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!

OpenGL 1.3 Spec Released

CmdrTaco posted more than 13 years ago | from the for-the-graphics-guru-and-the-wannabe dept.

Graphics 193

JigSaw writes "The OpenGL Architecture Review Board announced the new OpenGL 1.3 specification (1.8 MB pdf). In OpenGL 1.3, several additional features and functions have been ratified and brought into the API's core functionality. New features include Cube map texturing, multisampling, new texture modes that provide more powerful ways of applying textures to rendered objects, compressed texture framework etc. Let's all hope that GL can catch up with Direct3D now, as with the latest DirectX8, Direct3D has done some big steps towards feature-set, speed and even non-bloatiness when it comes to coding for it, while OpenGL 1.2 was released more than 2 years ago and it did not offer as much."

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

does it do sharders? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2109752)

Developers now have a card vendor neutral way to access programmable shaders (pixel and vertex shaders) from DX8. But does OpenGL1.3 have anything comparable, or do we have to resort to NVidia or ATI extensions? If that is the case, OpenGL will be hard hit unless a standard vendor neutral extension it added soon.

Re:does it do sharders? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2125074)

Well, it wasn't listed in the "core features" in the press release, so I doubt it. Anyways...

I'm not at all sure why you believe DX8's approach is superior (if I may read between the lines).

The extensions are there and work... part of (core) OpenGL's attraction is its *careful* evolution. Contrast this to the DX approach, which is "cram in all the new features we can each cycle".

Moving shaders into the "core" so quickly goes against the careful evolution strategy.

I prefer a stable API that has the ability to be extended (OpenGL), over an API that is constantly changing (DX).

Plagiarism alert! (1)

BlowCat (216402) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138761)

It's the comment from the previous story [slashdot.org] . The first reply is from the same story.

Fag alert! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2132226)

BlowCat is a raging homosexual faggot.

Re:Plagiarism alert! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2141684)

Yeah, that damn anonymous karma whore.

Wait a minute...

cockmaster alert! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2143967)

It is a duplicate story, expect duplicate posts. Oh, please go choke to death on a fat cock.

Re:Plagiarism alert! (1)

MessiahXI (48280) | more than 13 years ago | (#2157728)

He even said "Please ignore my previous AC post" in the comment you linked to.... chill out.

FP! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2113623)

FIRST POST FUCKAS! [goatse.cx]

fp (-1)

wenismonkey (267712) | more than 13 years ago | (#2113624)

roofle owned scrubs

Catch up to what? (5, Insightful)

Mongoose (8480) | more than 13 years ago | (#2116483)

GL is modular and relies on extentions. This produces a far more stable API and allows for the latest bleeding edge tech.

Comparing DX or better D3D to GL is like comparing UNIX to Windows. You can either allow modular ententions or rewrite the API every release, whus breaking backwards compatibility for no reason. GL ext from ATI and Nvidia are much easier to use for development that D3D imho.

Only moogles may disagree. We still love you dan! =)

Re:Catch up to what? (2)

drivers (45076) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138970)

If you want to use code written for a previous version of DirectX with new releases of the SDK, all you have to do is #define what version of the API you want to write to. Using COM the DLL also supports previous versions of the interface, giving backward compatibility. (At least, that's my understanding of it.)

Re:Catch up to what? (1)

Mongoose (8480) | more than 13 years ago | (#2144757)

I was also hinting at the problem with closed source DX games. If you run DX 8.0 you won't be able to play older DX games. If you bought every version of TombRaider ( dear god, why? ), and installed DX 8.0 you would be able to play only the last version.

I work on OGL clones of DX games as a hobby. Once I have my OGL based engine under the game, then I don't have to worry about newer API version breaking my binaries much less source.

I for one still play old DOS games and I enjoy having a 'long shelf life' in the titles I buy. I no longer buy DX based games even if I really want them now. If MarrowWind doesn't move off DX ( xbox/"pc" game ) I will never buy it. I waited years for MarrowWind too...

Re:Catch up to what? (2)

Archfeld (6757) | more than 13 years ago | (#2112022)

Umm what ?? I have games that ran on DX5 and the run just fine under DX8. I think you may have misunderstood what someone said. In my experience as a die hard gamer DX is VERY backward compatible. Not to say that OPENGL is not good, I use OPENGL for some games and DX8 for others. It really depends on the individual performance. As a consumer MORE CHOICES IS GOOD.

Re:Catch up to what? (1)

Darshu (87549) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138889)

Um, hey I hate MS as much as the next guy, but this is straight out wrong. DX is binary backwards compatible [and probably source, but I wouldn't know, I don't make DX programs]. The software does some sort of COM QueryInterface() call to get an interface to the API that it expects. A DX2 game get IDirectDraw2, etc. [i think] If what you were saying were true you'd here millions of angry gamers torching Microsoft. Any DX2 or higher game should work fine with DirectX 8. (I suppose DX1 aka Game SDK should work too but I wouldn't be on it, not that anyone ever really used it anyhow.)

COMPLETE BULLSHIT (0)

PRESIDENT BUSHCLIT (515272) | more than 13 years ago | (#2141683)

I can run DX1 games still on Win2K/DX8 no problem.

Re:Catch up to what? (1)

vrt3 (62368) | more than 13 years ago | (#2157360)

If you run DX 8.0 you won't be able to play older DX games. If you bought every version of TombRaider ( dear god, why? ), and installed DX 8.0 you would be able to play only the last version.

That's not my understanding of how DX works, and what you say is also not confirmed by my experience.

DirectX uses COM objects. As someone said before, correct use of COM objects guarantees backwards compatibility: if you make changes that would render the interface incompatible, you have to create a new interface, while the old one is still available.

Apple (3, Insightful)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 13 years ago | (#2118089)

Microsoft will support it eventually in a year, as they want DirectX more. Apple will probably have it on MacOS X by the end of the year, while Linux will be a somewhere in between.

Re:Apple (0, Offtopic)

MessiahXI (48280) | more than 13 years ago | (#2111746)

Never trust a tech who tattoes his IP address to his arm, especialy if it's DHCP.

Who would do that? what does DHCP have to do with it? DHCP does not necessarily mean dynamic ip addresses. But, more to the point, why would you tattoe it on yer damn arm? It's perplexing to the point of not being funny.

Great (0, Offtopic)

jfedor (27894) | more than 13 years ago | (#2118643)

That makes my 2nd ed. Red Book even more obsolete. :)

-jfedor

I'm can't wait (5, Funny)

briggsb (217215) | more than 13 years ago | (#2122345)

Until the specs support this kind [bbspot.com] of functionality.

Re:I'm can't wait (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2109911)

do you have to link to bbspot in all your posts? jeez, you're like a broken record.

Re:I'm can't wait (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2133097)

bbspot bitch

Re:I'm can't wait (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2138872)

You can alredy get this [outerspace.com.br] at 2.5fps.

Re:I'm can't wait (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2137215)

More pictures!

Re:I'm can't wait (1, Offtopic)

Lizard_King (149713) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138875)

OT: Seems to me like this [bbspot.com] is where you get all your material [slashdot.org] .

Blowing karma for originality.

Re:I'm can't wait (2, Interesting)

Nate Fox (1271) | more than 13 years ago | (#2144752)

Actually, this isnt too far off. ABC News [go.com] had an article about Sony cams with 'night vision' and a filter, and can (kinda) see through clothes.

Re:I'm can't wait (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2137202)

To eBay I will go...
To eBay I will go...
Hi Hoe their dairy O's: To ebay I will go...

I'm climbing up a tree...
I'm climbing up a tree...
I'm looking at my bitch neighbors' pussy... wait I see three?

Re:I'm can't wait (0)

Count (107594) | more than 13 years ago | (#2144755)

I guess that would be Direct Double D's

fp (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2124270)

puzzled are the masses without any asses

Re:fp (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2132221)

yeah, but did you realise that I've got your mother out back, hog tied and wetter than a fish' rectum? She wants me so bad, and I'm going to use a toothbrush to rub away her clit. Like that? How about this.. we're brothers! Yep, that's right. Your milkman is MY dad too! :D

Re:fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2134901)

Hi I think, negative post are really, well negative, but all the same dont cha rekon einstien is the immortal leader of our race, I mean, oppressed clever and a "god damn I'll never make bombs for your regime" peace lovin dude, sorry if this a bit of topic, but I thought I'd try to put the world to rights with my pithy and poignant thoughts, I hope you feel philophisesed out ther, love ya bye.. May H and kylie watch your souls bye bye.

The funny bit... (2, Insightful)

Papa Legba (192550) | more than 13 years ago | (#2127627)

If history is any judge in 10 years from now we will not be able to believe that we watched such crappy specs and liked them.

Gamer 1 " Good god this quake 3 is SUCH 24 bit color, how could they stand it?"
Gamer 2 "Totally!"

Re:The funny bit... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2117354)

GO! you pathetic wormy karma whore, go!

Re:The funny bit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2120092)

I play Quake 3 in 32 bit color, don't you?

Re:The funny bit... (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2138286)

There's no visual difference between 24 and 32 bit colour. Zip. zilch. 32-bit mode is faster, and 24-bit mode uses less memory, but that's *it*.

Re:The funny bit... (1)

Illume (11015) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138759)


Your hardware probably uses 32bpp during calculations because it's faster that way.
But if your graphic-card isn't very exotic it only uses 24bpp to actually display a colour and eight bits are ignored.

Re:The funny bit... (2, Insightful)

keesh (202812) | more than 13 years ago | (#2133681)

More likely to be resolution... I for one can't tell 24bit colour from anything higher, but I sure can tell the difference between 640x480 and 1600x1200...

Re:The funny bit... (1)

Grayraven (95321) | more than 13 years ago | (#2132222)

Actually, in the case of 32bit color, the 8 added
bits aren't actually used for anything else than padding. Atleast when just running a desktop.

Re:The funny bit... (2, Informative)

YeeHarr (187241) | more than 13 years ago | (#2140148)

Actually the extra 8 bits are used for alpha.

Alpha is one way to do the smoke/fog effects.

Alpha is the transparency of a material/texture.

Re:The funny bit... (2, Funny)

frankmu (68782) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138357)

yeah, my mother-in-law likes to play freecell on her computer at 640X480 on the 17 inch monitor that i bought her

Re:The funny bit... (2, Funny)

Kwikymart (90332) | more than 13 years ago | (#2143283)

So, you mean all gamers are going to become valley girls in the future?

Hmm. (2, Redundant)

citizenc (60589) | more than 13 years ago | (#2131989)

2001-08-14 19:23:44 OpenGL 1.3 Specifications Released (articles,graphics) (accepted)
*Twitch*

A story so nice, they had to post it twice (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2132171)

Crack out tha crack, fools!

Re:Hmm. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2139275)

Next time shorten "Specifications" to "Specs" to get the frontpage, instead of just "Developers".

Duh!!

Implementation (4, Insightful)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 13 years ago | (#2133200)

Now that we have the specs, how long before we can expect implementations that actually take advantage of them?

As to this issue of Direct 3D having a bigger feature set et al., this is only a worthy argument if we are talking MS-Windows. Outside of the Windows platform Direct 3D means nothing, since it isn't available there. OpenGL is currently the only cross-platform solution worth mentioning (please correct me if there is another). IMHO, the SDL game API made the right move in using OGL for it graphics, since the last thing we need is yet another graphics API that is just about supported. Maybe one thing that will help OGL, especially in games, is if more noise was made about it.

whoa! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2137467)

Slashdot? With a non-biased article? That doesn't try to tear Microsoft a new asshole? *gasp*

Shading? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2137482)

Developers now have a card vendor neutral way to access programmable shaders (pixel and vertex shaders) from DX8.
But does OpenGL1.3 have anything comparable, or do we have to resort to NVidia or ATI extensions?
If that is the case, OpenGL will be hard hit unless a standard vendor neutral extension it added soon.

A little bit offtopic but... (4, Informative)

stikves (127823) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138612)

Some people claim the death of opengl, while others want the community to keep it alive.

But the "evil" API Direct3D is already (mostly) available for Linux. Haven't you heard of trasgaming (http://www.transgaming.com/ [transgaming.com] )?

They are currenly working on D3D port to WINE [wineqh.com] .

(If you don't know, their license is not fully "free", but they will make it "free" when they get enough "support".)

[ By the way, I don't think opengl will die anytime soon. Because "serious" graphics work is not only "games". have you used SGI? they do not support D3D or whatsoever ]

SGI is dead. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2139224)

The only thing that can save them is by implementing Direct3D on their system to get more main-stream customers. Sucks, don't it?

Caucasian Jeans (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2138734)

Be the first on your block with these bad boys: Order now! [naawp.com]

Re:Caucasian Jeans (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2139081)

Stop being such a RACIST. It is offensive in general, and especially to those of us, myself included, who have friends that are black.

Um... (5, Informative)

Penrif (33473) | more than 13 years ago | (#2139083)

Give OpenGL some credit here. In some ways, it's D3D that has to catch up. Here's how it was discribed to be by a Very Smart Person [uiuc.edu] who works with nVidia a lot. nVidia comes to Microsoft saying "we want these features", Microsoft says "Okay, do it this way". The engineers at nVidia get frustrated about being limited by Microsoft's model and implement new features anyway and put them in OpenGL extensions. So, D3D has a better spec (arguably), but OpenGL has access to all the features.

wha? (1)

Atrophis (103390) | more than 13 years ago | (#2139084)

OpenGL is as good if not better then Direct3D.
think about it, OpenGL spec has not changed in how long and what kind of games are being produced with it? ... quake3, doom3, tribes2.
basically all the best. im not a graphics programmer, but i think its safe to say something is good when the best choose it.

Look at that list... (3, Informative)

lowe0 (136140) | more than 13 years ago | (#2142322)

2 of those are Carmack games. He loves GL (can't remember what pissed him off about D3D, maybe he'd like to tell us?)

Tribes2 is multi-API. So are some other biggies (Unreal Tournament comes to mind.)

Re:Look at that list... (1)

Eviltar (175008) | more than 13 years ago | (#2132559)

can't remember what pissed him off about D3D

I think he started favoring OpenGL in the days of Quake 1, about the time of the appearance of the Voodoo 1. To support that card (and future accelerators, of course), he attempted to port the Quake software renderer to both OpenGL and DirectX.

He succeeded with OpenGL in a single weekend. With DirectX, however, the API at the time (DirectX 1.0? 2.0?) was crap, or it was poorly documented. So he gave up on it.

I don't really know why he still doesn't use DirectX. Maybe he's just being consistent :)

Re:Look at that list... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2142844)

multi-platform is the last thing UT is. The engine was desaigned with Voodoo cards in mind, and on a "suggested" box without a voodoo, it runs like crap. Even my 1.4 athlon has trouble when I'm running OpenGL sometimes... And 3drealms's tech people repeatedly claim that openGL is crap. Just a little biased I guess.

those are your list of the best games ?? (1, Troll)

Archfeld (6757) | more than 13 years ago | (#2145273)

Tribes2 is a bomb, even the company that made it thinks it stinks. Quake 3 is nice, but I think UT on D3D is just as nice, DOOM3 ?? is it out or just being developed ?

Open GL is Dying (0, Funny)

Shoeboy (16224) | more than 13 years ago | (#2140101)

We should all keep in mind this simple truth: OpenGL is dying.

You don't need to be Kreskin to predict OpenGL's future. The hand writing is on the wall: OpenGL faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for OpenGL because OpenGL is dying. Things are looking very bad for OpenGL. As many of us are already aware, OpenGL continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Famed OpenGL using developer Jon Carmack states that there are 7000 delopers that are users of OpenGL. How many users of DirectX are there? Let's see. The number of OpenGL versus DirectX posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 1 to 4. Therefore there are about 7000*5 = 35000 DirectX users. OpenGL on Linux posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of OpenGL on Windows posts. Therefore there are about 700 developers using OpenGL on Linux. A recent article put OpenGL on *BSD at about .008 percent of the graphics library delopment market. Therefore there are (7000/100)*.008 = .56 OpenGL on FreeBSD developers. This is one guy working in his spare time and consistent with the number of OpenGL on FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of SGI, abysmal sales and so on, SGI is getting out of the graphics business and becomming a low end intel box vendor. SGI is still dying and the corpse of OpenGL will soon be turned over to another charnel house.

All major surveys show that OpenGL has steadily declined in market share. OpenGL is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If OpenGL is to survive at all it will be among games hobbyists, dabblers, and dilettantes. OpenGL continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, OpenGL is dead.

--Shoeboy

Re:Open GL is Dying (2, Funny)

Mongoose (8480) | more than 13 years ago | (#2142144)

Hahaha, if you believe those trolls actually produce product then I want to sell you some 'warm' land in russia. APIs don't have market share or profits. That's the problems with kids raized on MS products. They ask "Who is the marker leader?" when they should ask "Who has the best solution?".

Please grow up, before you anger the real developers.

Re:Open GL is Dying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2137667)

Hahaha. And those who try to run a business without asking "Who is the market leader" end up sitting in a dark room with their Betamaxes and Amigas ranting to themselves about the injustice of it all. And then they go to their new job and ask "Do you want fries with that?"

Re:Open GL is Dying (2, Insightful)

Bilestoad (60385) | more than 13 years ago | (#2142323)

APIs do have market share, and it's an ever-ascending spiral once one gets entrenched. If I want my game to take advantage of that huge installed base of nvidia and ATI cards then I write for DirectX. If I want my new video card to produce good benchmarks with popular games (and therefore sell) then I work hard on the DirectX support and windows drivers. OpenGL is just an afterthought.

In the ruthlessly Darwinist gamer/graphics market the answer to "who is the market leader" and "who has the best solution" is usually the same, as long as you consider that "best solution" does not mean "most sensible and powerful API". From a developer's point of view OpenGL may very well be better but it just isn't where the money is.

(And BTW, I am not the author of the parent to which you replied. That's a not-even-thinly-disguised recycled anti-BSD troll.)

Come on! (3, Redundant)

SpanishInquisition (127269) | more than 13 years ago | (#2140443)

Re:Come on! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2110417)

Quick... write an article about OGL1.3 Specs. It'll be a quick and easy 5 karma points!!!

Re:Come on! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2139598)

The answer, of course, is no. They even filter out Katz's posts, it's pretty sad how they manage things.

Although I'm glad this was posted to the frontpage. OpenGL must go forward or gaming will die on anything but Windows.

Re:Come on! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2154813)

Can't we just cut and paste all the comments from yesterday's post?

drooool... (2, Informative)

TechnoVooDooDaddy (470187) | more than 13 years ago | (#2140444)

DX8 was nice and feature rich to be certain, but that still didn't stop companies like NVidia from putting extensions into OpenGL to accomplish the same things..

NVidia OpenGL bad-ass extenstions [nvidia.com]

NVidia DX8 SDK [nvidia.com]

both contain very similar stuff you'll find i think, and I've always found OpenGL to be a better interface anyway. DX8 is night and day better than DX7 or before, but still carries a bit of the bloat around the middle that DirectX is famous for...

Extensions vs Core (5, Insightful)

throx (42621) | more than 13 years ago | (#2157658)

The problem with extensions is that at least with DX8 you can write a pixel shader program once and expect it to work on any cards that support that version of the pixel shader (1.0 if you want to be conservative).

If you go with OpenGL you have to write your program for each different vendor extension that comes out. Honestly, what are the chances of ATI or PowerVR ever supporting NV_texture_shader or NV_texture_shader2?

One of the main aims of DirectX was to avoid the situation in the days of games under DOS where a game developer would have to write different code for each different target video card. Through the use of vendor extensions, OpenGL does no better than DOS did - requiring the developer to figure out exactly which cards he is going to support and writing to those extensions individually, also sacrificing future compatibility if the next generation of cards support different extensions.

Writing to DirectX gives some degree of future-proofing your application as forward compatibility of the core API is preserved through revisions of DirectX. Sure this may carry a bit of "bloat around the middle" but that's the price you pay for compatibility.

Of course, if you aren't writing for Windows you're stuck with extensions.

Re:Extensions vs Core (2, Interesting)

.pentai. (37595) | more than 13 years ago | (#2135432)

That's what ARB extensions are for.
Standardized extentions which aren't necessarily part of the spec, but, they work the same accross implementations. I don't think it'll be too long before we see some sort of standardized shader extension. But then, if you have to write microcode for the vertex shaders etc. then don't you have to do that over anyways unless the cards are binary compatible with their shader processors. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't trust DirectX to take my optimized per-vertex code and translate it to a different shader language set.

...but then what do I know :P

OpenGL Death: This is not such a sad thing (0, Insightful)

Captain_Frisk (248297) | more than 13 years ago | (#2142145)

Sorry Folks, (I'm ready for the mod down)

This is not a bad thing. While this does not bode well for Linux / MAC users, it does mean good things for the majority of the game playing market -> Windows users.

Back in the day when 3dfx was the big bad daddy, developers who knew how to code for their card made the decision to only support Glide, and if they supported other APIs, they weren't done as well.

Deus Ex is probably the best example of this. It was based on the Unreal engine, which had glide as its primary API. In subsequent patches, epic fixed Unreal so that its Direct 3D played well. Ion Storm did not, and as a result, the game runs like ass on my 1.2 with 512 MB ram and GeForce 2.

Much like modem standards (remember those wars?), user interfaces (sorry, just read someones disertation on why having 12 different window managers under linux is a bad idea), it is not always a good idea to have multiple ways of doing things. If everyone supported Open GL, that would be great. However, todays hardware is written with Direct3D in mind, and it saves work for the developers, as well as making things more consistant for the end user, if everyone would just use it.

Captain_Frisk

Re:OpenGL Death: This is not such a sad thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2131857)

Yes, and communication would be so much easier if we all just spoke English. And there would be so much more efficiency in car plants if we all drove a red Ford Taurus. And, and, and...

What about pro apps, i.e. Maya? (1)

lowe0 (136140) | more than 13 years ago | (#2139015)

last I checked, 3ds max 4.0 is pretty shitty in D3D. Yes, I've tried both on a GeForce 2.

MAX is soooo much better on GL. I've never tried HEIDI or other such. I wonder what Maya would run like in D3D? Not so well, I imagine.

Re:What about pro apps, i.e. Maya? (1)

Captain_Frisk (248297) | more than 13 years ago | (#2139012)

3dstudio max is better in open gl not because gl is better than direct3d, but because the developers coded it better for that api. Here, the developers chose opengl, and as a result, those of us who want to use direct3d suffer.

Re:OpenGL Death: This is not such a sad thing (1)

geekster (87252) | more than 13 years ago | (#2155557)

I agree that having a standard is a good thing...
But I don't like people having to be forced in to accepting a standard that isn't support by any other operating systems. How is people developing for linux gonna support it?

openGL 1.0 is more advanced than Direct3D 8 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2142319)

Who cares about texture ability when the videocards of today are meant to render more polygons. Texturing is just 2D artwork gone awry. So lets just forget texturing and create polygons with hundreds of pixel-sized polygons.

Re:openGL 1.0 is more advanced than Direct3D 8 (0)

PRESIDENT BUSHCLIT (515272) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138873)

hahaha! Sure, send 10 or 20x the data down the pipeline. That'll work great on PC architecture!

Re:openGL 1.0 is more advanced than Direct3D 8 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2145307)

You damn right it will. And it'll work even better when the next Athlon motherboard chipset will support transparent compression of data over the pipeline. Whew I can see the lag on Doom3 now!

2.4 or 2.5? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2142462)

how long before Linus implements it? :-)

Re:2.4 or 2.5? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2138609)

You sir, are a fucking retard.

Name one thing linus implemented. (not counting a half-assed minix clone). Yep, he must really inspire you.

But does it do shaders? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2143492)

Developers now have a card vendor neutral way to access programmable shaders (pixel and vertex shaders) from DX8. But does OpenGL1.3 have anything comparable, or do we have to resort to NVidia or ATI extensions? If that is the case, OpenGL will be hard hit unless a standard vendor neutral extension it added soon.

Well, it wasn't listed in the "core features" in the press release, so I doubt it.

like deja vu all over again (5, Informative)

Proud Geek (260376) | more than 13 years ago | (#2143560)

Thanks for the info [slashdot.org] . That's very informative. Please do tell, though, what's the difference between a "spec" and a "specification" that makes it worth repeating?

Re:like deja vu all over again (2)

pgpckt (312866) | more than 13 years ago | (#2123829)

This is hilarious. The articles are within 2 posts of each other on the developers page. LOL!

timmothy != taco (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 13 years ago | (#2139082)

Not everybody reads posts from all authors.

Re:timmothy != taco (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2144170)

But, as a editor, shouldn't taco at least check to see if it has been posted in the past? Shit, it shouldn't be hard for an 3l33t hacker like taco.

you missed it (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138086)

someone who does not like that leet taco would miss the story if tiny tim did not post it, and vice versa. Duplication is not as bad as missing things.

Re:like deja vu all over again (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2142661)

what's the difference between a "spec" and a "specification" that makes it worth repeating?


My guess is that it's easier for people skimming the homepage of /. [slashdot.org] to read. ;-)



Re:like deja vu all over again (0, Redundant)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 13 years ago | (#2143582)

This is the second article in a row that they had the article up a few hours ago in another area besides the frontpage (This was in developers, the constants not constant in the science as "evolution of electromagnetism").

I think they're having a kegger in the /. office today....

C'mon Taco! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2143583)

This was posted yesterday. Do you even read this site anymore?

OpenGL = Direct3D 8.1 (5, Insightful)

room101 (236520) | more than 13 years ago | (#2143683)

I have said it before (yes, an OpenGL troll), and I'll say it again: OpenGL can do anything D3D 8.x does. It just does it in a different way.

OpenGL uses extensions, so you don't have to rev the version number to add funtionality, you only have to have supporting drivers (and/or hardware).

That is why OGL hasn't been rev'ed in so long, it didn't need it, so you can provide a stable API for the developers.

It is just cleaner to have this new stuff "built-in", so they do it every now and then.

Re:OpenGL = Direct3D 8.1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2141019)

Not without OpenInventor.

Adding your own C++ wrappers around OGL blows, and most games written today use OOP. Time to move into the future. Use DirectX or SDL.

Re:OpenGL = Direct3D 8.1 (1)

BigJimSlade (139096) | more than 13 years ago | (#2138758)

SDL's 3D code is just a wrapper around OpenGL for whatever platform you're using, if I'm not mistaken. So the 'future' that you point out is wrappers for OpenGL?

Re:OpenGL = Direct3D 8.1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2142808)

Except D3D is way better at what it does.

Re:OpenGL = Direct3D 8.1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2115554)

Oh, you mean, make learning how to write games way more difficult than it has to be? I guess you have a point.

Yeah, D3D is better at what it does (1)

OpenGL (158318) | more than 13 years ago | (#2147625)

D3D is better at what it does, namely giving developers headaches, making programs require more lines of code, enriching the Microsoft empire, etc.

Re:Yeah, D3D is better at what it does (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2135984)

Carmack doesn't agree with you.

Re:Yeah, D3D is better at what it does (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2145279)

Well, in my universe Carmack isn't god and frankly makes a lot of stupid remarks now and then.

Re:Yeah, D3D is better at what it does (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2145281)

Actually Carmack has said repeatedly that D3D suck sweat monkey's balls.

MS has withheld OGL 1.2 for about 2 years now from the MS platform, so D3D could get an andvantage. Guess they ovelooked OGL's extension mechanism...

Re:OpenGL = Direct3D 8.1 (2, Interesting)

MasterVidBoi (267096) | more than 13 years ago | (#2144177)

I've been considering tinkering with OpenGL graphics for awhile, and I have a small question that someone more experienced than I can answer.

As said here a bunch of times, OpenGL relies on extensions to expand it's functionality. AFAIK, both NVIDIA and ATI offer these extensions for their cards (as well as a lot of extensions from other developers).

If both ATI and NVIDIA release OpenGL extensions to support new feature x, is there something that keeps developers from having to implement feature x twice, for each api/card, compared with DirectX where there is one standard way to do it?

Re:OpenGL = Direct3D 8.1 (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#2143739)

The usual evolution of extensions are as follows(given that they are useful extensions):
Vendor specific extension(NV_ , ATI_, SGI_, etc.)
Multivendor extension(EXT_)
ARB extension(ARB_ )

Then it might be let into the core, if it's really that useful and supported by the companies sitting on the ARB. When the extension hits the EXT_, you can pretty much count on it beeing supported on chips that matter.

Deja vu Times two... (0, Offtopic)

wrinkledshirt (228541) | more than 13 years ago | (#2143788)

Weird [slashdot.org] . I recently posted this on a Code Red story.

instead (2, Insightful)

linuxpng (314861) | more than 13 years ago | (#2154072)

why not hope GL1.3 exceeds DX8 to make it more attractive to developers. We needs these guys seeing GL as a standard they can count on. It's really a messed up situation when a proprietary API is deemed a "standard".
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?