Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


VESA, is it worth learning???


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
10 replies to this topic

#1 Rene   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 February 2000 - 03:04 AM

Is it at all worth learning VESA and dos programming since most future software and games will probably be made to windows with DirectX???

Sponsor:

#2 mhkrause   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 February 2000 - 05:52 AM

DOS programming meaning "console" programming is worth it, it''s better to learn C/C++ through a console app than a full Windows app. I still use Win32 Console Apps for small test programs and so on, when I don''t care about the interface.

As for Vesa/VGA, I have a lot of knowledge of DOS graphics programming that I''ll probably never really use anymore. The basic concepts are the same, but you might as well learn the actual implementation with DDraw, which really isn''t that hard.



#3 evaclear   Members   -  Reputation: 162

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 February 2000 - 08:49 AM

DOS is all but dead. With Win 2000 being released this month it''s only a matter of time before it dissappears completely. I wouldn''t worry about programming Vesa at all. That''s what Direct X and OpenGL are for.

#4 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Likes

Posted 07 February 2000 - 08:52 AM

DOS is all but dead. With Win 2000 being released this month it''s only a matter of time before it dissappears completely. I wouldn''t worry about programming Vesa at all. That''s what Direct X and OpenGL are for.

#5 joeG   Members   -  Reputation: 172

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 February 2000 - 08:54 AM

When I was experimenting with Linux, I discovered that my videocard wasn''t supported. However, it was VESA compliant and I was actually able to get X up and running I guess I was just surprised to hear the name VESA again. So, if you''re a driver developer, then you''d probably be the only one who''d need to know about VESA. But most game programmers build their engines from others drivers now these days.

#6 Veldrik   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 February 2000 - 02:11 PM

Although most of you lot wouldn''t ever need it, it is still very useful to be able to use the VESA and EGA/VGA modes.
You will learn from it easily how to use the video buffers (and pages) and how to make damn fast screen refreshes without using any APIs.
It is also fun when playing with boot disks.
And also with many other operating systems (OS2, MacOS, old DOS/Windows systems) being able to use run DOS based programs, it is still useful for cross-compatibility (I just normally port and recompile it to the other OS though).

#7 Rene   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 February 2000 - 07:01 PM

Okay, i guess it is DirectX i have to learn. What do i need to do that. Can i use DJGPP(gcc) for DirectX or what? Is there good tutorials avaible on the internet or should i go buy a good book???



#8 Jester   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 08 February 2000 - 03:39 PM

There is a package out at electronic stores called Game Programming v3.0 you can get it at electronics boutique or whatever game store you have..
It comes with DX6.1, VC++ 6.0 and Genesis 3D engine. You either need Borland C++ builder or Visual C++, I personally recomend Visual C++ because it is easier I think. VESA is a gory pain in the butt and unless you work for a hardware vendor and are creating drivers or if your really interested in knowing the ins and outs of PC''s don''t do it! At age 15 I started trying to develope a DirectX equivalent and oooooooohhhh was I disapointed to support all those cards and the little bugs and tricks with each card is not something any one person can do.

Good luck

#9 Radiohead   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 10 February 2000 - 08:37 PM

Why is evryone so worried about learning DirectX...It is a piece of junk. It alot wiser to learn OpenGL for the simple fact that it is a lot more widely used in games today..not to mention looks a heck of alot nicer... Even John Carmack says it is just not worth wasting his time with... plus if you learn GL then you have something under your belt that is a heck of lot more powerful then the DirectX that you want to learn

--------------
Radiohead
--------------

"For God''s Sake Put Some Pants On!"

#10 evaclear   Members   -  Reputation: 162

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 11 February 2000 - 11:33 AM

Not to turn this into a DX vs OGL argument. The reason we keep talk about learning Direct X is because it encompases EVERYTHING.

OpenGL doesn''t take into account Sound, Joysticks, Keyboard Input, Mouse Input, Music, Etc. Also OpenGL hasn''t been officialy updated in a long time while DirectX has a new version offering new options every 6 months.

As far as what Carmack says...It was years ago he made a statement saying why he chose OGL over DirectX. And not once did he say DirectX sucks. He said something to the effect that OGL was easier to learn. Now that he knows OpenGL, it''s pretty pointless to spend his time learning the in''s and outs of Direct3d. If you notice though, Quake 2 and 3 both need the DirectX API installed on your machine for it to work correctly. That''s because Quake 2 and 3 use Direct Input which is part of the DirectX foundation SDK.

You can go on making un-researched comments and keep giving your opinion but that doesn''t make OPENGL or DIRECTX better. Both API''s have advantages and disadvantages, but at least when you say something give a reason other than "it''s a peice of junk". To me that statement just means "I can''t figure Direct X out".

#11 Rock2000   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 11 February 2000 - 01:43 PM

Well, just to be accurate, Carmack didn''t say DirectX sucked, but he did say, and I quote, "D3D sucks!". It was a long time ago, and obviously you can''t apply that statement today, because it has gotten much better. They are both pretty equivalent today.

Why does everyone say supporting VESA is a headache because of different cards?? The whole point of VESA is to write one standard interface, and it''ll work on any VESA compatable card. Granted lots of them weren''t fully VESA compliant, but that''s what Scitech was for. It''s not really worth learning anymore (nice to know, but not very helpful), but it was very nice once.

Rock





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