in Vista (and the performance seems acceptable), but it doesn't seem to work with OpenGL rendering. I'd expect it to just work if my pixel format has an alpha channel and my rendering window is prepared using the DWM functions, but there must be some difference between how OpenGL and Direct3D content is provided to the system. This could be a bug or a driver limitation for all I know, I'm not aware of any documentation covering this area.

Thanks for any information you can provide.

Michael Gold
08-09-2006, 09:38 AM
Initial investigation suggests this is an OS bug. I'll follow up when I have more information.

Chris244
09-02-2006, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by Michael Gold:
Initial investigation suggests this is an OS bug. I'll follow up when I have more information. I realize it hasn't even been a month yet, but was this issue corrected for Vista RC1?

Chris244
10-17-2006, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by Michael Gold:
Initial investigation suggests this is an OS bug. I'll follow up when I have more information. I still see this in RC2 (5744) x64 with nvidia driver 96.85. Will this be fixed (by MS or nvidia) for RTM?

Chris

RigidBody
11-17-2006, 09:43 AM
since the release seems to come closer- is there anybody here at all who plans- as a private person- to upgrade to vista? i don't want to start a flame here, but i could imagine something better to do with 250 euros than spend it just to have transparent windows with shadows. vista doesn't seem to have all of the features which were promised by ms some years ago, so what's left to justify the price?

Korval
11-17-2006, 11:15 AM
is there anybody here at all who plans- as a private person- to upgrade to vista?In maybe 3-4 years, sure.

Komat
11-17-2006, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by RigidBody:
is there anybody here at all who plans- as a private person- to upgrade to vista?I plan to upgrade to vista probably in second half of next year.



vista doesn't seem to have all of the features which were promised by ms some years ago, so what's left to justify the price? The things that are important for me are: better support for running as user with limited rights and DirectX 10.

soconne
11-17-2006, 06:18 PM
We just installed Vista on some test PC's at work today and I can honestly say I wasn't that impressed. I'm not being biased, but I was heavily disappointed. I was expecting some big change but all i found was an annoying GUI that slowed down the desktop, irritating security messages asking me if I was sure I wanted to execute an app I just double clicked and then asking me again, and a horrible new organization for my computer.

But on the bright side, I was able to run some of my OpenGL software apps and they did seem to run just fine. So that's a plus!

But as someone said before, none of the "new" stuff justifies the price hike.

Luckily for me though I get a free license of Vista Ultimate :-)

glDesktop
11-21-2006, 06:09 PM
I decided with all this Vista fiasco, enough is enough and I'm now doing everything I can to get out of this Microsoft Windows trap. At the moment I'm migrating all my code to be cross platform (compiles with Linux) and I'm migrating to use cross platform applications like Firefox etc. I am sincerely hoping that Linux will become my main OS in the not so far future.

I know several very good people who just run Linux now and have left Windows far behind. I greatly respect them for their efforts that they have made and I know it is doing our community a lot of good. We need more heroes like this.

Suse 10.1 proved to me that Linux is a true platform available right now. And Microsoft know that their empire has sprung a significant leak. Yes, people are getting free software and it is becoming more and more powerful. It is a liberating force.

Right now I could download a DVD of Vista with a valid licence key from my MSDN account. But, I just can't be bothered with all the nonsense and licencing and everything. Just a hassle and a waste of time. At the moment I'm much more interesting in Suse 10.2 and PS3 Linux and learning more about Linux in general.

Basically, my efforts and interests are now focused on OpenGL on Linux rather than the next iteration of Windows. I believe Linux greatly deserves more support from developers and is the solution to problems like this entire topic.

Bye bye Windows

Linux, Linux, Linux

ferrazrafael
12-02-2006, 06:06 PM
if you dont want to happen things like that use free software!! in the free software world this dont hapen, freedom is the greater objective... In my opnion linux is strong enought to the desktop users. You need to learn how linux works, but you need to understand it is a anoter system, if you are a advanced user in windows, you will be a basic user in linux until you learn the system, linux is not a windows clone (keep that in mind) it was build from zero with your own technicals, politicals, philosofical ideias. But Is a stronger system.... If you wanna to migrate start with a simple desktop distribution, keep your pc with windows until you get all your aplications running on linux without the need of ms windows. Be FREE!!

Korval
12-03-2006, 01:01 PM
is the solution to problems like this entire topic.But... the "problem" has already been solved. So, in fact, Linux is not the "solution".


Be FREE!!Oh, please. Take your Richard Stallman-inspired nonsense elsewhere.

I have all the freedoms I want under Windows.

glDesktop
12-03-2006, 08:17 PM
Oh, please. Take your Richard Stallman-inspired nonsense elsewhere.
I have all the freedoms I want under Windows. Then stay with Windows if you like.

ferrazrafael
12-04-2006, 11:06 AM
Korval do you know the Plato's Allegory of the Cave myth? only when the prisioner see the reality (freedom) he really know what its. But you have the freedom to choose what will be your reality

Korval
12-04-2006, 03:06 PM
Korval do you know the Plato's Allegory of the Cave myth?Yes. And Linux is not freedom; it is merely another cave that you happen to like.

The failure in your analogy (perhaps one among many) is that you equate FSF-style freedom to actual freedom of action. And it isn't.

At the very least, to use FSF-style freedom, you must be a programmer. Well, that rules out the vast majority of people on Earth. And, considering that the skills for programming (let alone wading through code that has been touched literally by thousands) are very specialized, you can basically forget about the vast majority of people exercising their FSF-style freedoms.

So these people are still trapped in the cave.

Second, the FSF-style freedom isn't free either, because it requires that the person exercising these freedoms give them to others rather than reserving them to himself. Source code has to be distributed if you distribute the modified executables. That's just another cave.

ferrazrafael
12-05-2006, 04:06 AM
if the person dont know how to program, he is benefited with the fact of much more programers are looking e developing the software for him too, and with this they can see the softwares code and learn from it and became better programers and this will help better software to be writed. and you dont give your freedom to others, you share your knowleged to others. A basic step to get this knowleged improved. Imagine if nobody shares your knowleged. We will need to develop alone all the maths, phisics... to make something like a toaster...
Talking about give the software to others. If you program you give software patents to others, in change for money. In FSF-style you can be payed for your software too, when you stop to receive money you can stop to develop. But the software became a knowlegde for all, not to the corporation

The freedom who are found today, like free speech, maybe dont be used for the majority but is important for that majority to improve our society.

glDesktop
01-09-2007, 01:46 PM
Just to keep everyone up to date with OpenGL on Vista. I did some tests today with the x64 RTM build and Nvidia's latest drivers (5th Jan).

OpenGL performance was quite poor for my two simple applications. Frame rates were not full and jerky and the CPU usage was thrashing one of my CPU cores to the max. Big difference compared to XP, which is fine and almost zero CPU usage.

Obviously OpenGL is not yet properly working on Vista, but I expect that Direct3D 9 is probably almost perfect.

Another disappointing thing is the Windows 95 style icons on the taskbar. They don't always show you those in the fancy screen shots, but they ruin the Aero effect in my opinion. It's like mixing Windows 95 with Aero, they must be rushing things a bit.

Buy comparison, I'm most impressed by the Mac OSX desktop. No, crummy icons on that one.

My advice to anyone out there is to stick with XP if you are doing OpenGL on Windows. Don't get excited about Vista. Or if you don't believe me, spend a few hours with it and see for yourself.

glDesktop
01-28-2007, 08:48 AM
I've done a couple more tests with OpenGL on Vista via the latest NVIDIA drivers:

Windows Vista x64 RTM
ForceWare Release 95
Version: 97.46
Release Date: January 5, 2007
WHQL Driver

GLinfo reports:

Driver version: Unknown
Vendor: Microsoft Corporation
Renderer: GDI Generic
OpenGL version: 1.1.0

I tried both with and without Aero enabled and it makes no difference to OpenGL.

Therefore, we currently have just software rendering and OpenGL version 1.1 at the moment. This explains why the performance was so poor in my previous post. And this is much worse than expected.

Vista is due for it's big release on Tuesday and lots of new PCs and Laptops will have it preinstalled, I've seen some already on display in the local shops.

How long will it be before we have proper OpenGL on it? Because, I'm not using Vista until this is sorted out.

It would be good to know about the ATI drivers if anyone has done any testing.

I will post an update as soon as there are some new drivers to test. This is important to know.

And most importantly, if you use OpenGL, don't waste your time with Microsoft Vista yet!

glDesktop
02-01-2007, 02:51 PM
NVIDIA have released some BETA drivers for Vista:

Windows Vista 64-bit
ForceWare Release 100
Version: 100.54
Release Date: January 30, 2007
Beta Driver

This time they actually offer OpenGL 2.1 which is a vast improvement than before. But, I did notice they were poor performers compared to NVIDIA's XP drivers. The CPU usage is much higher and there is the occasional jerkiness with frames being delayed or something.

The question is, is it the NVIDIA drivers or Microsoft's Vista to blame for this jerkiness and high CPU usage. I suspect the Direct3D Aero desktop could be complicating things here for OpenGL.

Therefore in my opinion, if you want the best OpenGL on the Windows platform I advise to stick with XP not yet Vista.

glDesktop
02-02-2007, 10:34 PM
Just tested the 100.59 beta drivers from NVIDIA. Just the same results as the previous ones with my tests. There is a nasty jerk in the normally smooth OpenGL rendering about every second or so. The CPU usage is abnormally high too.

I tried this with and without Aero. Without Aero (Direct3D desktop effects), the CPU usage was a bit lower, but still higer than XP.

Aero effects seem to introduce another process called "dwm.exe", this eats a lot of CPU for an OpenGL app. Disabling Aero helps remedy this.

On the whole, OpenGL on Vista is quite jerky and inefficient with or without Aero. Therefore don't yet bother with Microsoft Vista if you are serious about OpenGL.

ZbuffeR
02-03-2007, 02:07 AM
Some effort still needed from Nvidia :-)

http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/07/02/03/0110248.shtml

glDesktop
02-03-2007, 03:14 AM
To tell you the truth, I am much more critical of Microsoft than NVIDIA, for several very good reasons. I think Vista is to blame, but there is a chance things could improve somewhat.

It is worth remembering that NVIDIA do superb OpenGL drivers for Windows XP and several versions of Linux. Currently the worst is Vista for driver quality.

NVIDIA is also well ahead of ATI for Vista, so we should thank them for working hard to release these early beta drivers.

But I very much agree that NVIDIA need to listen and care for their customers a bit more. I myself have previously found myself in a hopeless situation with their drivers in the past. And it was like talking to a brick wall for their support. Thankfully the issue was resolved within a couple of weeks or so by unfortunately raising a flaming rant on these forums.

Korval
02-06-2007, 02:35 PM
I think Vista is to blameWow, a guy who hates Microsoft thinks that Vista is to blame for nVidia's drivers not working. What a shock :rolleyes:

In ATi news, it would seem (http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/aticat71vista/) that ATi actually beat nVidia in terms of non-OpenGL Vista performance. On the OpenGL side, they're working from a completely rewritten GL implementation (which immediately explains why GL on ATi hasn't been getting much love these past months). And strangely enough, it seems that the ATiGL is pretty stable, though buggy and not exactly performant.

So it would seem that Vista has little or nothing to do with GL functionality. Which was as expected.

glDesktop
02-06-2007, 11:38 PM
Hi Korval,

I am not convinced by your statement that Vista has nothing to do with GL functionality. I think it is too early to draw conclusions yet, but my initial suspicions are that Vista could harm the performance of OpenGL.

In Vista, OpenGL has to go through an extra software layer than XP, namely Aero. This is what could be damaging. I understand about the NVIDIA drivers you mentioned, I know that they fully implement OpenGL. But they still have to function properly within the OS environment.

I myself could use Vista for OpenGL in the future, so this is certainly not a hate Microsoft thing, as you stated. I currently use XP Pro for development.

I'm just doing some objective tests with OpenGL on Vista. It would be good to know the truth about Vista and where else on the web is someone going to this trouble. This is a possible factual reference for potential Vista adopters, so that they know what to expect if they upgrade to Vista.

I hope you can understand instead of just flaming me.

Please think before you flame.

Korval
02-07-2007, 09:40 AM
I'm just doing some objective tests with OpenGL on Vista.No, what you're testing are the quality of nVidia's Vista drivers, which are widely known (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070206-8784.html) to be weak. Then, you're using the results of those tests to say something about Vista on OpenGL.

My point is that your conclusions do not derive logically from your evidence, that there are other, widely known, causes for the problems you cite. In short, thinking Vista is to blame cannot be the result of deduction based on evidence, and it therefore must be (taking into account prior evidence on this thread) the result of Microsoft hatred.

Your argument about having to go through an extra software layer is valid, yes, but also purely theoretical. Furthermore, D3D has to go through that same layer, since it too must play nice with Aero. Unless you have clear and convincing evidence that the problems you cite are from Vista itself and not the crappy state of nVidia's Vista drivers, there is no basis for the claim that Vista is responsible for it.

glDesktop
02-07-2007, 11:54 AM
Ok then, so whatever is the cause, we may never know, but we do know that:

OpenGL is damaged on Vista at the moment with NVIDIA drivers.

And I don't suppose ATI's are any better either (at the moment).

Therefore if you are serious about OpenGL on the Windows platform, then don't upgrade to Vista yet.

Korval
02-07-2007, 01:54 PM
And I don't suppose ATI's are any better either (at the moment).Did you not follow the link I mentioned earlier? The one that led to a review of ATi's Vista drivers?

They rewrote their OpenGL component from scratch (and God knows it needed it). Right now it's clearly not ready for prime time. Not only is it slower, but it's actually buggy (wrong textures, etc), so it isn't ready for actual use at the moment.


Therefore if you are serious about OpenGL on the Windows platform, then don't upgrade to Vista yet.Don't you mean, "Therefore if you are serious about the Windows platform, then don't upgrade to Vista yet?" Because I wouldn't suggest upgrading to Vista at the moment on general principle. Let a service pack come out; then upgrade.

glDesktop
02-07-2007, 02:33 PM
Yes, I followed the interesting link, that's why I assumed ATI's wouldn't be any better.

Sounds good then, we both agree that Vista could be good, but is not quite ready yet for general use and for OpenGL.

And this is mostly caused by the lack of quality drivers.

So after some time when drivers are fully available, we can then compare the performance and quality to other OS platforms like Windows XP and Linux.

glDesktop
02-16-2007, 04:15 AM
I've installed and tested the following:

Windows Vista 64-bit
ForceWare Release 100
Version: 100.64
Release Date: February 13, 2007
Beta Driver

There is still a lot of jerkiness and high CPU usage with very basic OpenGL apps.

glDesktop
02-24-2007, 01:33 AM
I've installed and tested the following:

Windows Vista 64-bit
ForceWare Release 100
Version: 100.65
Release Date: February 20, 2007
WHQL Driver

There is still a lot of jerkiness and high CPU usage with very basic OpenGL apps.

When Aero effects are disabled, most of the jerkiness goes away. Therefore, I assume that OpenGL has to go through an extra software layer with Aero enabled, which ultimately has a negative effect on quality and performance.

I also noticed when an OpenGL application is using the full screen at 1920 x 1200, the performance is very very poor, even using a high end card. I guess that this means the driver is sub-optimal at the moment.

ferrazrafael
02-24-2007, 08:12 AM
maybe nvidia is too busy with the implementation of directx10 and only will take care of opengl in vista after directx is good.. A clue to this is the directx10 suport to geforce 8 and no opengl 2.1 suport (only 2.0). This shows a most care with the new directx and less care with the new opengl...

ZbuffeR
03-04-2007, 02:10 PM
Anybody could try this new driver ?
http://www.opengl.org/news/permalink/nvi...ance_under_vis/ (http://www.opengl.org/news/permalink/nvidia_forceware_beta_v10141_adds_enhanced_opengl_ api_performance_under_vis/)

glDesktop
03-04-2007, 02:52 PM
I've only been testing the 64-bit drivers. Which are usually released the same time as the 32-bit ones. But for some reason, they have not yet released the 64-bit driver yet?

I am hoping that it will be released soon. If not, I'll test the new 32-bit one, by doing a new Vista install on a spare hard disk. This will be no major problem at all.

I think NVIDIA are very keen to announce that they have a good working driver. But I have very strong doubts about the quality they can achieve on Vista with OpenGL.

I am still expecting that nasty jerkiness and juddering that is probably caused by OpenGL having to go through the extra Aero software layer. And if so, there is nothing NVIDIA can do about it.

glDesktop
03-04-2007, 04:25 PM
I found the link for the 64-bit version drivers, I didn't realise they were "beta" drivers. They don't usually promote beta drivers like that.

Windows Vista 64-bit
ForceWare Release 100
Version: 101.41
Release Date: March 2, 2007
Beta Driver

I found that OpenGL is much stronger in these, they have cured the previous problem with the very poor performance at the 1920 x 1200 screen resolution.

But as expected, there is still that annoying Vista jerkiness and juddering. You can see it if you run just a simple OpenGL application like the classic gears one, especially at a high resolution.

On this same machine I get perfect smoothness with Linux and XP. So there is something about Vista's Aero that is doing this. I don't think NVIDIA are to blame somehow.

I've also noticed some rendering artifacts with OpenGL with this new version. Some grey lines or something from the previous frame are showing through.

Direct3D9 is not that perfect too. It also judders a bit.

I'd say, if you want quality OpenGL then you are best using XP or Linux (for now anyway).

I also think that there should be some more formal testing for OpenGL on Vista. Then we can get some proper performance and quality stats. But I don't think there are any applications that can do this, are there?

glDesktop
03-04-2007, 05:47 PM
On closer examination and more tests, it looks like those slight rendering artifacts I previously saw, were actually the faded remnants of the previous frame. Like a slight motion blur.

I also observed that the buffers are swapped differently from XP. There seems to be some automatic buffer swapping with Vista. Both with Aero on and off. When not accounted for on an old application, you can get a flicker or a wobble from the previous/next frames. So you need to check your apps for compatibility in this case.

Bleakmage
03-23-2007, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by ZbuffeR:
Some effort still needed from Nvidia :-)

http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/07/02/03/0110248.shtml Umm, that message leads to a site that is pretty much an ad for Nvidia. Is it SUPPOSED to do that?

Bleakmage
03-23-2007, 10:49 AM
I came here to this site to learn more about OpenGL, and I find out all of this ~Points up~

It seems, then, that the general consensus, be you a Microsoft groupie (and all that implies) or not, is that Vista is garbage, eh? I would feign surprise, but why bother?

I'm sticking with XP for as long as is possible, until the Oblivion of the Vista era comes out and forces me to upgrade. I eventually buckled in and gave up ME when I discovered that XP was superior for my gaming.

And that brings me to the crux of my problem. The games. For me and many others, it's all about the games.

How many of us has wished for years on end for Linux, or ANY other competition to find us a way to play our games on something besides Windows?

It's been about games from the very beginning, in the consumer market. When there was none but Apple and Windows, why did everyone use PC instead of Mac? Even though Mac was far more stable than PC, and from what I hear, still is?

The Games. All the games came out for PC, and hardly any for Mac, and it's pretty much the same now as it was then. Back in those days I was too young to care. Sure, I noticed, but I didn't know what it meant. Hell, I was so dumb it came as a shock to me years down the road that MS in MS-Dos meant Microsoft. I was so pissed that everything was going to Windows 95, man, I was SEETHING. Imagine how I felt when I. . .you get the point.

Back on topic. Sorry. :D

It's ALL about the games on the Consumer end. For the moment, XP is the preeminent platform for PC gaming, bar none. Vista is a joke, unless you're bursting from the seams at all the Ram you get to use now, assuming that Vista will not hog it all. :D

The simplistic solution would be to find a legal loophole or something allowing emulators on other platforms free-reign with Direct-X. I don't really know enough about such things to say anymore, only that, in all my wishful thinking -- and that's all it is, really -- If only there were an emulator out there for Linux or Mac or whomever to play my games, as well as they play on XP, and I would leave Microsoft behind without ever looking back, except maybe to flip them off. :D

What gets me is what the big deal about Direct-X is to begin with. Maybe OpenGL doesn't have Bloom, but it is otherwise far superior in every way to Direct-X.

I hope none of this is considered Microsoft bashing. Why would I bash a company that makes most of it's own pre-service pack 2 games obsolete?!? I really wanted to play Omicron, Nomad Soul, dammit! :D

An an old friend of mine used to tell me all the time that I was falling behind the times, that it was 'Progress' that the games of old are now a thing of the past. . .but think about his reasoning. Will you be happy someday when you feel like popping in an old classic like Knights of the Old Republic or Doom III and realize (I'll spare you the emotional plea) that you can no longer play that game again? That maybe, IF you're lucky, you might someday have the hope of playing a crappy emulated version of it on some operating system you're never gonna use in the first place because it has no !@%!@$%!@$%!@$ games?

It's all about the games. Microsoft would have no power if everyone just said, "Enough is Enough", but I'm a realist, and I know that will never happen. . .

I really did just come here to learn more about OpenGl. . .honest I did. . .~Shrugs~

I still have a whole new website to explore. Thanks for lending an ear.

glDesktop
04-21-2007, 05:58 PM
This is my response to the recent article promoting Microsoft's Vista for OpenGL:

"Windows Vista and OpenGL-the Facts"

I do not agree with this article. What about the quality of smoothness. In Vista there is a lot of jerkiness and juddering. If you are developing smooth desktop animations you notice it very easily.

And the jerkiness gets much worse at higher resolutions. This is poor quality rendering and definitely a good reason to stick with XP.

But, I have noticed that full screen applications suffer less jerkiness then windowed ones.

Also, Vista is very memory intensive. It uses about double what XP uses. Also, the CPU usage is much higher with Vista. So it is much less efficient than XP.

I think it is crazy that these issues are not highlighted and Vista is still being promoted as something so wonderful when it is definite a step back for OpenGL quality.

Vista is definitely not yet ready and I personally warn anyone not to upgrade yet.

If you want performance, quality and efficiency, stay with XP for as long as possible, where it is proven.

Someone needs to state the facts here!

glDesktop
04-21-2007, 06:13 PM
Quote: "OpenGL ARB wishes to reinforce the positive synergy between OpenGL graphics and Windows Vista in this article"

This article is NOT a balanced argument for upgrading to Vista to use OpenGL.

I think the purpose of the article is to say all the wonderful things that are new in Vista. Regardless of how much we gain from them. The truth is, Vista hurts OpenGL and OpenGL runs much better on XP or Linux.

This article is definitely not critical enough of "all" the current issues.

I would definitely not spend my hard earned cash on a Vista upgrade that does nothing positive for OpenGL. And especially giving money to a company that just threatens the very existence of OpenGL.

Korval
04-21-2007, 08:41 PM
This article is NOT a balanced argument for upgrading to Vista to use OpenGL.Of course it's not. For one, it's not anti-Vista, anti-Microsoft, so someone coming from that perspective (as you do) will never see it as anything but unbalanced.

Furthermore, they're not arguing for upgrading to Vista to use OpenGL. Indeed, I don't know why anyone would upgrade to Vista to use OpenGL; there's no real argument to be made for that period.


The truth is, Vista hurts OpenGL and OpenGL runs much better on XP or Linux.Yeah, those facts and statistics they benchmarked and quoted don't actually matter. Rhetoric is more important that actual information. :rolleyes:

Who should we believe more: the frothing Microsoft hater, or the ARB who has actual facts to back up their assessment?


This article is definitely not critical enough of "all" the current issues.You mean the current issues that don't have anything to do with running OpenGL under Vista?

The article isn't meant to be an anti-Vista tirade, nor is it meant to judge Vista in general. It's talking about the current state of OpenGL and the applications that use it under Windows Vista. Questions of how much memory Vista uses (which, btw, is actually a good thing, since it relies much less on virtual memory by being aggressive with RAM) and other such issues are irrelevant.


I would definitely not spend my hard earned cash on a Vista upgrade that does nothing positive for OpenGL.I wouldn't suggest that anyone upgrade to Vista at present, period. For any reason. Even gamers with their new GeForce 8600 cards frothing for DX10 content. That has nothing to do with OpenGL; it's merely an assessment of wanting Microsoft to work the bugs out of the new OS.

glDesktop
04-22-2007, 05:22 AM
Hi Korval,

Can you provide any explanation for the nasty jerkiness and juddering with OpenGL in Vista. It runs like someone has put a spanner in the works.

Also, can you provide a good reason why my OpenGL apps use much more CPU on Vista, when they idle on XP and Linux.

So what if I or someone else does not trust Microsoft. Is there anything wrong with that. There are lots and lots of people out there that don't trust them. After all the underhand tricks and tactics they have employed to keep people locked into their products and destroy other businesses. I have a personal right not to trust them and warn others about it and there is nothing wrong with that. So just accept it, it is very acceptable and absolutely right.

It is very foolish to promote the products of a very, very powerful company that would like to destroy OpenGL given half the chance.

Korval
04-22-2007, 12:00 PM
So what if I or someone else does not trust Microsoft. Is there anything wrong with that.No, but it does undercut your credibility because you have an ulterior motive. Furthermore, your observations seem to fly in the face of the most credible sources (the ARB in their recent notice). Since they have more credibility than you do, your continuing to spout the same stuff as before in the face of more credible evidence only further undercuts your credibility.

So, yes, you have the right to believe whatever you want and post whatever you want. However, we have the right to completely ignore you due to your obvious bias.

glDesktop
04-22-2007, 12:14 PM
Hi Korval,

Quote: "However, we have the right to completely ignore you due to your obvious bias"

You say "we", how many people do you represent and why can't you answer my questions. You talk extreme and exaggerated nonsense, it makes you look very foolish, especially when you keep rolling your eyes. You are voicing an individual opinion with this one, but you imply you represent everyone. You must be deluded.

Again, why is there lots of jerkiness and a much higher CPU rate in Vista with OpenGL? This is a question based on the Quality of OpenGL not the performance.

Quote: "Questions of how much memory Vista uses (which, btw, is actually a good thing, since it relies much less on virtual memory by being aggressive with RAM) and other such issues are irrelevant."

You simply don't know what your talking about. Vista is simply very bloated software. Vista now ships on a DVD whereas XP came just on a CD. Microsoft is still trying to debug it, after it has shipped.

Brolingstanz
04-22-2007, 01:20 PM
Hey guys, I'm having a pretty good time with Vista32 :cool:

Old GL code runs with a touch of reservation, but it does run. I'm guessing there's a lot to work out in the drivers with a totally new driver model, and I'm betting the compositor doesn't make things any easier.

Overall my experience thus far has been a good one. Though, admittedly, I'm spending most of my time with DX10 right now.

glDesktop
04-22-2007, 01:53 PM
Thanks Leghorn,

That's it, most code does run but there are some quality issues.

You are absolutely right, I personally suspect the introduction of the compositor for the symptoms I'm having with my desktop applications. Whereas full-screen ones seem to run better.

Many thanks for your informative response.

Korval
04-22-2007, 02:29 PM
You talk extreme and exaggerated nonsenseYou mean like saying, "This article is NOT a balanced argument for upgrading to Vista to use OpenGL?" Which was clearly nonsense, as the article was not making an argument for upgrading to Vista at all?

Or how about, "I think the purpose of the article is to say all the wonderful things that are new in Vista?" Also exaggerated nonsense, as the article doesn't discuss the "wonderful things" that are new in Vista; it's very clearly focused on how OpenGL works on Vista.

Before you make accusations against someone, you might want to check to see that you yourself are not guilty of the same crime.


Again, why is there lots of jerkiness and a much higher CPU rate in Vista with OpenGL?And again, you miss the point. I'm not in this thread to argue whether Vista is an OpenGL wonderland or not. I'm here to counterbalance your obvious anti-Microsoft bias, so that when people read this thread, they do not get the impression that the ARB's commentary is wrong or being ignored by the community at large.


Vista is simply very bloated software. Vista now ships on a DVD whereas XP came just on a CD.You realize that there is no actual logical consequence to that statement, yes? The fact that Vista comes on a DVD when XP comes on a CD does not make it bloated any more than the fact that XP comes on a CD, while Win 3.1 came on a small set of 3.5" floppies.

In order to show bloat you have to do more than say Vista is bigger. You have to show that the size is incredibly unnecessary. Further, you have to show that XP's size is also not incredibly unnecessary. After all, it's more reasonable to say that Vista's "bloat" is just part for the course with regard to Windows operating systems. I recall people talking about Win95 as being bloated too, as well as XP.

A reasonable statement about Vista's alleged bloat would be "it is no more or less proportionately bloated than any other Windows OS in recent memory." Which means that the alleged bloat is hardly unexpected.

glDesktop
04-22-2007, 02:57 PM
Hi Korval,

Quote: "And again, you miss the point. I'm not in this thread to argue whether Vista is an OpenGL wonderland or not. I'm here to counterbalance your obvious anti-Microsoft bias, so that when people read this thread, they do not get the impression that the ARB's commentary is wrong or being ignored by the community at large."

So you are now speaking for the ARB and Microsoft. Instead of speaking for everyone else like before.

And somehow, the ARB's article is totally right and unquestionable, because it is from the ARB.

I still think you are very deluded. You need to speak for yourself here and post something informative like what Leghorn did, instead of trying to pretend to be some authority, which you are sadly not!

Instead of being useful here, you are just trying to dominate these forums with multitudes of trashy and obnoxious comments that mean nothing and cloud the issues.

It is an awful shame that the informative technical information I contribute here is mixed up in with reels and reels of your nonsense rambling.

Korval
04-22-2007, 04:26 PM
And somehow, the ARB's article is totally right and unquestionable, because it is from the ARB.No, I just pointed out that it's a lot less questionable than the ravings of an anti-Microsoft drone. I just want to make sure that when people read your spiel, they're aware that you're coming from an incredibly biased perspective.


instead of trying to pretend to be some authority, which you are sadly not!I hate to get all schoolyard on you, but you did that first, when you basically said that the ARB's commentary was not balanced and factually inaccurate. You put yourself above the ARB, thus making yourself seem like the kind of authority that people should listen to about the merit of their article. I just smacked you back down ;)

Like I said, I'm not doing this for you. I don't expect to convince you that you're wrong. You're religiously anti-Microsoft, and it would be a waste of my time to argue religion with you. I just want to make sure that other people don't take your words as fact, or even as reasonable counterpoint to the ARB's article.


It is an awful shame that the informative technical information I contribute here is mixed up in with reels and reels of your nonsense rambling.Yes, calling an obvious bias a bias is "nonsense rambling".

If you're going to try to insult me, please make better attempts at it. At the very least, make some insults that have some actual logic behind them.

glDesktop
04-22-2007, 05:26 PM
quote: "Yeah, those facts and statistics they benchmarked and quoted don't actually matter. Rhetoric is more important that actual information. Who should we believe more: the frothing Microsoft hater, or the ARB who has actual facts to back up their assessment?"

You started by calling me the frothing Microsoft hater and started your tirade against me.

You should understand that my initial post is very genuine and as an OpenGL developer, I have noticed some serious issues with Vista. Especially with Desktop applications (not full screen). As I stated previously:

Quote by glDesktop: "I personally suspect the introduction of the compositor for the symptoms I'm having with my desktop applications. Whereas full-screen ones seem to run better."

Quote by Korval: "I just smacked you back down"

As I said Korval, I wonder about your mentality, thinking you are an authority here, leaping to the defence of Microsoft.

If you can falsify the technical problems I'm having with Vista, then fair play. But if you can't then please stop what you are doing. I'm only trying to help other developers and share useful information. If I was lying then that would be bad, but I'm honestly telling the truth here.

The basic issue: I am having some genuine problems with Vista's compositor and the "QUALITY" of my OpenGL animations.

Korval's issue: I am a frothing Microsoft hater and an anti-Microsoft drone.

glDesktop
04-22-2007, 07:05 PM
I will be totally honest here and say that XGL on Linux has major problems too, with OpenGL desktop applications. They are far worse than Vista. They totally thrash the CPU core and the frame sync goes crazy. It is best to have XGL "off" if you want sensible OpenGL on Linux. Just like they turned "DWM" off in those ARB tests.

But I would expect that most people would want Vista for new fancy desktop effects. No way! would they turn Aero off. Then that's where my problems begin with OpenGL desktop applications. They simply run quite badly through the DWM. The previous ultra smooth OpenGL hardware acceleration has been somewhat compromised.

OpenGL is there with Aero, but not in it's pure form. I can tell the difference, I have been developing OpenGL for a good few years now.

I personally love the ultra smoothness of OpenGL, and somehow I hope it survives all these new 3D desktop technologies in both Vista and Linux's XGL.

I suppose, ultimately, time will tell. The drivers will improve, as obviously stated in the ARB's article. But Vista is ultimately crippled to most people without Aero enabled. That is what Vista is mainly about, the Aero effects.

I think it is a bad idea to in any way promote or give positive attention to Vista. Most businesses are waiting for service pack 1 to be released. That may be a sensible time, I won't argue with that point. But now is much too early.

Remember, most users will not turn Aero off with Vista cause it looses it's attractiveness. And that is where the problems begin for OpenGL desktop applications, like the ones I develop, which are supposed to run ultra smooth.

Komat
04-23-2007, 01:31 AM
Originally posted by glDesktop:
Remember, most users will not turn Aero off with Vista cause it looses it's attractiveness. And that is where the problems begin for OpenGL desktop applications, like the ones I develop, which are supposed to run ultra smooth. I do not know what kind of applications do you develop so I do not know if it is suitable for you to programatically disable the composition using the DwmEnableComposition api when your program runs until that issue is resolved.

glDesktop
04-23-2007, 04:05 AM
Thanks Komat, that is a possibility.

I was thinking that offering a full-screen mode may be the best way round it. At the very most you could offer to disable Aero with a "Yes/No" dialog box for windowed applications.

But I think most users would like to keep the Aero effects running. Only the most serious users would disable it. Then, if you are not using Aero with Vista, it leads to the question, why not just use XP.

Komat
04-23-2007, 04:40 AM
Originally posted by glDesktop:
But I think most users would like to keep the Aero effects running. Only the most serious users would disable it.
If your application content is the center point of user focus and takes most of the screen, even the ordinary user is imho likely to not care for temporarily disabled Aero, if he does not have to disable it manually each time.



Then, if you are not using Aero with Vista, it leads to the question, why not just use XP. Maybe because you like different feature the Vista has. In my case one important reason why I will upgrade to Vista once all programs I need have Vista compatible version is the UAC and limited user compatibility improvements.

glDesktop
04-23-2007, 05:11 AM
True, I have found that wireless networking is improved in Vista too. But, I'll still wait for SP1 at the very least. With XP I waited until SP2 was released before upgrading from Windows 2000.

glDesktop
04-23-2007, 08:16 AM
I am currently writing this from my Vista testing partition with the latest NVIDIA drivers:

Windows Vista 64-bit
ForceWare Release 158
Version: 158.18
Release Date: April 17, 2007
Beta Driver

Disabling Aero effects does not solve the jerkiness which is more visible at higher resolutions. The worst setting for running desktop applications is "Windows Vista Basic", it runs like sludge. I don't understand why since "Windows Standard" and "Windows Classic" run just the same as "Windows Aero"?

There is a process in the background called "dwm.exe" and it runs constantly with all of the color scheme modes (Aero on or off). But the important observation is that it uses zero cpu with Aero effects switched off ("Windows Aero" mode). This process is responsible for the higher than normal CPU usage and can probably negatively effect performance.

As stated before, full screen OpenGL applications do not seem to be negatively effected and run very nicely, which is something for now.

Therefore we have some problems with desktop applications whether Aero is on or off. This is not stated in the ARB's article, which states that turning off Aero is positive for OpenGL. But there is clearly something very wrong with the "Windows Vista Basic" mode. And the other two alternative non-aero modes have the old style grey windows, that predate XP.

Hopefully things will improve for desktop apps, but I don't expect it anytime soon. I advise to stay with XP for now if you don't want these issues.

Komat
04-23-2007, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by glDesktop:

The worst setting for running desktop applications is "Windows Vista Basic", it runs like sludge. I don't understand why since "Windows Standard" and "Windows Classic" run just the same as "Windows Aero"?
I read that the Standard style also uses the DWM. The Classic on the other hand is simplest from all of them. This might explain why the Basic style is worst. It has more work to do than the Classic while it does not have the advantage of hw composition the Standard style has.

The new driver model also does not support hw acceleration of GDI operations so this might also reduce performance. Especially in the styles which do not use hw composition.

glDesktop
04-23-2007, 01:13 PM
Just to clarify, in Vista's Appearance Settings dialog, there are the following color schemes (in the same order as listed):

Windows Aero
Windows Vista Basic
Windows Standard
Windows Classic
High Contrast White
High Contrast Black
High Contrast #2
High Contrast #1

"Windows Aero" is the only one that has the new transparent desktop effects and also the only one where the "dwm.exe" process uses any CPU.

"Windows Vista Basic" is similar to "Windows Aero", but has no transparency or 3D desktop effects.

"Windows Standard" and "Windows Classic" both behave exactly the same. The only noticeable differences are the fonts and shades of grey used. The both look and behave like Windows 98 styles.

The remainder of the styles "High Contrast White", "High Contrast Black" ... behave just the same as the "Windows Standard" and "Windows Classic", but are special colour schemes to probably assist the clarity of text.

I think that once the drivers mature, there is a good chance that "Windows Vista Basic" will work better with windowed applications. A workaround at the moment, is to run applications in full screen mode, where there seems to be no issues.

Brolingstanz
04-28-2007, 12:39 AM
ForceWare 158.18 (WHQL) was released yesterday. I'm seeing a fairly sizable gain in performance with Quake3 (30% or thereabouts).

glDesktop
04-28-2007, 06:50 AM
I've installed and tested the following drivers today:

Windows Vista 64-bit
ForceWare Release 158
Version: 158.18
Release Date: April 26, 2007
WHQL Driver

They do not solve any of the previous problems with Windowed OpenGL applications. But I expect that full screen applications will still be alright.

Brolingstanz
04-28-2007, 11:14 AM
Windowed Q3 is totally smooth, and I honestly can't tell the difference in framerate between it and fullscreen. I'm not being very scientific about my measurements, but it's difficult to focus with Biker, Bitterman and Orb constantly goading me into combat.

glDesktop
04-28-2007, 12:57 PM
Try using the mode "Windows Vista Basic" at a high resolution say 1920 x 1200 in windowed mode. With the latest NVIDIA drivers. With small window areas it is not that noticeable, expand the window out fully, then you should see a reduction in framerate.

But I must agree that different applications, do have different behaviours. It can vary with how the animation is internally timed. And Q3 may be alright.

Brolingstanz
05-19-2007, 05:27 AM
You're right. I've noticed a few snafus in Vista lately, mostly with maximizing a window. Everything runs fine windowed, but when maximized things begin to stutter a bit. It's not the size of the window; it's being maximized, it seems, as a window state. As you say, this seems to be happening in Basic mode only, not Aero.

I've had a few driver resets lately too, but that was using D3D, and I'd be willing to bet it was the runtime and not the driver itself (158.43).

P.S. Driver recovery/reset is pretty nice in these our first formidable steps.

glDesktop
05-19-2007, 07:06 PM
Hi Bonehead, how's it going :)

What a remarkable discovery you have made there, you are absolutely right about the "maximized state" in "basic mode". Good work!

There is still that general jerkiness too, but it does not seem as bad in "basic mode".

That might explain why my BD movie player also changes to "basic mode" on start-up.

So it looks like "Windows Vista Basic" (Aeroglass effects disabled) mode will be the best quality when these issues are sorted out.

Hmmm, sort of takes the Wow out of Vista, doesn't it?

Brolingstanz
05-19-2007, 10:23 PM
Wow? You're kidding, right?

I recently installed Ubuntu Linux, which by most accounts is the friendliest of the nix flavors. Being a Linux newbie of the lowest order, it took an afternoon of googling for installation procedures and trial and error to get my video drivers correctly installed (hopefully). After finally getting things up and running, I find that it won't remember my settings on restart, so I have to manually set my display resolution after each boot, despite countless attempts to save the configuration from the X Server Settings dialog.

Now I ask you, where's to wow in that? Ubuntu has been around a heck of a lot longer than Vista has.

In Vista, you download a driver and double click it, then go make a snack while it uninstalls the old and installs the new. If you didn't have to choose "Yes" to "Restart my computer now", you'd scarcely be troubled to lift a finger. Wow!

Making things hard is easy; making things easy is hard.

glDesktop
05-20-2007, 04:49 AM
That's unfortunate, the problems you have been having with Ubuntu. I prefer Suse to Ubuntu at the moment, but the latest Ubuntu has very good wireless support.

I've got 4 OSes on my laptop and 4 on my PC. On my laptop I've got Suse 10.2, Ubuntu, XP and Vista. I mainly use XP at the moment.

Linux graphics drivers from NVIDIA are super. In fact I've had more problems with Vista graphics drivers. I suggest, give Suse 10.2 a try.

Brolingstanz
05-20-2007, 05:58 AM
Thanky for the Suse tip ;-)

Suse was actually my first choice, but I grabbed the x86_64 version by mistake, and already had Ubuntu on DVD. I think I'll try the Suse/Ubuntu double header this time around. I've finally got an extra system I can use as a lab rat.

I really liked the look of Fedora too, but some folks were saying it was RedHat's Enterprise lab rat, which if true is not necessarily a bad thing. Everyone needs a lab rat, sometimes, and a hot bowl of san pedro :-)

Brolingstanz
05-20-2007, 09:34 AM
Oh yeah, that's much better. Driver installation using YaST2 is downright painless :cool:

urchinsub
03-30-2009, 08:54 PM
The bottom line is that the program I've been writing, in hopes of commercial release, for over a year and a half doesn't display correctly on my Vista machine even with Aero off/full screen/ and the most recent driver for my graphics card. It displayed fine on XP but does a weird clipping thing on Vista.
I've read in a lot of forums that people think there should be a lawsuit. If anyone actually knows of a class action lawsuit regarding OpenGL not running properly on Vista, please let me know as I would like to be compensated for my losses but can;t afford to hire a lawyer by myself.

Rob Barris
03-30-2009, 09:29 PM
The developer relations department of your GPU vendor is probably a more logical first stop.