OpenGL 3 Updates

[ZbuffeR]

And for Mac OS X ?

[NeARAZ]

What about Amiiigaaaa?!

[Eddy Luten]

Considering the shrinking gaming market for PC/Desktop games, I doubt many ISV will put much time into Linux and Mac. Which is quite sad, actually.

If you want to make profit you have to go with a popular platform (XBOX 360, PS3, Wii, PC). But Amiga? C'mon... That's a joke, right? How many people still use that platform?

[Demirug]

Personally, I've pretty much decided this weekend to take a serious look at D3D10; when I first learnt OpenGL it was D3D8 and the interface was horrible and OpenGL was a better option, D3D9 was an improvement and if D3D10 is better then I'll be using that from now on.

The overall structure of Direct3D 10 is very similar to what we have seen from OpenGL 3.0 so far. That’s the reason why I had postponed any work on my Direct3D 10 to OpenGL wrapper.

The main difference from a high level look is that OpenGL 3.0 uses C bindings while Direct3D 10 is based on C++ interfaces (with a little bit of COM).

There are some pitfalls when it comes to porting Direct3D 9 or OpenGL 2.x applications that can totaly ruin your performances. I learned some of them the hard way while porting our engine from 9 to 10.

If you have any questions fell free to ask. But I am not sure if this the right place to discuss Direct3D details.

[Eddy Luten]

I don't know if this is reliable at all but taken from one of the comments on my blog:

I’m on the ARB mailing list and I can assure you they are working hard for a release (I’m not a contributor for the spec though I just follow it). While I also feel they should released more news, things like patents hindering or someone wanting to kill OpenGL are totally false. Stop being paranoid . Some game developers are also actively contributing to the spec. There are a lot of difficulties with the coming up with a new OpenGL spec-they would like it to have a long life, so they try hard to revise the proposed object mechanisms so they interact well with other parts of the API. They have been tirelessly revising the specs to iron out the issues (no really, coming up with a proper design really *is* hard - don’t jump into conclusions like the new OpenGL is also ill-designed). They are doing a pretty good job with the current kind of organization- members from different companies contributing. Probably the best way would be to have some people working together in the same physical location with their whole time dedicated to it, but such a thing would be hard to realize.

Can anyone verify?

[Brolingstanz]

Why don't we just ask Old Mother Hubbard what she thinks ;-)

[Brolingstanz]

What about Amiiigaaaa?!

Amiga and Atari. Now there are 2 platforms steeped in OpenGL lore ;-)

[Zengar]

Anyhow, if anyone from the GL3 team reads this, my advice is: change branding. Don't call it OpenGL 3.0 but instead invent a new name. The GL3 would be parting from ideas adn teh design of the current OpenGL; also, "OpenGL" is often connected with buggy and slow drivers in the minds of the customers. Lets be honest, the major driving force behind 3D technology is gaming and GL3 has to be (and hopefully is being) designed with this in mind; so if a new API is released, it needs a new name to indicate a new direction. Call is Open3D or NextGL or whatever.

[tanzanite]

/.../ or NextGL /.../

Naah ... there is only one x and even that is a small one. Any other suggestions?

[Zengar]

We should start a thread with best suggestions