OSNews:

Comment by Tomasz Dominikowski

donotreply@osnews.com (Tomasz Dominikowski) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:33:00 GMT

It should be noted that a few hours after publishing the specs, NVIDIA has released drivers that support OpenGL 3.1 (Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris) http://developer.nvidia.com/object/opengl_3_driver.html#dl

OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (adkilla) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:45:00 GMT

The more interesting bit of news on the announcement was this:

The newest standard they'll be tackling is an API for accelerated 3D on the web.

The link in that announcement then leads to an even more interesting bit of news:

The working group will consider various approaches including exposing OpenGL and OpenGL ES 2.0 capabilities within ECMAScript.
.
.
Mozilla has proposed exposing the OpenGL ES 2.0 API and capabilities to an ECMAScript container such as a web browser to enable the development of cross-platform 3D-capable web applications. The working group will consider this and other proposals and any contributions from other working group members.

Eat your heart out DirectXXX!

-AdEdited 2009-03-25 13:46 UTC

RE: OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (ba1l) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 15:17:00 GMT

Eat your heart out DirectXXX!

If, and only if, this can somehow be supported in IE as well. Otherwise, it's going to be yet another useful feature available in everything except IE, which is therefore nearly useless.

Maybe something like the ActiveX plug-in implementation of Firefox's Canvas element would work? Maybe a "make IE work correctly" plugin, to add support for 2D- and 3D- drawing, video and audio, and all the other neat stuff Microsoft will probably never implement.

RE[2]: OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (sbergman27) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 15:48:00 GMT

If, and only if, this can somehow be supported in IE as well. Otherwise, it's going to be yet another useful feature available in everything except IE, which is therefore nearly useless.

1999 called. They want IE's 95% market share back. IE has sixty-some-odd percent of market share these days.Edited 2009-03-25 15:48 UTC

RE[3]: OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (leos) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:09:00 GMT

1999 called. They want IE's 95% market share back. IE has sixty-some-odd percent of market share these days.

No difference. Would you want to create a website that doesn't work for 60% of web users? Unless your site is targeted exclusively at Linux/Mac users, or is a pure hobby site, IE still needs to be supported.

RE[4]: OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (sbergman27) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:22:00 GMT

No difference. Would you want to create a website that doesn't work for 60% of web users?

Depends on the site. For many sites, it would be quite acceptable to make the page itself viewable with IE, minus the 3D content, and then slap a "Best viewed with Mozilla Firefox! (You get to see the 3D.)" link at the bottom leading to getfirefox.com. Sure, it would be better if IE were < 50%. But there is, indeed, a substantial practical difference between < 60% IE market share and > 95% IE market share. If MS ends up dragged into supporting a standard because other browsers support it, I call it a win for everyone.Edited 2009-03-25 16:22 UTC

RE[5]: OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (adkilla) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:01:00 GMT

Well if Microsoft wants to pooh-pooh it let them. I would like to see cross-platform online gaming become a reality. Enough with heavy gaming clients that are Windoze only!

With Google heavily backing it, I could care less about Microshaft!

-Ad

RE[5]: OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (danieldk) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:38:00 GMT

Sure, it would be better if IE were < 50%. But there is, indeed, a substantial practical difference between < 60% IE market share and > 95% IE market share. If MS ends up dragged into supporting a standard because other browsers support it, I call it a win for everyone.

I fully agree. How many programs require installation of the .NET framework? Plenty (as a non-Windows user I got dragged through that hell running Windows in a VM). A Firefox download for Windows is, what? 7 MB? The big difference between .NET or ActiveX is of course that Firefox works on nearly every non-mobile platform.

It could be an opportunity to get even more market share Microsoft-style. But this time it is cross-platform FLOSS software.

RE: OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (tyrione) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:55:00 GMT

The more interesting bit of news on the announcement was this:
"The newest standard they'll be tackling is an API for accelerated 3D on the web.

The link in that announcement then leads to an even more interesting bit of news:

The working group will consider various approaches including exposing OpenGL and OpenGL ES 2.0 capabilities within ECMAScript.
.
.
Mozilla has proposed exposing the OpenGL ES 2.0 API and capabilities to an ECMAScript container such as a web browser to enable the development of cross-platform 3D-capable web applications. The working group will consider this and other proposals and any contributions from other working group members.

Eat your heart out DirectXXX!

-Ad "

Thatll be great to leverage. However, give me the new API and it's Object Model which has been the biggest gripe by the community so we can now silence their complaints and move forward.

RE[2]: OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (Wrawrat) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:15:00 GMT

However, give me the new API and it's Object Model which has been the biggest gripe by the community so we can now silence their complaints and move forward.

It kinda sucks that the Khronos Group seem to tackle any issue they encounter, except that one. I wouldn't be surprised if the object model doesn't ever see the light of the day because of some influent vendor that doesn't want to update its codebase.

Hell, I wouldn't even think about giving a try to DirectX if they had released the original Longs Peak proposal. I dislike proprietary standards, but at least DirectX is going forward...

RE[6]: OpenGL on the Web

donotreply@osnews.com (Wrawrat) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:27:00 GMT

Well if Microsoft wants to pooh-pooh it let them. I would like to see cross-platform online gaming become a reality. Enough with heavy gaming clients that are Windoze only!

As far as I am concerned, adding 3D support in the browser is a bad idea. It's just going to add even more complexity to a browser, like they weren't already enough vulnerables. Anyway, ECMAscript won't bring "heavy gaming clients" in your browser...

Personally, I believe pushing OpenGL in Java would be a better idea. There are already some JNIs to OpenGL, the Java VM isn't a vulnerability fest, it would be faster than interpreting ECMAscript and Java is available on many platforms. Why are they reinventing the wheel? Oh well.Edited 2009-03-25 22:28 UTC