Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

OpenGL 2.0?


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
25 replies to this topic

#21 Null and Void   Moderators   -  Reputation: 1087

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 19 November 2001 - 02:32 PM

quote:
Original post by Dauntless
Since I''m new to OpenGL, how do the extensions work exactly? From what I can understand, they are specific to the hardware being utilized. So doesn''t that make it harder for the programmer?


Extensions aren''t always specific to the hardware. They also allow backwards compatibility (in the case of Windows and its slow uptake of new versions, that''s very important ). The ARB ''standardizes'' extensions and makes them an optional part of the OpenGL spec. (as in: you don''t have to support this feature to be officially OpenGL compliant, but if you do, do it this way) after a while.

[Resist Windows XP''s Invasive Production Activation Technology!]

Sponsor:

#22 MiNDHiVE   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 19 November 2001 - 09:23 PM

Remember the good old days with DOS when you had to write an separate Interface to cater for sooo many different Video/Audio cards? Seriously... DirectX has made developers lazy. Writing two separate effects to cater for say nVidia and ATI OpenGL extensions is still infinitely less work than simple Super VGA 2D graphics and Audio were under DOS.

Be thankful and stop complaining!

I like both OpenGL and Direct3D (The current API anyway), I actually find them quite similar. But Microsoft insists on changing their 3D API with every new DX version. This alone will prevent anyone who doesn''t want to learn a new API every year from sticking exclusively to D3D. My opinion? Support both!

#23 zedzeek   Members   -  Reputation: 528

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 November 2001 - 09:10 AM

theres more news about opengl2.0 at www.opengl.org out today.
definitly looks like its moving foward pretty quickly

>>I''d like to thank the 3Dlabs team for their hard work in producing the white papers on a very aggressive schedule, and reviewers from Alias| Wavefront, Apple, ATI, id Software, Nvidia, PTC, SGI, SoftImage, the Stanford Graphics Lab and others.<<

id software hehe

#24 jenova   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 November 2001 - 10:55 AM

Direct3D is garbage, PERIOD.
wannabe OpenGL.

peace.

To the vast majority of mankind, nothing is more agreeable than to escape the need for mental exertion... To most people, nothing is more troublesome than the effort of thinking.

#25 Null and Void   Moderators   -  Reputation: 1087

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 November 2001 - 01:50 PM

quote:
Original post by jenova
Direct3D is garbage, PERIOD.
wannabe OpenGL.


I love OpenGL; I hope I''ve made that clear. But posting stuff like this is kind of inflamitory and useless. Sure, you can give your reasons and discuss objectively, but otherwise you''re just going to get all the people that love DirectX in here yelling . DirectX obviously works; but, does it work better? That''s the thing we''re discussing.

[Resist Windows XP''s Invasive Production Activation Technology!]

#26 Shag   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 November 2001 - 03:11 PM

Null ... you have no idea ...

I remember the days of trying to emulate Elite in assembly on the Acorn Electron ... Now that was real 3D graphics! lol

I''ve gone all bleary eyed thinking about it!




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS