Part of the Khronos Group
OpenGL.org

The Industry's Foundation for High Performance Graphics

from games to virtual reality, mobile phones to supercomputers

Page 56 of 63 FirstFirst ... 6465455565758 ... LastLast
Results 551 to 560 of 623

Thread: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 today

  1. #551
    Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    469

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod

    I appreciate the new ClearBuffer API At least something that I can't do on GL2.x even with extensions.

  2. #552
    Senior Member OpenGL Guru knackered's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,833

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod

    Thanks for the apology. Thanks for being honest too - we could do with more of that from the ARB.

  3. #553
    Junior Member Regular Contributor CatDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    226

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Gold
    Not all hardware supports the same basic constructs, which is why vendors often disagree on guidance.
    Which then leads to no guidance at all? From my point of view, this is the most annoying thing about OpenGL today. Five years ago, there was the excellent Red Book. Hardware didn't change that quickly theses days, so that good old Red Book was all you needed to write good OpenGL applications. Nowadays hardware is less abstracted. So I'd really appreciate all efforts of the ARB to find a place where vendor specific information is condensed.

    Also, I'd like to know, what you guys are breeding about for the future. Rob talks about a long list of things to do. Would you mind to share this list with us? I'm explicitly not asking for *promises* here. I'm just asking for your plans!

    This leads to your statement about lobbying ARB members. How can I successfully express my wishes when I don't know what you are currently discussing and (most important) whom to speak to? Take the wide lines as an examples. From my user perspective, I can only guess *why* glLineWidth now fails for values > 1. Guesswork isn't the best foundation for building a solid opinion about a specific topic.

    CatDog

  4. #554
    Junior Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    172

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod

    The fact that different vendors may disagree on optimal paths is hardly specific to OpenGL. There are some common sense optimization tricks which should work well on most implementations. The ecosystem group intends to offer generic guidance but realistically vendor specific information can only come from the vendors.

    In general terms I would expect the next version to roll more functionality into core (see the current list of ARB extensions) and some of the deprecated functionality will probably be removed. I know this is fairly obvious but I really can't be more specific than that.

    Topics for lobbying include anything you consider important. Don't want a deprecated feature to be removed? Speak up! Need an extension promoted to the core? Speak up! Need a new mechanism which doesn't yet exist? Speak up!

    I don't imagine wide lines will fail for any GL3 implementation which supported wide lines on 2.1. The reason for deprecation? Likely one or more vendors simply don't have the hardware support for it and don't want to emulate it anymore. As I said, not all vendors agree on the deprecation list.

  5. #555
    Junior Member Regular Contributor CatDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    226

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod

    Thanks for your answers!

    What is the proper way to "Speak up!" (and getting the warm feeling of having been heard)?

    And if "one or more vendors simply don't have the hardware support for it and don't want to emulate it" is true, then I really like to know which vendors are going to drop support for that feature! Or at least, which one will continue supporting it as core extension. Some of us have the ability to "recommend" hardware to their users, you know...

    CatDog

  6. #556
    Intern Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    32

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod

    Please do not misunderstand my previous post as a complaint, the intent was neither to pour salt into the wound, nor to find a scapegoat. My point was that people would have probably taken it more lightly if there was an announcement in February stating "Long Peaks has been aborted due to difficulties that need serious investigation before continuing the effort. Due to the desire for DirectX 10 level functionality, OpenGL 2.1 will be continued for now." for example. Every seasoned programmer knows that you have to support the mistakes you make and that something like LP - that was intended to last for years - should not contain rushed, severe design flaws. GL3 is an improvement and it was definitely a sane decision to do this, instead of releasing an immature LP.

    I resisted the urge to voice my disappointment around Siggraph to get a better picture of GL3 first, thus the delay. Due to the silence around LP and the rumors about a NDC I expected some great and clever hacks that would kick Microsoft's solution hard between the legs

    @Korval: Do not take it as offense, but have you actually tried working together with IHVs to solve the difficulties you mention? Sounds a bit like a prejudice that they wouldn't care if your company isn't id or Blizzard.

  7. #557
    Junior Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Waltham, MA
    Posts
    125

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod

    For what it's worth, I'd personally like to state that I'm satisfied with the direction OpenGL is going. Admittedly, satisfied is not necessarily "totally happy with", but in my opinion, OpenGL 3.0 is an acceptable first step.

    On one hand, I really like the idea of a brand new API. On the other hand, the idea of an untested API is a pretty big concern for me. When I heard that LP would be a complete departure from the current API, I expected that I'd have to write and maintain two separate rendering paths: one for OpenGL 2.1 and one for OpenGL 3.0. Of course, I could have just ported everything to OpenGL 3.0, but to do so would have been somewhat risky. In short, while I like the idea of a total refresh, I think I personally benefit more from the incremental approach that's being taken.

    Also, as much as people complain about OpenGL 2.1 and drivers, my personal experience with them has been fairly smooth sailing. As a general rule, I try to do as little with the API as possible... I pre-allocate resources, I keep usage patterns extremely simple, and I try to keep my resource counts to reasonable numbers. That said, perhaps I'm just not hitting the buggy paths that I hear so much about. I can honestly say that I've found OpenGL drivers to be just as stable as D3D9 drivers.

    Kevin B

  8. #558
    Junior Member Regular Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    172

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod

    CatDog -

    Its a good question - Honestly I'm not sure the best mechanism to ensure you are "heard" by the right people. I was going to suggest developer support but their focus is different. Let me get back to you on this one. (Some ARB members read here but the signal-to-noise ratio has been lacking of late.)

    Again, the ARB cannot be expected to provide vendor-specific information. I can state that, in the case of wide lines, NVIDIA hardware has supported this feature for a long time and will for the foreseeable future. Hence we're likely to continue supporting this if/when the ARB officially removes it.

  9. #559
    Advanced Member Frequent Contributor cass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Austin, TX, USA
    Posts
    913

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod


    Agreed that the signal-to-noise has been a little lower than normal since SIGGRAPH, but it's going up. Also I think a lot of ARB members read posts here, though from the frequency of their posts they could do better at making that clear.

    And from my experience, posting here is a good way to get heard. But you have to be careful that your personal s/n is high. I have always cherry-picked what I read here based on members who offer useful insights and communicate clearly. It takes some time to develop that kind of reputation.
    Cass Everitt -- cass@xyzw.us

  10. #560
    Junior Member Regular Contributor CatDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    226

    Re: The ARB announced OpenGL 3.0 and GLSL 1.30 tod

    Since I'm getting heard at the moment, I'd like to speak up and make a suggestion concerning this forum. A simple first step for solving the feedback problem is to tag ARB representatives as such. For example replace Michaels "Regular Contributor" by "ARB - nVidia". Same for other active ARB representatives of course.

    This would have several (mostly psychological) effects. First of all, it would express the ARBs will to officially communicate - this would be an important signal I think. Novices searching the forum will be able to separate ARB statements. Information given away by individual representatives can be thought of as vendor specific without explicitely mentioning it. Finally, this may add pressure to communicate for those vendors, that have been very quite in the past... but of course, each member/vendor would be free to attend to this kind of "PR".

    (*edit* Of course those members have to agree to this before replacing their titles!)

    Well, I hope this isn't too naive thinking and I don't make a fool of myself with this suggestion.

    CatDog

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •