Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

IE11 To Support WebGL

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the better-late-than-never dept.

Internet Explorer 111

mikejuk writes "The biggest problem with IE10 as far as modern web apps go is its lack of WebGL support. Now we have strong evidence that IE11 will support WebGL. A leaked build of Windows 'Blue,' aka Windows 8.1, also contained an early version of IE11. Web developer François Remy decided to see what it was hiding and found that there were WebGL APIs, but they were non-functional. Rafael Rivera, who writes the Within Windows blog, dug a little deeper and discovered the registry keys that have to be changed to enable WebGL support. Apparently the API works so well that you can take existing WebGL programs (with OpenGL shaders) and just run them. As the implementation also supports DirectX HLSL shaders, it seems reasonable to guess that the implementation maps OpenGL to DirectX, thus avoiding Microsoft having to endorse OpenGL use."

cancel ×

111 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The biggest problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342377)

The biggest problem with IE10 as far as modern web apps go is its lack of WebGL support.

Sounds like someone who has never had to support IE10 in anything remotely complex.

Re: The biggest problem (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | about a year ago | (#43342483)

Log on as a different user is broken which is a major pain.

Re: The biggest problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342747)

Log on as a different user is broken which is a major pain.

If you have to log on as a different user in IE then you're doing it wrong. IT "techs" today...

Re: The biggest problem (2)

cyber-vandal (148830) | about a year ago | (#43342951)

Care to elaborate? I log on as field users to determine what is causing their issues with Dynamics CRM, an application I don't have the source to and which gives very cryptic error messages. If you have a better solution I'll be over the moon to use that instead.

Re: The biggest problem (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#43347035)

Well there's your problem; your trying to run a Microsoft web application in a Microsoft browser on a Microsoft OS.

(Changing any one of these will likely fix about 33% of your problems).

Re: The biggest problem (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#43347053)

your

you're

Sorry.

Re: The biggest problem (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | about a year ago | (#43348593)

But until I'm head of IT and can get approval to completely rewrite one of our core systems at great expense for very little business benefit it would be useful to hear what the alternative to doing what I do is.

Re:The biggest problem (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#43342605)

A little nitpick mine is, why must the title bar of IE be empty, and thus that space goes completely to waste. At least put the tabs or address bar there.

Re:The biggest problem (1)

vux984 (928602) | about a year ago | (#43343073)

A little nitpick mine is, why must the title bar of IE be empty, and thus that space goes completely to waste. At least put the tabs or address bar there.

Chrome is empty as well.
And firefox is empty except for the Orange firefox button.

Additionally IE by putting the address bar on the same line as the tabs actually uses the least amount of vertical space of the 3 with the window dressing, leaving the most space for the browser window.

I was actually surprised to discover this just now.

Re:The biggest problem (1)

PlusFiveTroll (754249) | about a year ago | (#43344081)

>And firefox is empty except for the Orange firefox button.

Go to options and make sure menu bar is turned off. Your tabs are beside the orange button. Firefox does a good job of optimizing vertical space in this case.

Re:The biggest problem (1)

vux984 (928602) | about a year ago | (#43344941)

My firefox looks pretty much like this:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5176/5500087378_793df8b18b_o.png [flickr.com]

Please note that I'm not complaining about it, it was just an observation I made. I don't need it "fixed". When I was looking for that screenshot to post, I did see examples of the arrangement you are referring to.

I didn't think it looked better, but it's probably a good idea on small screens.

Re:The biggest problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43344265)

Chrome is empty as well.

Chrome doesn't even show it, what do you mean it's "empty also"?

Re:The biggest problem (1)

vux984 (928602) | about a year ago | (#43344915)

Chrome doesn't even show it, what do you mean it's "empty also"?

I mean there is empty space - when I open chrome it looks pretty much like this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a6/Une_fen%C3%AAtre_de_Google_Chrome_9.0.597.94_sous_Windows_7.jpg/800px-Une_fen%C3%AAtre_de_Google_Chrome_9.0.597.94_sous_Windows_7.jpg [wikimedia.org]

With empty space in the title bar, all along the top, up to the standard icons on the far right to minimize, restore, and close the window.

Re:The biggest problem (1)

gigaherz (2653757) | about a year ago | (#43345917)

They (Chrome and Firefox) take that space only when maximized. Since both do the same, I assume there's a reason for that. I didn't know anyone used a web browser without it being maximized, though. I personally never cared much about "maximizing screen space". I prefer to keep menubar and bookmarks in the first bar, followed by navigation, followed by the tabs. I have a strong dislike for tabs-on-top layout, which is one of the main reasons I don't like Chrome (right after its complete lack of UI customizing, beyond simple skinning).

Re:The biggest problem (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#43347131)

Additionally IE by putting the address bar on the same line as the tabs actually uses the least amount of vertical space of the 3 with the window dressing, leaving the most space for the browser window.

I was actually surprised to discover this just now.

Wow, it actually does take up exactly 1 pixel less vertical space than Chrome of fullscreen (which is how I always use my browser)
It does this by trading off with less horizontal space for both the address bar and the tabs though; don't know if it's worth it.

Re:The biggest problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43344159)

Or even better, putting the title there. I mean, it is called the title bar so it shouldn't be that hard and it would put something in otherwise dead space without changing much of anything.

Re:The biggest problem (1)

cbhacking (979169) | about a year ago | (#43344299)

Believe it or not, this was my biggest gripe with IE9. In my opinion, it was more a downgrade or regression than anything else, and I can think of no reason for it to go through. I frequently have too many tabs open to read the titles there, so I use Ctrl+Tab to cycle through them quickly. On older browsers I could use the title bar to see the name of the tab I wanted very quickly. On modern browsers, including IE9 and 10, that doesn't work. Frustrating...

Re:The biggest problem (1)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | about a year ago | (#43344063)

It would be nice if they fixed all the basic SVG functionality they completely broken in IE10. Perhaps once they can do vector graphics in 2D properly again, we'll let them add the third dimension. :-)

Re:The biggest problem (1)

omfgnosis (963606) | about a year ago | (#43344485)

I haven't encountered SVG issues in IE10, can you explain more about what was broken?

Re:The biggest problem (1)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | about a year ago | (#43347615)

Right now, it doesn't draw markers properly on paths for one thing. You just get a big block instead of, say, the arrowhead you expected. Copy and paste the marker example right out of the W3C SVG spec for an example.

Re:The biggest problem (1)

Toonol (1057698) | about a year ago | (#43347097)

Yeah. I switch between Firefox & Chrome, do a fair amount of browsing and gaming, and I don't think I've ever ran anything that used WebGL. Has it just not hit yet, or is it like VML, and will never be commonly used?

Re:The biggest problem (1)

Jrono (470199) | about a year ago | (#43348513)

Personally I would like to use WebGL in projects at work (mostly internal web applications visualizing datasets) but I can't until IE supports it since a large portion of my user base only runs IE.

April Fool's... (4, Funny)

sstamps (39313) | about a year ago | (#43342385)

..was yesterday.

Just like Microsoft.. a day late and an API short. :P

I wonder (1)

Xenkar (580240) | about a year ago | (#43342401)

Will I have to upgrade to Windows Blue for this Internet Explorer 11, or will Windows 8 be enough? Somehow I suspect it won't be the latter.

Win2k, WinXP, Vista, Win7 all got major IE upgrade (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#43342653)

So far, for every version of Windows since 2000, Microsoft has provided at least one major upgrade to Internet Explorer. Windows 2000 shipped with IE 5 and got 6, Windows XP shipped with 6 and got 8, Windows Vista shipped with 7 and got 9, and Windows 7 shipped with 8 and got 10. So I'd be inclined to assume that Windows 8, which shipped with IE 10, will get IE 11.

Re:I wonder (2)

robmv (855035) | about a year ago | (#43342801)

Windows Blue = Windows 8 SP1, The name is a marketing trick

Re:I wonder (2)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year ago | (#43343537)

Windows Blue seems to just be a codename.

Re:I wonder (1)

johnsnails (1715452) | about a year ago | (#43344143)

will it have a blue screen?

Re:I wonder (1)

Merk42 (1906718) | about a year ago | (#43346631)

Provided IE11 is released while Windows 8 is in "Mainstream Support" (new features) and before it moves to "Extended Support" (security fixes only), then Windows 8 will be enough. As Windows 8 will be in Mainstream Support until September 2018, safe bet to say Windows 8 will get IE11. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=16799 [microsoft.com]

IE11 is getting good! (1)

elabs (2539572) | about a year ago | (#43342417)

IE11 is getting pretty awesome. I'm not a fan of WebGL but I do want my browser to support as many open standards as possible.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#43342559)

IE10 has already quite nice HTML5 video playback, also. Much less resource-intensive than of other browsers.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1, Redundant)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#43342677)

That ain't gonna change the fact it has a bullseye the size of Texas painted on it Hoss. Every malware writer knows that IE is the "grandma browser" and grandma is clueless so if you want your malware to last longer and infect systems where it won't be found for ages? Go after IE. The fact that it takes a seriously nasty bug to get MSFT to patch IE out of cycle just makes it that much more of a juicy target since the other guys patch the second they have a reason to.

This is why I give my customers a couple of browsers and let them choose, usually one Moz variant and one Chromium based (Now its Dragon/IceDragon but its been Pale Moon and Chromium in the past) with ABP and make it clear they are taking a risk if they choose IE, because its just too juicy a target for the bad guys. That fact that MSFT refuses to backport to their still supported OSes just seals the deal as far as I'm concerned, any company that would tie the browser, the biggest attack vector on a PC, into some scheme to try to force sales? Isn't a company i want to trust when it comes to browsers.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342823)

That fact that MSFT refuses to backport to their still supported OSes just seals the deal as far as I'm concerned, any company that would tie the browser, the biggest attack vector on a PC, into some scheme to try to force sales? Isn't a company i want to trust when it comes to browsers.

Pretty standard for vendors, Apple does the same thing with Safari on OSX.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#43344969)

Yeah and how many Apple users are running on anything but the latest OSX version? pretty much none, the numbers are so low as to be meaningless. Now compare that to how many Windows users are running the latest and "greatest" (man I nearly choked writing that, Win 8 is a turd) compared to previous versions? last figures had Win 8 at less than 3%, it fact Vista has twice as many users as Windows 8 does and that is after a 4 billion dollar marketing campaign and a holiday season.

So I'm sorry but saying "Apple does it!" really doesn't help if you aren't Apple and your customers don't behave like Apple customers. Oh don't get me wrong I'm sure Ballmer is sitting in Redmond clicking his ruby slippers and going "There is no place like Cupertino" but that ain't gonna magically change the entire windows ecosystem, no matter how much Ballmer might want to be the CEO at Apple.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1)

naoursla (99850) | about a year ago | (#43345243)

I have a Powerbook running a pretty old version of OSX. I didn't want to pay for the update.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43346123)

So I'm sorry but saying "Apple does it!" really doesn't help

Its not supposed to help, its just pointing out that Apple falls exactly into your statement of companies you wouldn't trust when it comes to browsers.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1)

Merk42 (1906718) | about a year ago | (#43346655)

Google too actually. Chrome is only available for Android 4.0+.
So basically no company that makes an OS and web browser backports their browser to older versions of their OS.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1)

bwintx (813768) | about a year ago | (#43346857)

Yeah and how many Apple users are running on anything but the latest OSX version? pretty much none, the numbers are so low as to be meaningless.

Wish that were true, but businesses who've slashed IT spending as a reacton to the tough economy of recent years are keeping their people stuck with old PCs using WinXP and/or, where applicable, old Macs using OS X 10.5 (Leopard). In my case, it's both -- i.e., old PC with WinXP and old Mac with OS X 10.5.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43344325)

That fact that MSFT refuses to backport to their still supported OSes just seals the deal as far as I'm concerned

Yes, I wish MS backported the Win7 kernel to WinXP so IE10 would work. I don't use Linux because they won't backport Wayland to Kernel 2.0.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43345225)

It isn't a sales based strategy. Each new version of IE takes advantage of new Windows APIs. They would have to port all of those features back too. Have you noticed that there is usually a technology pack for the previous version of Windows before the latest IE can run on it? That is the new API's being back ported. They do limit how far back they go, but that is really a matter of balancing resources going into support for old versions and developing new versions.

WebM vs. MP4 (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#43342707)

Does IE 10 support the WebM plug-in like IE 9 did, or is its <video> element MP4-only? I haven't been able to find solid evidence either way, nor do I own a Windows 8 box on which to try it myself.

Re:WebM vs. MP4 (0)

foniksonik (573572) | about a year ago | (#43343087)

Who cares. Nobody encodes to WebM.

Re:WebM vs. MP4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43345871)

You mean apart from YouTube, who are the largest single video site on the entire internet by a country mile?

Re:WebM vs. MP4 (1)

Merk42 (1906718) | about a year ago | (#43346663)

Who also encodes in mp4 so it's moot?

Re:IE11 is getting good! (2)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year ago | (#43342645)

As a 3d graphics dev (primarily OpenGL these days) I reckon it's great that IE is supporting WebGL, it might not be a standard of any sort yet but obviously some sort of access to 3d graphics hardware from the browser is inevitable and the ubiquity of OpenGL makes it - or at least an API based closely on it - the obvious choice, even if on some platforms it's a wrapper for whatever native 3d API that platform uses. I'm still concerned about the security and stability implications of exposing the most volatile piece of computing hardware through the browser though.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1)

gigaherz (2653757) | about a year ago | (#43345961)

It is a standard. At least in name. The Khronos group manages it here [khronos.org] . The "the security and stability implications of exposing the most volatile piece of computing hardware through the browser" is exactly why every browser exposes WebGL through a wrapper/translator library that acts as a validator to prevent bad behaviour. WebGL-based exploits have been shown in the past.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year ago | (#43346101)

It is a standard. At least in name. The Khronos group manages it here [khronos.org] .

It's a spec...but it seems to be turning into at least a defacto standard.

The "the security and stability implications of exposing the most volatile piece of computing hardware through the browser" is exactly why every browser exposes WebGL through a wrapper/translator library that acts as a validator to prevent bad behaviour. WebGL-based exploits have been shown in the past.

The issue is that video driver crashes are one of the most common causes of system crashes, so driver stability is a major issue and not going to be fixed by a translation layer. The other is security, especially given you are writing to GPU memory, having that sort of access to hardware through the browser is potentially a huge security issue with the ability to exploit driver bugs, cross domain image hacks using fragment shaders, denial of service attacks, sampler overflows, etc... and these don't have easy solutions.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about a year ago | (#43343269)

It could be the awesomest ever, but in my Windows 7 shop, it's irrelevant.

Thank goodness there's Chrome, Opera and Firefox.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (2)

cbhacking (979169) | about a year ago | (#43344315)

IE10 is out for Win7. Have you seen any documented evidence that IE11 won't be available for Win7? I mean, I have no evidence either way, but since they're now releasing browser versions on a more accelerated schedule it seems likely they'll support them on the current generation most-popular Windows variant.

Re:IE11 is getting good! (1)

Merk42 (1906718) | about a year ago | (#43346705)

If IE11 is released before January 2015 it should be available for Windows 7. That's what differentiates "Mainstream Support" from "Extended Support"; new features. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=14482 [microsoft.com]

What a silly statement (4, Interesting)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about a year ago | (#43342425)

"it seems reasonable to guess that the implementation maps OpenGL to DirectX, thus avoiding Microsoft having to endorse OpenGL use."

No, more likely MS doesn't want to have to rely on vendors providing a working OpenGL driver, since that can be problematic (looking at you here ATi). If you have an accelerated Windows driver, a WDDM driver, it has DirectX support. That is how it works, just part of the spec. OpenGL, however, is an addon. Vendors can provide an OpenGL driver, or any other API they like, if they wish but it isn't an inherent part of the driver. They can choose not to provide them, or can provide broken ones.

So, would make sense for WebGl support to have something that does translation, so it works as long as you have a WDDM driver installed.

Re:What a silly statement (5, Informative)

gigaherz (2653757) | about a year ago | (#43342485)

Even Firefox uses Google's ANGLE to translate WebGL to Direct3D.

From the ANGLE site [google.com] : "The goal of ANGLE is to allow Windows users to seamlessly run WebGL and other OpenGL ES 2.0 content by translating OpenGL ES 2.0 API calls to DirectX 9 API calls. "

Sensible way to do it (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about a year ago | (#43342921)

You don't want to rely on a host OpenGL driver since OpenGL isn't the native interface for Windows.

Heck translation might be good even on a GL system, since ES isn't directly compatible with normal OpenGL unless you have a 4.1 or better setup which requires a fairly new card (GeForce 400 or newer in nVidia's case). I don't know of any Intel GPUs that do GL 4.1 yet, even Ivy Bridge is still 3.1.

So regardless of platform, it could make a lot of sense to implement it as a translation system, and then just choose the target of translation based off of what it is running on.

Re:What a silly statement (1)

edxwelch (600979) | about a year ago | (#43346595)

> Even Firefox uses Google's ANGLE to translate WebGL to Direct3D.
Whether that's a smart thing to do is another thing, because then they have a different code base on Linux and Mac and OpenGL was designed to be cross platform.

Re:What a silly statement (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year ago | (#43342585)

No, more likely MS doesn't want to have to rely on vendors providing a working OpenGL driver, since that can be problematic (looking at you here ATi).

Particularly since it's an OpenGL ES driver, Chrome and Firefox do the same thing i believe.

Re:What a silly statement (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#43342843)

Now correct me if I'm wrong but isn't OpenGL ES a much wimpier subset of OpenGL cooked up for cellphones and consoles NOT for desktops? That was the way I had always heard it explained which if so makes all the hubub just one more "ZOMFG we can be like the iPhone!" as far as I'm concerned.

Is anybody else tired of the mobile bubble yet? I personally can't wait until it pops, its getting about as asinine as the height of the dotbomb. You got VCs throwing money at pretty much anything with iPhone or Android in the name or description, you got the press doing a giant circle jerk on how "mobile is teh future yo!"...all I can think of is how it sounds no different than how we were all going to do everything on the web, from buying groceries to caskets and pretty much any company that had .com in the name was getting stupid money thrown at them.

Maybe its just me but I'm getting the feeling its the same old bubble song and dance all over again.

Re:What a silly statement (2)

ais523 (1172701) | about a year ago | (#43343139)

Basically the problem is that OpenGL has a lot of old cruft in that people have been trying to get rid of for a while, that made sense at the time but nowadays only exists for backwards compatibility. OpenGL ES is gaining in prominence because it looks like it might actually be a chance to make a clean break with OpenGL's past.

Re:What a silly statement (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#43344987)

Well, and again correct me if I'm wrong, just a humble fixit guy here...ain't that what a fork is for Hoss? if a company just isn't running a project in the direction the majority wants the project gets forked and either the original stays the champ or it withers and dies ala Open Office?

Because what you are describing to me sounds like OpenGL is ripe for a good forking, let those that need the old cruft support the original version while a new version that takes the best gaming stuff from the desktop and mobile versions goes their own way and let the best OpenGL win.

Re:What a silly statement (2)

gigaherz (2653757) | about a year ago | (#43346011)

OpenGL is not an opensource project. It's an open standard managed by a group that's composed of experts from hardware and software corporations, and sponsored by those (and maybe other) companies. The group's name is Khronos. and yes, THEY decide what OpenGL looks like, and who can use the OpenGL logo. Of course you could create a LibreGL, that bases itself on OpenGL, but flows in a different direction, but then you will NOT be sponsored by all those large corporations, who will most probably ignore your effort, good or bad. If you did succeed, though, it would be a truly amazing achievement.

On a side note, OpenGL 3.0 was supposed to be exactly that. They were supposed to remove all then nonsense from the API, and give us something clean and effective. But by the time it was out of the box, it turned out to be just yet another set of extensions added into the core, and some little side notes in old features saying they were now considered deprecated. They did add non-backwards-compatible profiles in version 3.1, which, if activated, disable all of the old features that were marked as deprecated in 3.0, but they had already disappointed everyone by then.

Re:What a silly statement (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#43347257)

Forking is fine for code, slightly less so for standards.

Car analogy;
Forking code is like copying a car design and changing it slightly; it may look and work differently but can still drive on all roads.
Forking standards is like copying the road design and changing it slightly; no existing car can drive on the new roads and future cars can't drive on the old roads.

(Actually a train analogy would have been a better fit, since they actually have forked the trainrails design and have ended up with those problems).

Re:What a silly statement (2)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year ago | (#43343229)

Now correct me if I'm wrong but isn't OpenGL ES a much wimpier subset of OpenGL cooked up for cellphones and consoles NOT for desktops? That was the way I had always heard it explained which if so makes all the hubub just one more "ZOMFG we can be like the iPhone!" as far as I'm concerned.

Kind of, ES doesn't have a lot of the - now deprecated or removed - cruft in OpenGL like the Begin/End calls in favor of the more modern techniques. It isn't quite as cutting edge as the full OpenGL desktop version that you get in the latest desktop hardware, there are some features like geometry shaders that it omits - i don't think there is support for bindless graphics either - but it has pulled in features like multiple render targets and a lot of new texture format options. Generally ES gets the most used/popular features of OpenGL in the following major release.

Re:What a silly statement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43345925)

> isn't OpenGL ES a much wimpier subset of OpenGL cooked up for cellphones and consoles

Cellphones. A console could handle OpenGL proper.

Although ES 3.x is not so far from the desktop spec, WebGL is basically ES 2.0, so you aren't going to see a WebGL port of Crysis.

Re:What a silly statement (1)

edxwelch (600979) | about a year ago | (#43346627)

So, how is it that Rage and Quake, and most 3D creation apps use OpenGL without any problems?

About time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342427)

Welcome to 2011 Internet Explorer!

Another ASP debacle (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342447)

Yes, let's include another gaping security hole in Internet Explorer that allows direct access to a system's hardware from the browser!

Re:Another ASP debacle (3, Insightful)

Millennium (2451) | about a year ago | (#43342557)

You mean like the alleged hole that supposedly left Microsoft with no choice but to remove NPAPI plugin support from IE back in the 1990s?

Frankly, this is huge. Direct3D is probably Microsoft's second most effective tool for locking-in users (behind MSOffice) and the single most effective tool for locking-in developers. To officially support its open competitor -and in a way that would allow apps (read: games) to actually be played on other platforms, no less- is uncharacteristic of them, to put it mildly. Are they so afraid of WebGL's potential that they see simply supporting it as less risky than embrace-extend-extinguish?

Re:Another ASP debacle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342695)

Are they so afraid of WebGL's potential that they see simply supporting it as less risky than embrace-extend-extinguish?

I fail to see how this isn't a part of the Redmond Triple-E Special. Wasn't Microsoft going to "support" Java way back in the day, too?

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year ago | (#43342919)

I fail to see how this isn't a part of the Redmond Triple-E Special.

Between the major OSes Windows (XP, 7 & 8), Linux, OSX, Android and iOS with the major browsers IE, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Opera, I hardly think the combination of Windows 8 + IE11 is going to be able to extinguish WebGL no matter what they do. Windows doesn't have anything near a monopoly on browser-based computing these days, much less the combination of Windows 8 with IE.

Wasn't Microsoft going to "support" Java way back in the day, too?

Yes, back when they owned the computing market, these days they struggle to get wide-spread adoption of their products.

Re:Another ASP debacle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43344827)

these days they struggle to get wide-spread adoption of their products.

Yes, it must be really hard on Microsoft, what with having only a 90% desktop market share, and 55% browser market share (its nearest competitor around 15%)

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year ago | (#43346161)

Yes, it must be really hard on Microsoft, what with having only a 90% desktop market share, and 55% browser market share (its nearest competitor around 15%)

Legacy desktop market share means nothing, 90%+ of that marketshare won't even get IE11 and even then thats purely desktop. The only products with a hope of getting IE11 are Windows RT, Windows Phone and Windows 8...I suppose you're just seeing those flying off the shelves with their phenomenal market share? Perhaps you should stop living in the 90s, these days Microsoft most certainly is struggling to get widespread adoption of their products.

Re:Another ASP debacle (3, Insightful)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#43342717)

The other option is that they're in step one of the embrace-extend-extinguish dance.

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

beelsebob (529313) | about a year ago | (#43345727)

I don't get why no one else has called this... They're actually already at step 2

1. Embrace WebGL
2. Extend WebGL by supporting HLSL shaders
3. ...

Re:Another ASP debacle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43346187)

so you actually believe that developers will only develop for WebGL + HLSL to target windows 8 with internet explorer 11? whats your conspiracy theory? what do you suppose they are going to do here with all their windows 8 marketshare that will be able to be leveraged to topple everything else?

seriously you idiots that actually believe microsoft is force in setting the course of computing just need somebody to hate, theyve failed in mobile, in tablets, in browsers and are even failing in their home turf of desktops, holy shit windows 8 can't even get 1/2 way to double digits in marketshare and people like you are running around shitting bricks and scared stiff like microsoft is going to destroy webgl.
get a hobby or something, your energy hating microsoft is long past wasted, you just look like a nutter now.

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

beelsebob (529313) | about a year ago | (#43346315)

so you actually believe that developers will only develop for WebGL + HLSL to target windows 8 with internet explorer 11?

No, I believe that some developers will use HLSL, and this will mean that there are some IE 11 only web sites out there, and this will mean that IE will gain market share. This is how embrace, extend extinguish worked in the past, and it's how it can work again.

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#43342887)

Uhhh it OpenGL ES and its being supported in the BROWSER which unless they changed things by default is running in low rights mode anyway...yeah I really don't think anybody is gonna be seeing performance that rivals a DirectX game installed on the hardware Hoss. This will be fine for "cut the rope" style games, which frankly Flash worked fine for until Apple slit its throat ( and we have yet to see a replacement that can fill all the roles Flash was good at in a similar footprint, its all either bloated as hell like HTML V5 video or just doesn't have the features that flash had like good animation support) but I don't see anybody cooking up the next Bioshock on this, sorry.

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year ago | (#43344015)

Uhhh it OpenGL ES and its being supported in the BROWSER which unless they changed things by default is running in low rights mode anyway...yeah I really don't think anybody is gonna be seeing performance that rivals a DirectX game installed on the hardware Hoss.

It will be a WebGL wrapper around DirectX, just like Firefox and Chrome do on Windows, so I don't expect there will be anything to hinder performance there.

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#43345007)

Uhhh...any time you add layers to something performance is gonna suffer friend, if it didn't everything from your browser to your video player would just be throwaway VMs so bugs would be a thing of the past.

Again for Plants Vs Zombies, Angry Birds and Cut The Rope? I'm sure this will be fine and dandy, heck it'll probably be fine and dandy for older games to like Q3 Arena but until I see something with the graphics quality of Just Cause II or Bioshock Infinite running on this? Well just color me skeptical, after all we've all heard these kinds of promises before.

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year ago | (#43345143)

Uhhh...any time you add layers to something performance is gonna suffer friend, if it didn't everything from your browser to your video player would just be throwaway VMs so bugs would be a thing of the past.

The only thing that matters is how much it suffers in the particular case we're talking about, the answer is that it is negligible. I'm not sure why you're comparing to VMs, a VM is a lot more heavyweight than a simple API wrapper. Even around 15 years ago we had 3d API wrappers (most notably Glide OpenGL wrappers) that had negligible performance impact and these days with so much work done in shader code that is pre-compiled the performance impact is even less.

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#43347331)

Uhhh...any time you add layers to something performance is gonna suffer friend, if it didn't everything from your browser to your video player would just be throwaway VMs so bugs would be a thing of the past.

Not necessarily.

Additional layers hide complexity. In some cases, they hide a sort of complexity that is too specialized for most developers to be able to handle well.
Stuff like hardware drivers, the TCP/IP stack, runtimes and even the BIOS are abstraction layers too.

In theory, a smart programmer can get much better performance out of coding his entire 3D hardware accelerated game directly on the BIOS in assembler.
In practice, I dare say no programmer is smart enough to actually outperform all those abstraction layers inbetween.

A well-built WebGL layer wrapped around DirectX may outperform all but the most experienced DirectX developers.

Re:Another ASP debacle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342961)

Debunk:
- OpenGL is fully supported on Windows by Nvidia, AMD and Intel drivers for the respective hardware (probably a few more platforms). There is even a OpenGL on DX wrapper made by Microsoft, I believe.

- in case of WebGL in IE the only remote culprit is HLSL support, but I think that they just didn't want to restrict it from running as it's de facto supported by the implementation. It is not likely, especially today, that people who intend to make their webapp supported on several platforms, are going to restrict it to IE by using HLSL on WebGL.

Re:Another ASP debacle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43344173)

IE11 will support WebGL

Embrace.

the implementation also supports DirectX HLSL shaders

Extend.

thus avoiding Microsoft having to endorse OpenGL use

I wonder where this is going?

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

game kid (805301) | about a year ago | (#43342591)

Yeah, looks like they might not be so worried about those security issues [duckduckgo.com] after all. Or maybe they only come in play when you turn your free non-WebGL'd Windows Blue into Windows Blue Super-Clouditized And Also Actually Plays Games Edition with monthly subscription.

...but seriously--long side rant follows--their Windows 8 insolence motivated me to get a laptop and make it Arch Linux-only (I have a desktop with Windows 7 and Arch in some crude tandem dualboot way, but I wanted to try non-secure-boot EFI and GPT and also see how the laptop would work with Linux and such), so I guess I won't have to worry about that. I got Wine and managed to massage it to play Terraria and Torchlight II with not too much strangeness (the Steam Cloud'd Torchlight II characters I played over on Windows played nicely on Wine), and I'm having fun (with scattered annoyances) trying to build a 64-bit simulated processor in Verilator [veripool.org] there, and ultimately to turn that into something with a GUI and "monitor" in a window that runs my own interpretation of POSIX. That should be fun.

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

game kid (805301) | about a year ago | (#43342791)

...and whaddya know, I open Steam juuuuust after the comment to check, and as if to vindicate me I see the GUTS editor and other fun stuff for TL2 were released [steampowered.com] . (Sorry my comments ended up becoming a whole big TL2 ad, just saying.)

Re:Another ASP debacle (1)

cbhacking (979169) | about a year ago | (#43344363)

There's a huge difference between being concerned about security issues and delaying the inclusion of potentially security-risky features, and omitting them entirely even after having enough time to thoroughly examine the risks, develop mitigations, test extensively, and so forth.

Microsoft did the former (they were concerned - and probably rightly so - about allowing incredibly untrusted code [anything on the web] to interact with incredibly delicate system components [video drivers]).
Microsoft is not doing the latter (instead, they have apparently, according to a very early leaked build, decided that the security ramifications can be dealt with).

What's the "actually plays games" bit about, anyhow? Win8 is a great platform for gaming; it has lower base system requirements than Win7! Compatibility has been a total non-issue in my experience, with exactly zero incompatible games.

Re:Another ASP debacle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43344913)

Talking about gaping, I like to look at the gaping asshole of a woman after she was being fucked in the ass. Only women's, mind you, not men's. I'm not a faggot, you see.

Windows 8.1 (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43342521)

May I assume that Windows 8.11 for Workgroups will be out soon?

IE's biggest problem (1)

littlebigbot (2493634) | about a year ago | (#43342533)

IE's problem isn't particular support in one area or another, it's that they take years to release new versions, thereby falling behind other browsers. They are never that bad on release, but fall behind other browsers that strive to remain current. But IE8 still has ~10% marketshare, and that was released 4 years ago. IE6 finally became negligible 2 years ago, after 10 years.

But they're starting to get better, IE10 was the least bad version and it only took them ~17 months to release it after IE9.

At ladt 3D will have it's break through (1)

Sla$hPot (1189603) | about a year ago | (#43342691)

Get those head mounted displays on.
Lawnmower man here i come.. huh chuckle cuckle.
Have to admit that i'm looking forward to doing web design that incorporated 3D objects.
Will there be a lot of chrome Victorian tea pots ot there?

Finally (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342757)

Why is MS always behind the curve?

And microsoft will try to market it like ie10 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342781)

" LOOK how FAST ie10 is. You can play a GAME on it. TOUCHSCREENS!!!!. We are FINALLY SECURITY!"
Man all those ads were quite annoying, and rather false.

WebGL support? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43342849)

I'm sure both users of IE11 will be thrilled to hear it.

rly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43343039)

Since when does anyone care what IE supports. It's the worst browser available.

Is IE relevant anymore? (0)

QuietLagoon (813062) | about a year ago | (#43343123)

I mean, really, Microsoft has been so discredited in the Internet and mobile space, they should be embarrassed to even continue trying. And don't even get me started about Windows 8....

.
Give it up, Microsoft. Your time was Windows 95, and that time has passed.

Re:Is IE relevant anymore? (1)

gigaherz (2653757) | about a year ago | (#43346043)

If being discredited was a reason for anyone to stop trying, then no one would come out of their tiny holes. Fall, learn from your mistake, stand up, and try again.

thx for the lulz (1)

znrt (2424692) | about a year ago | (#43345409)

The biggest problem with IE10 as far as modern web apps go is its lack of WebGL support

wrong. the biggest problem with ie10 is ie10.

what's the meme for crap like this, "first sentence made no sense whatsoever;dr"?

MS to use WebKit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43345671)

I just saw a commit in the Git repo of WebKit about a built-in BASIC interpreter. I do not know who is that bill.gates@microsoft.com guy, but I suspect that MS makes IE11 WebKit based.

Good for them (1)

gravis777 (123605) | about a year ago | (#43346339)

Although I do hope that IE11 gets released to Windows 7.

Here is my thinking - I love WebGL, but I don't see it really taking off unless IE supports it (granted, IE is loosing market share, but that's another topic). However, Windows 8 seems to be a bigger bust for Microsoft than Vista and ME was. So, if IE11 is exclusive to Windows 8, that still means that the default webbrowser used by a good portion of the web users won't support it.

Probably why many webpages still look like they did 10 years ago, websites are writing to the lowest common denominator - ie IE (no pun intended) 6 and 7.

And IE10 and previous did not... (1)

brunes69 (86786) | about a year ago | (#43346429)

.. which means that as usual IE will be holding back web development for another 5 years. I am being serious. This is an ongoing problem for anyone who developers client-facing sites especially when long-term support is part of the requirement. Most companies simply can't justify having one group of engineers working on WebGL and then another group working on some other IE-only implementation... they do not have resources like this. You have limited resources and need to choose one solution that works across as many users as possible. And as much as the /. crowd hates to admit it, IE still comprises a good 40% of the browser share so something that excludes those people is not an option. Which means WebGL will not be a mainstream option for more years to come because a) IE drug their feet in adoption, and b) they won't move to a rapid release cycle.

It works *so* well (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43347165)

Apparently the API works so well that you can take existing WebGL programs (with OpenGL shaders) and just run them

Well yes, that's what "WebGL support" means.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>