http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/cg...c;f=12;t=000001

There are currently 2 different API's for controlling a graphics cards processor,
1) THE INDUSTRI STANDARD OpenGL by SGI (http://openGL.org)
2) Microsofts DirectX.

Currently, Graphics cards are compatable with both OpenGL and DirectX.
OpenGL is a cross platform API, and can (and is) used for many games consoles, pc's and Apple macs.
DirectX is a microsoft only API, which only works with products bought from microsoft.

OpenGL was the first, and untill quite recently, wiped the floor with DirectX.

In my opinion, DirectX caught up, and started producing similar performace and quality to OpenGL around the time of the release of windowsXP. (remember Half-Life 1.0 on windows 98 ? ran smooth on OpenGL, and with several seconds of mouse lag on DirectX)

Today, OpenGL and DirectX are very similar in speed, and quality.

Competiton is a good thing, But Microsoft need to re-think there stance on OpenGL for windows Longhorn (vista)

Currently, in windowsXP, DIrectX is given a slight advantage by beeing built into the Operating system, OpenGL is a seperate module, and optional. But in Vista, they are planning to plain and simply kill off OpenGL.

Windows Longhorn (Vista) will..
1) NOT allow OpenGL applications to access the graphics card.

2) OpenGL applications will run on a *virtual graphics cars*, the Craphics card will use DirectX to Emulate OpenGL, causing an estimated 50% reduction in performance.

3) Untill recently, DIrectX had the more advanced Grphics Library, OpenGL recently released version 2.0, (only very new, expensive graphics cards support OpenGL 2.0 at themoment) which was to put OpenGL back in the lead.
Longhorn will LOCK the openGL emulation to un-optimised Vanilla version 1.4


Why i REALLY hate MS for this plan...

1) It is obviouse that MS is forcing developers to use ONLY DirectX. (for the performace, not openGL is crippled)

Developers like OpenGL because it is portable, OpenGL allows games to be poerted to Games COnsoles or other operating systems like MacOSX, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris....

But DirectX can ONLY be ported to MS's X-Box.

2) Since OpenGL applications will nolonger have direct access to the graphics card, then Graphics manufacturers may stop making OpenGL compatable graphics cards.

if this happens, Microsoft will have complete monopoly modern computer games.
Only MS producs will have accelerated 3d graphics.

Okay, okay... so what's MS's excuse for sabotaging a rivals product on its operating system ?

the answer is.....

Windows is not capable of using both DirectX and OpenGL at the same time.
Meaning starting up an OpenGL application would cause the special desktop effects lik transparent menu's to be tempreraly dissabled.

GRRRR... !!!

1) When OpenGL applicatons (screen savers / full screen games) are running, the user wont be looking at the cool new pointless fading effects.

2) I would rather have a NON-trasparent "start" menu than 50% graphical performace drop.

3) WHY?
Why cant windows use 2 different graphics API's at the same time ?
Xorg in Linux can !!!
surely this is a weakness of the operating system, and should be fixed rather than exploited to remove a rival company.

Im no lawyer.... but SURELY this is going to cause a huge, and totally un-winable Anti-Trust lawsuit for microsoft.

what do you guys think ?

Another Microsoft's illegal practices, predatory selling. Where it targets competitors and completely wipes them out. Therefore, OpenGL will sue them as usual.

Go OpenGL! I like their API better anyways.

xboxrulz

Welll I agree with your arguments, the only thing i can say for ms part is that they have been working a lot In Vista... years, and they still have 1 more year until release, im sure they took this decision cause they have something up their sleaves. I say lets just wait and look in the future.

Like i said, Its not difficult to use OpenGL AND DirectX at the same time.. Windows 98 could do it, as could Windows 2000, as can windowsXP.

There is NO need to laer OpenGL over DIrectX, there is no Benefit in using OpenGL over directX.

there is no need or point in....
Locking OpenGL to an old version (1.4)
Wasting CPU time *translating* Old OpenGL to DirectX

Microsoft are sabotaging a rivals product, making it apear to be much xloser than it really is, shielding new versions of OpenGL from its customers, And attempting to gain anouther Monopely.

They are not competing fairly, they are damaging inovation, and DELIBRATLY selling there customers a broken product, to turn them onto the MS version.

When Vista comes out, benchmarks will show computer gamers benchmarks of OpenGL vs DirectX, show that DIrectX is 50% faster, in turn causing game customers to demand DirectX from developers, attempting to put an end to OpenGL, and make it even harder to port Software to other *NON MICROSOFT* platforms.

MS has always *cheated* a little with OpenGL, for example, OpenGL is now on version 1.5 (version 2.0 if you have a super new card) But MS Windows still only supports version 1.1 of OpenGL.

but now they have gone too far.



HOPEFULLY, Ms will be bullied into fixing their policy on OpenGL.
Both ATI and NVIDIA (Especially Nvidia, who are at the top as far as OpenGL is concerned) are talking with MS to *resolve* this issue.

Link from NVIDIA's news site http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=54837

Wow man, you wrote alot of stuff there. I find that Direct X works faster for me but OpenGL looks better... Hmmmm... I don't even know what this post is about. Uhhhh, GO DIRECT3D!!! And DIRECT X!!! WOOT!

Knowing Microsoft, what will probably happen is one of three things.

The least likely is that Microsoft will capitulate and the issue will be resolved.

The next least likely is that there will be OpenGL compatible drivers written by the hardware manufacturers that either a) allow full OpenGL and DirectX support or OpenGL will be added to the cards directly and achieved through BIOS calls, which is slow, but not as slow as translating OpenGL into DirectX.

The most probable resolution is that Vista will be released without OpenGL support, but a later update or Service Pack will add support in.

Just my two cents, but looking at Microsoft's history with similar problems, I feel it is semi-accurate.

Personally, I like OpenGL and ma currently working on a programming language that allows for direct calls to both OpenGL and DirectX without requiring an external library, so this new tact by Microsoft really makes me mad.

~Viz

I dont like where MS is going with its operating systems.

For example, i read that the vista kernel will not allow access to the CD-ROM drives, except though the kernel's filesytem drivers.

This means it will be much more difficult to *rip* audio cd's into compressed mp3's.
Put an audio cd into windows, and try to browse the disk, all you can see is shortcuts to the music files, you cannot drag copy the music onto thje hard disk.

This is the current copy protection.

CD-Rippers work by ignoreing the filesystem on the CD, and directly accessing the raw data on the disk.

so to rip a CD in vista, you will need to install a *hacked* cd-rom driver of some sort that will allow direct UNIX style disk access ( similar to /dev/cdrom ).
And im pretty sure this Trusted computing thing will prevent users from installing kernel level drivers that havent beem digitally signed by the pope.

I agree that the end result is good, it makes it slightly harder to distribute copyrighted material, but it limits the users ability to do *cool things*

for example, write encrypting cd's.

I want my computer to do what i tell it to do, true, somtimes ripping cd's is illegal, but sometimes its not. Dont tred on everyones rights, just to slightly inconvinience a few criminals.

Microsoft, the name was derived from the small sized, tight memory applications that they had to build during the early stages. It was all about softwares back then and today its more about business. Besides, their softwares and OS have become immensely hungry for resources, be it Primary or Secondary Memory or the recently required Graphics card with pixel shader 2.0.

Shouldn't they be executing this command:-

NAME "Microsoft", "Gigabiz"

I liked OpenGL anyway. I'm also not liking where Microsoft is going with their operating systems this is exactly why I'm switching over to Apple in a couple of weeks.

Why can't they stop another product from running on it, it's there software isn' it.

I can try and stop hackers from modifying my software and it's intended purpose .

Why the hell do we need 2 graphics API's anyway, if both operating system and graphical hardware dropped support, that's less work, less trouble, less interference, less bloat, and maybe even a bit less money to fork out.

How is that a bad thing .

But maybe they should be using something like OpenGL that isn't controlled by Microsoft..... ahh well.