Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 11th Mar 2010 18:52 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
3D News, GL, DirectX "Khronos Group, the association behind OpenGL, has today announced the fourth generation of its cross-platform API spec, which takes up the mantle of offering a viable competitor to Microsoft's DirectX 11. The latest release includes two new shader stages for offloading geometry tessellation from the CPU to the GPU, as well as tighter integration with OpenCL to allow the graphics card to take up yet more duties off the typically overworked processor."
Thread beginning with comment 413380
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Directx
by deathshadow on Fri 12th Mar 2010 09:38 UTC in reply to "Directx"
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

if Linux had viable choice for Directx as whole

Don't forget "and viable video drivers that were easy to configure and delivered 100% of the hardware performance, instead of 60% and having to turn off all the 'extras' if you want to run more than one display.

But of course without a stable hardware API making hardware vendors WILLING to write drivers for it, instead of relying on people who just "feel like working on it out of the goodness of their hearts" that's never going to happen.

Let's be honest - Look at Windows 98 and MacOs 5, and they BOTH make X11 implementations look like a total joke when it comes to running more than one display at a time. You put 3d in the mix, and DXGI blows anything even PLANNED for OpenGL on any platform out of the water!

Edited 2010-03-12 09:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Directx
by Laurence on Fri 12th Mar 2010 15:38 in reply to "RE: Directx"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Oh for crying out loud - talk about people taking extremes of POV.

Kishe: you're comments are so optimistically thinking that there's not even remotely based on reality.

1/ who's going to tell all the gamers to switch platforms once they've got their gaming machine set up? I certainly can't see them formatting their machines any time soon.

2/ who's going to tell hardware manufacturers that they need to invest time getting all of their hardware drivers up to scratch. Sure, they're probably about 75% there, but in gaming FPS matters and that 25% loss of advanced chip set functionality would end up being a deal breaker for many gamers who spent a small fortune on hardware.

3/ who's going to tell the games developers that they need to re-program all of their current games for a completely different platform for free? (they're not going to get much income for it as you're talking about 50% of an existing Windows market share plus whatever casual gamers Linux has).

4/ who's going to tell all of the above that they've only got 4 week in which to perform the migration?

Utter madness.


deathshadow: you're not exactly being level-headed either.
Though you're comments have much more basis on facts, you're still somewhat overstating the reality.

1/ Video card drivers are easy to set up in Linux. In fact, even in Slackware I had little troubles.

2/ re:dual head graphics cards: How many Windows gamers use multiple monitors in games? Very very few is the answer. So why even bring up twin-views in a thread about gaming? All you're doing is attacking a platform for the sake of attacking it - so how about we concentrate on the real issues instead?




The reality for OpenGL is somewhere inbetween both your comments.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Directx
by Zifre on Fri 12th Mar 2010 22:17 in reply to "RE[2]: Directx"
Zifre Member since:
2009-10-04

I wish I could vote you up 100 times. I hate it when people take such extreme positions and bend facts to their personal agenda...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Directx
by WereCatf on Sun 14th Mar 2010 12:03 in reply to "RE: Directx"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Don't forget "and viable video drivers that were easy to configure and delivered 100% of the hardware performance, instead of 60% and having to turn off all the 'extras' if you want to run more than one display.

I VERY rarely agree with deathshadow as he is just a plain old bitter troll trying to bash Linux whenenver possible using any dirty arguments and "facts" taken out of his arse.

But here... well, I just installed Linux back cos I wanted to try something. I had also obtained a second monitor just recently and thought to try it out. Turned out that whenever I tried to turn on the second monitor in anything other than clone mode I got an error about the resolution being too high. I could get them both working if I set it to 640x480, but that's just unacceptable. After some time messing around and googling I found out I had to manually add "Virtual" "2560x1024" to xorg.conf to get it working properly!

And then... when I had both monitors working fine I found out my graphics card doesn't support shader programs under Linux and lacks several other features that all work properly under Windows. And that if I enable Compiz (ie. 3D desktop effects) it will leave part of my freaking desktop undrawn because the width of it is over 2048...

My graphics card isn't the latest and greatest so I assume that's why there are still features missing, but don't people usually make the claim that open-source drivers are the best one can have and all that? And how about multi-monitor setups? Those are not uncommon and it's still this flaky..

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Directx
by Laurence on Sun 14th Mar 2010 16:55 in reply to "RE[2]: Directx"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


My graphics card isn't the latest and greatest so I assume that's why there are still features missing, but don't people usually make the claim that open-source drivers are the best one can have and all that? And how about multi-monitor setups? Those are not uncommon and it's still this flaky..


The propitiatory drivers are much much better than the open source ones when it comes to graphics cards.

Which makes sense when you think about it as you'd expect manufacturers drivers to be better than Microsoft's own graphics drivers in Windows as well.

You'd expect the chip set makers to know the hardware better than the guys reverse engineering it.

Reply Parent Score: 2