Anybody read/link this yet? => http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/U...e_manycore.pdf
Anybody read/link this yet? => http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/U...e_manycore.pdf
Yeah, I am learning about the Larabee stuff. There's supposed to be a dev kit out soon from Intel. I'm very interested in this. My gut says it won't work out, but I hope it does. I want to see DirectX and OpenGL get wiped out.
I will add my 2 cents as well. Nothing that has not been voiced already, just had to reinforce the message myself as well. OpenGL3 is an utter failure. Plain and simple. There is no excuse. They could have opted to better support GL2.1 with extensions(All DX10 extensions are only available on NVIDIA chipsets). It would be the same thing, and everyone would be happy. Really, GL 3.0 is nothing new compared to what we already had. So, please ARB, it's not too late, apologize to people, start communicating again and give what you promised. All this 'fanfare for nothing' at the main site is only making people more disappointed at how underrated their (the people's, not the ARB's) intelligence is. I am but an amateur game programmer but it is plain simple that anyone serious about that will switch to Direct3D sooner rather than later. so, hurry ARB...you may still have some eggs unbroken in the end.
Oh and one more thing that really unnerved me. I really appreciate, given the current state of the API that people still work on it. If people could refrain from calling efforts like GL_EXT_direct_state_access a joke it would make things easier for people who are making the effort. I,for sure, despise it when my work is discarded as useless just like that...it just extinguishes any incentive.
while(1){keyboardsolo(FORTE, BPM_190);}
Originally Posted by Y-tension
It's ok to criticize GL3.0 but not GL_EXT_direct_state_access? Weird.
That could be because DSA goes farther than GL 3.0 in providing what Longs Peak promised.It's ok to criticize GL3.0 but not GL_EXT_direct_state_access? Weird.
Longs Peak aimed to solve the "bind to edit" issue in OpenGL, by eliminating "edit" - and providing only immutable objects. If you can't edit objects, yep, no worries about bind to edit any more.
DSA aims to solve "bind to edit" by removing the need to bind an object to the state vector (context) before altering it.
it's nvidia's last gasp attempt at forcing an object model on OpenGL. Like, ok you won't let us have LP so we're going to copy and paste some kind of object model from the existing API. It's appreciated, but really highlighted what a joke 3.0 itself became. I feel sorry for nvidia.
Seems pretty clear to me that anyone serious, or at least a bit curious, would have / should have / could have tested the API greenness on the other side some time ago. For the rest of the graphics development community, I'd say things turned out pretty darn good, as GL3 turned out pretty much the way they, the majority, wanted it to - to the possibly chagrin of some, the minority, game coders.
Clearly the big question right now is when do we get stable drivers from the "big 3", and to a lesser extent how this deprecation/profile model will play out in practice. This first question is the only interesting one to me, since whether or not vendors want to drop functionality is entirely up to them... no skin off my nose either way.
I wonder who this 'majority' are, because from my understanding this wasn't a mass 'no to 3.0' vote but a case of 'we aren't getting it done on time, lets release 2.2, oh hi mr Khronos PR, what's that? call it 3.0? ok...'.
Not quite true Rob. State could not be edited - but data could. For example if you want to read or write buffer data, GL2 requires that you bind it first. LP did not.
Posting Permissions
