the Windows Vista OpenGL Debate


Recommended Posts

I thought it was that they were going to to support up to 1.4 out of the box but let drivers/whatever provide the real support.

They can't not have OpenGL on Vista.

Think of all the software that is used to create games for Windows that is run on Windows, like Maya, 3D Studio etc.

They use these OpenGL applications to create models for DirectX games too.

They won't break all of these pieces of software. I'm sure Microsoft even use an OpenGL modeling package in their games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Situation: Microsoft is going to run openGL ontop of DirectX.

Your worries: its going to be slow.

Truth: there will only be a 2-5% loss in performance

Reason: The fact that DirectX is going to be a good chunk faster, as well as the advancements in OS/ Hardware. The loss ( if there actually is going to be any) will be unoticable. Stop worrying. It wouldn't benifit MS to make openGl run like ****.. you really think MS thinks ID will start using DX just because vista doesnt like it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Situation: Microsoft is going to run openGL ontop of DirectX.

Your worries: its going to be slow.

Truth: there will only be a 2-5% loss in performance

Reason: The fact that DirectX is going to be a good chunk faster, as well as the advancements in OS/ Hardware.  The loss ( if there actually is going to be any) will be unoticable.  Stop worrying.  It wouldn't benifit MS to make openGl run like ****..  you really think MS thinks ID will start using DX just because vista doesnt like it?

586533745[/snapback]

Its not that simple, its only Opengl 1.4 vanilla not the latest proper OpenGL 2.0 with extension support. Imagine if the table was reversed and its d3d on the sidelines.... then it'd be like OpenGL only supporting a DX6 Wrapper, that would be unacceptable, so why is it acceptable that the Opengl d3d wrapper is only 1.4 vanilla ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not that simple, its only Opengl 1.4 vanilla not the latest proper OpenGL 2.0 with extension support. Imagine if the table was reversed and its d3d on the sidelines.... then it'd be like OpenGL only supporting a DX6 Wrapper, that would be unacceptable, so why is it acceptable that the Opengl d3d wrapper is only 1.4 vanilla ?

586533997[/snapback]

As far as that is concerned I'm honestly not sure. However my first guess would be stability. Or MS just doesn't care. In that case yes, that is an issue that needs to be addressed, I enjoy Quake III myself :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeaaaahhhh !!! Finally someone gets it !!

thats what i think to, MS just doesn't care, they cant just ditch opengl coz itd look bad so they support it, but at the same time support an old useless version instead.

Its like they do but they dont.

nothing but cheap tricks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

XP is a good little OS and supports no OpenGL

It leaves it in the capable hands of Nvidia and ATI and any other Video card manufacturer, and IMO it should stay that way, coz if MS isnt going to get OpenGL support in aeroglass right they shouldnt even get involved.

I would say the answer is no, GL2 and DX9 have little difference in what they can do, i don't see why GL2 cant be wrapped with D3D, i don't really know the logic behind MS's decision to only wrap 1.4

Doom3 with the Displacement bump mapping mod aka Parallax Mod and the U-E-Q Mod AKA Ultra Extreme Quality Mod Together can really show off GL2's capabilities.

Your video card handles OpenGL, with full support.

There is an opengl.dll that comes with xp but its main support is running them screensavers like 3dpipes and 3dmaze.

Edited by Visentinel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what was reported by a Windows dev in those forums, Vista will support at *LEAST* OpenGL 1.4 WITH many extensions out-of-the-box under LDDM.

The opengl.dll that comes with XP is entirely software based.

Additional support for OpenGL will come from the hardware vendors. Nothing is changing, in that respect.

Also, I don't believe any of the apps concerned with windowed mode support require anything greater than 1.4 - that being Maya, 3D Studio, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what was reported by a Windows dev in those forums, Vista will support at *LEAST* OpenGL 1.4 WITH many extensions out-of-the-box under LDDM. 

The opengl.dll that comes with XP is entirely software based. 

Additional support for OpenGL will come from the hardware vendors.  Nothing is changing, in that respect. 

Also, I don't believe any of the apps concerned with windowed mode support require anything greater than 1.4 - that being Maya, 3D Studio, etc.

586534944[/snapback]

Which is why the opengl that comes with xp is nothing more than a driver to run the screensavers.

I still don't see the logic in only supporting GL 1.4, supporting the innovative 2.0 which has been supported by video cards for ages now is supporting innovation, theres nothing wrong with innovation.

Maya, 3d studio will continue being upgraded and with its upgrade path in graphics support effectively dismantled, i don't think that makes many people happy, its nothing less than a nuisance having to close down aeroglass just to get a little 2.0 support >_> coz it still doesnt make sense.

when you write a program and use for example, bink video, do you use the bink dll from 5 years ago or the latest ?

its just that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

XP is a good little OS and supports no OpenGL

It leaves it in the capable hands of Nvidia and ATI and any other Video card manufacturer, and IMO it should stay that way,

It IS staying that way. That's what we've been trying to tell you. Well, actually, XP does support OpenGL a bit. It's not changing in Vista.
I would say the answer is no, GL2 and DX9 have little difference in what they can do, i don't see why GL2 cant be wrapped with D3D, i don't really know the logic behind MS's decision to only wrap 1.4
It's not their responsibility. As long as they allow drivers to support it, there is no issue.
Which is why the opengl that comes with xp is nothing more than a driver to run the screensavers.
But nothing is changing as far as OpenGL support. Why should MS be forced to allocate more resources to reimplement a new standard that isn't theirs?

I get your point, but I just don't agree. OpenGL support is the same in Vista as it was in XP, so you can't say they're purposefully trying to take OpenGL down. Your beef seems to be that they are (from what we know) supporting "only" OpenGL 1.4 out of the box, instead of 2.0. Again, that's not their responsibility to support other standards natively, as long as they allow it to be implemented by third parties, which they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see anything wrong with that post, its true.

Aeroglass has to close wich reduces the users experience on windows vista, not to mention having to wait for aeroglass to close then to open when your done.

whats wrong with building support in aeroglass to use the proper GL API run by your vendors video card drivers ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see anything wrong with that post, its true.

No it's not.

Aeroglass has to close wich reduces the users experience on windows vista, not to mention having to wait for aeroglass to close then to open when your done.

Closing the DWM is one solution. For fullscreen, the DWM doesn't need to "close" since it loses ownership of the screen context anyway.

whats wrong with building support in aeroglass to use the proper GL API run by your vendors video card drivers ?

586538143[/snapback]

Because then Direct3D wouldn't work. I don't know how many times this problem must be explained before it sinks in.

You can't run a Direct3D app and an OpenGL app inside of it. The DWM is a Direct3D app. However, the wrapper solves this problem. If there's another way around it, Nvidia/ATI will find it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it's not.

Closing the DWM is one solution.  For fullscreen, the DWM doesn't need to "close" since it loses ownership of the screen context anyway.

Because then Direct3D wouldn't work.  I don't know how many times this problem must be explained before it sinks in. 

You can't run a Direct3D app and an OpenGL app inside of it.  The DWM is a Direct3D app.  However, the wrapper solves this problem.  If there's another way around it, Nvidia/ATI will find it.

586540882[/snapback]

But the wrapper doesn't solve it properly, it only supports an old version of openGL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the wrapper doesn't solve it properly, it only supports an old version of openGL.

586541788[/snapback]

As of now, it will yes. Why should Microsoft be required to use their resource to fully implement the latest and greatest version of someone elses 3d graphics API natively?

They still provide the ability to have full implementations from third-party gfx drivers, do I don't see an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vista provides baseline OpenGL support designed to support pretty much any OpenGL app that currently runs on Windows. It's up to the vendors to go farther than that... If we can wrap OpenGL 1.4 support, what's to stop Nvidia from implementing 2.0 in the same way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.