OpenGL versus DirectX - Linux

This is a discussion on OpenGL versus DirectX - Linux ; On Oct 12, 11:06*pm, Hadron wrote: > > They frequently conduct User feedback projects. They worked WITH the > games writers and the Video HW designers. > Microsoft absolutely did NOT listen to games writers or HW designers. The games ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 74

Thread: OpenGL versus DirectX

  1. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    On Oct 12, 11:06*pm, Hadron wrote:
    >
    > They frequently conduct User feedback projects. They worked WITH the
    > games writers and the Video HW designers.
    >


    Microsoft absolutely did NOT listen to games writers
    or HW designers. The games writers even wrote
    open letters and signed petitions calling on Microsoft
    to dump the godawful Direct3D and get behind OpenGL
    instead. These are big games companies and even
    people like John Carmack were on the list:

    http://chrishecker.com/OpenGL/Press_Release

    What Microsoft did instead was to join all the OpenGL
    organizations they could and spend the whole time
    promising that they would full embrace OpenGL...

    ....but what they were really doing was trying to sabotage
    it, e.g. project Fahrenheit which would have brought
    SGI's high performance scene graph to OpenGL PCs
    - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_graphics_API

    And remember Windows Vista? It took yet another
    industry outcry and petition to get them to support
    OpenGL on Vista. Microsoft wanted to cripple it (restrict
    it to OpenGL 1.4 - no vertex buffers, no shaders, no
    nothing...) and told us lies about this being done for
    technical reasons (something which ATI and NVIDIA
    both denied).

    Eventually they caved, but should this even be necessary...?

    http://digg.com/tech_news/Microsoft_..._Vista_support


    Microsoft listens to users/developers? Yeah, right...



    --
    <\___/>
    / O O \
    \_____/ FTB.

    http://www.topaz3d.com/ - New 3D editor!


  2. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    Hadron wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Köhlmann writes:
    >>>
    >>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Jerry McBride writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Matt writes:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Apparently, OpenGL needs help from something like SDL to handle
    >>>>>>>>> keyboard and joystick events.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I don't know that OpenGL handles any joystick events. Keyboard
    >>>>>>>> events can be handled by a user-supplied callback registered using
    >>>>>>>> GLUT's or Freeglut's glutKeyboardFunc.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> DirectX found favour.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> MS courted and listened to what people wanted and needed.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Bulls****... Microsoft NEVER listened to their customers... except
    >>>>>> when there's a huge swell of anger and disappointment... That why a
    >>>>>> windows weenie and STILL buy windows xp instead of vista... and they
    >>>>>> pay extra to do it... hehehahhahahha
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You have no idea what you are talking about.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> None.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> They frequently conduct User feedback projects. They worked WITH the
    >>>>> games writers and the Video HW designers.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You don't know. No surprise there.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> That simply *has* to be the reason for XPs "activation". Or the very
    >>>> much hated DRM of Vista. Or Vistas UAC, which is universally shunned
    >>>> for its intrusiveness.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, MS is /obviously/ listening to its customers...
    >>>
    >>> What are you talking about?

    >>
    >> Learn to read.
    >> I talk about windows users. You know, those you mentioned with
    >> your "feedback" claim

    >
    > It was no claim. It was fact. But you being the loony you are now start
    > waffling on about DRM. MS do do certain things many users do not like. I
    > daresay they have their reasons. They also do do many feedback
    > programs. Only a complete idiot would deny that.
    >

    They do a lot of "programs". Question is, did they actually heed the
    results?
    Why did the revamp the UI of MS Office? Most people I know absolutely hate
    the changed UI, as they have gotten used to the established Office UI

    MS can claim all they want about "better UI". It still does not explain why
    *all* users should learn a new UI

    >>> I gave examples of how they do and how that has benefited development of
    >>> Video HW and entertainment SW.

    >>
    >> Yes. And they publish a new API and later tell people that it is dead.
    >> Happened more than once.
    >> Lots of talk to the very much surprised developers took place,
    >> obviously...

    >
    > You are moving goalposts. APIs change Live with it.


    Well, there is a slight difference between a "changed API" and a "dead one"

    >>
    >>> DRM is something other people wanted MS to include. For legal
    >>> reaons.

    >>
    >> They could as well have told them to take a hike
    >>
    >>> FWIW I think it sucks too.

    >>
    >> It certainly does, when you play a video you yourself made and Vista
    >> absolutely *demands* a secure connection to the screen.
    >> What DRM is there? None.
    >> What ledal reason is there? None
    >> What other reason is obviously there: MS incompetence and laziness.

    >
    > You know more about it that me. I use Debian.


    No. You /claim/ to use it.
    That does not mean that I would believe any of that.

    >>
    >> And they have *not* talked to and listened to their users with this ****.
    >> They simply ignored users wishes. Users be damned, they have already paid
    >> for this garbage

    >
    > You are a paranoid loser.
    >


    Really? In all the examples I provided, MS simply ignored or even acted
    *against* users wishes.
    So how come you can claim with a straight face that users are important to
    them? All they have done in the past shows that for MS users are only good
    for buying their latest incarnation of garbage
    --
    It is very difficult to prophesy, especially when it pertains to the
    future.


  3. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    After takin' a swig o' grog, fungus belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > On Oct 12, 1:09*am, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> DirectX found favour.
    >>
    >> MS courted and listened to what people wanted and needed.

    >
    > ...and locked you into a windows-only world where they
    > can produce things like Windows Vista without losing any
    > market share - it's waiting for you on all new PCs!.


    Does DirectX have the support of /anything/ like the Khronos Group?

    Is there more than one DirectX implementation?

    Anyway, there's a fungus among us, and he makes a good point: is a
    developer convenience worth being locked to a single vendor, even one as
    viable as Microsoft?

    That's a question each game maker has to answer. It may well be that
    DirectX carries the day simply because of Microsoft's dominance in
    numbers?

    > --
    > <\___/>
    > / O O \
    > \_____/ FTB.
    >
    > http://www.topaz3d.com/ - New 3D editor!



    --
    A day without sunshine is like a day without Anita Bryant.

  4. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    After takin' a swig o' grog, fungus belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > On Oct 12, 11:06*pm, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> They frequently conduct User feedback projects. They worked WITH the
    >> games writers and the Video HW designers.

    >
    > Microsoft absolutely did NOT listen to games writers
    > or HW designers. The games writers even wrote
    > open letters and signed petitions calling on Microsoft
    > to dump the godawful Direct3D and get behind OpenGL
    > instead. These are big games companies and even
    > people like John Carmack were on the list:
    >
    > http://chrishecker.com/OpenGL/Press_Release
    >
    > What Microsoft did instead was to join all the OpenGL
    > organizations they could and spend the whole time
    > promising that they would full embrace OpenGL...
    >
    > ...but what they were really doing was trying to sabotage
    > it, e.g. project Fahrenheit which would have brought
    > SGI's high performance scene graph to OpenGL PCs
    > - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_graphics_API


    "By 1999 it was clear that Microsoft had no intention of delivering
    Low Level; although officially working on it, almost no resources
    were dedicated to actually producing code.[11] At the same time
    Microsoft was in the process of massively investing in DirectX 7.0
    (similar to 3.0 largely in name only). Without Low Level, Fahrenheit
    couldn't be delivered on Windows, and the project stalled."

    Wow. Sounds like Microsoft's duplicitous ass-dragging on OS/2 versus
    Win 3.0 all over again.

    What a surprise to learn that Hadron is either talking out his nether
    orifice, or, to be fair, perhaps thinking of Microsoft's solicitude
    /after/ they locked up the market for gaming APIs on Windows.

    > And remember Windows Vista? It took yet another
    > industry outcry and petition to get them to support
    > OpenGL on Vista. Microsoft wanted to cripple it (restrict
    > it to OpenGL 1.4 - no vertex buffers, no shaders, no
    > nothing...) and told us lies about this being done for
    > technical reasons (something which ATI and NVIDIA
    > both denied).
    >
    > Eventually they caved, but should this even be necessary...?
    >
    > http://digg.com/tech_news/Microsoft_..._Vista_support
    >
    > Microsoft listens to users/developers? Yeah, right...


    They listen if they developers are proven Microsoft fans .

    --
    To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a
    test load.

  5. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 16:35:04 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Matt writes:
    >>
    >>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Apparently, OpenGL needs help from something like SDL to handle keyboard
    >>>> and joystick events.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I don't know that OpenGL handles any joystick events. Keyboard events
    >>> can be handled by a user-supplied callback registered using GLUT's or
    >>> Freeglut's glutKeyboardFunc.

    >>
    >> DirectX found favour.
    >>
    >> MS courted and listened to what people wanted and needed.
    >>

    >
    >
    > Bulls****... Microsoft NEVER listened to their customers... except when
    > there's a huge swell of anger and disappointment... That why a windows
    > weenie and STILL buy windows xp instead of vista... and they pay extra to
    > do it... hehehahhahahha


    You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.
    Microsoft regularly has people in their labs testing user interfaces and
    programs to uncover patterns, problems etc.
    They conduct surveys all the time.
    At just about every trade show they have a set up where they do stuff like
    the above and give away trinkets to people who volunteer to participate.

    That's why most Microsoft programs don't have the obvious gotcha's that
    Linux ones do.
    You know, like installing a program and now not seeing an icon to launch
    the program.
    SOP for Linux.
    You'll never see that happen with Windows unless it's some one file utility
    program or something like that.

    The problem with Linux is that you guys test all the wrong stuff.
    I'm sure the typical 8 editor programs included with typical Linux
    distributions work, but something like a map program or a GPS program will
    be a trial in patience to get working.

    And guess what?

    As Linux is becoming more mainstream, thanks to Ubuntu, all of this is
    coming out on the table because average people don't give a hoot about
    compiling kernels and learning to use vi.
    They want to install a program, click on the icon/menu item and run it.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  6. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:55:50 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Peter Khlmann writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Khlmann writes:
    >>>
    >>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Jerry McBride writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Matt writes:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Apparently, OpenGL needs help from something like SDL to handle
    >>>>>>>>> keyboard and joystick events.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I don't know that OpenGL handles any joystick events. Keyboard
    >>>>>>>> events can be handled by a user-supplied callback registered using
    >>>>>>>> GLUT's or Freeglut's glutKeyboardFunc.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> DirectX found favour.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> MS courted and listened to what people wanted and needed.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Bulls****... Microsoft NEVER listened to their customers... except when
    >>>>>> there's a huge swell of anger and disappointment... That why a windows
    >>>>>> weenie and STILL buy windows xp instead of vista... and they pay extra
    >>>>>> to do it... hehehahhahahha
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You have no idea what you are talking about.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> None.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> They frequently conduct User feedback projects. They worked WITH the
    >>>>> games writers and the Video HW designers.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You don't know. No surprise there.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> That simply *has* to be the reason for XPs "activation". Or the very much
    >>>> hated DRM of Vista. Or Vistas UAC, which is universally shunned for its
    >>>> intrusiveness.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, MS is /obviously/ listening to its customers...
    >>>
    >>> What are you talking about?

    >>
    >> Learn to read.
    >> I talk about windows users. You know, those you mentioned with
    >> your "feedback" claim

    >
    > It was no claim. It was fact. But you being the loony you are now start
    > waffling on about DRM. MS do do certain things many users do not like. I
    > daresay they have their reasons. They also do do many feedback
    > programs. Only a complete idiot would deny that.


    With Koalmann the goalposts grow legs after the first response.

    >>
    >>> I gave examples of how they do and how that has benefited development of
    >>> Video HW and entertainment SW.

    >>
    >> Yes. And they publish a new API and later tell people that it is dead.
    >> Happened more than once.
    >> Lots of talk to the very much surprised developers took place,
    >> obviously...

    >
    > You are moving goalposts. APIs change Live with it.


    He's doing Linux loon danceroo.

    >>
    >>> DRM is something other people wanted MS to include. For legal
    >>> reaons.

    >>
    >> They could as well have told them to take a hike
    >>
    >>> FWIW I think it sucks too.

    >>
    >> It certainly does, when you play a video you yourself made and Vista
    >> absolutely *demands* a secure connection to the screen.
    >> What DRM is there? None.
    >> What ledal reason is there? None
    >> What other reason is obviously there: MS incompetence and laziness.

    >
    > You know more about it that me. I use Debian.


    Hahahah!


    >>
    >> And they have *not* talked to and listened to their users with this ****.
    >> They simply ignored users wishes. Users be damned, they have already paid
    >> for this garbage

    >
    > You are a paranoid loser.


    He's definitely got an anger management problem.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  7. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    fungus writes:

    > On Oct 12, 11:06*pm, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> They frequently conduct User feedback projects. They worked WITH the
    >> games writers and the Video HW designers.
    >>

    >
    > Microsoft absolutely did NOT listen to games writers
    > or HW designers. The games writers even wrote
    > open letters and signed petitions calling on Microsoft
    > to dump the godawful Direct3D and get behind OpenGL
    > instead. These are big games companies and even
    > people like John Carmack were on the list:


    No. John Carmack was one of the few.

    Let me put it this way : they wanted to develop their OWN API so they
    would be in charge of getting it improved. And for THIS reason they
    worked with the developers and the HW manufacturers.

    >
    > http://chrishecker.com/OpenGL/Press_Release
    >
    > What Microsoft did instead was to join all the OpenGL
    > organizations they could and spend the whole time
    > promising that they would full embrace OpenGL...


    You do know OGL games have run fine on Windows?

    >
    > ...but what they were really doing was trying to sabotage
    > it, e.g. project Fahrenheit which would have brought
    > SGI's high performance scene graph to OpenGL PCs
    > - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_graphics_API


    Oh God. You are a loony. Fair enough.

    >
    > And remember Windows Vista? It took yet another
    > industry outcry and petition to get them to support
    > OpenGL on Vista. Microsoft wanted to cripple it (restrict
    > it to OpenGL 1.4 - no vertex buffers, no shaders, no
    > nothing...) and told us lies about this being done for
    > technical reasons (something which ATI and NVIDIA
    > both denied).
    >
    > Eventually they caved, but should this even be necessary...?
    >
    > http://digg.com/tech_news/Microsoft_..._Vista_support
    >
    >
    > Microsoft listens to users/developers? Yeah, right...


    You're biased.

    Yo want to know about video. Talk to Koehlmann. His knowledge is in the
    signature below.


    --
    "Do a screen-shot of a text. Now disable anti-aliasing. Do again screen-shot of same text. Compare both. They are exactly the same."
    Peter Koehlmann, COLA, explaining Anti Aliasing ....
    http://tinyurl.com/33672q

  8. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    Peter Khlmann wrote:


    > Really? In all the examples I provided, MS simply ignored or even
    > acted *against* users wishes.
    > So how come you can claim with a straight face that users are
    > important to them? All they have done in the past shows that for MS
    > users are only good for buying their latest incarnation of garbage


    Signed, Peter Kohlmann
    Lying Swine
    Lifelong Windows Developer
    Wouldn't Have It Any Other Way




  9. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    fungus wrote:
    > On Oct 12, 1:09 am, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> DirectX found favour.
    >>
    >> MS courted and listened to what people wanted and needed.
    >>

    >
    > ...and locked you into a windows-only world where they
    > can produce things like Windows Vista without losing any
    > market share - it's waiting for you on all new PCs!.



    The world GLADLY embraced - and continues to embrace - MS and Windows
    technologies.

    It's only a tiny handful of impotent Linux/OSS lusers who whine about
    Windows.




  10. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    Hadron wrote:

    > I use Debian.



    Yeah ... why do you do that?

  11. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    Matt wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> I use Debian.

    >
    >
    > Yeah ... why do you do that?


    He does not. He pretends to use it
    Installing it in a virtual machine goes a long way for trolling purposes
    --
    Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware


  12. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    >> ...and locked you into a windows-only world where they
    >> can produce things like Windows Vista without losing any
    >> market share - it's waiting for you on all new PCs!.

    >
    > Nobody is locking you into anything.
    > Use a Mac.
    > Use Linux.
    > Use BSD
    > Use OS/2.
    > Use Solaris.
    > etc..


    Using DirectX above version 8 practically locks you to Windows.
    WINE has only partial support for DX8, not to speak of DX9
    (though I expect, that there's going to be a fairly good clone
    of DX10 someday, as v10's design is much cleaner and better
    documented).

    Anyway: If you're designing your projects carefully, then it
    should be fairly easy to replace components like the renderer or
    user input subsystem. If you did it well, then you crafted
    carefully a slim abstraction layer around the core components,
    shielding any platform specific stuff.

    Last time I checked, that layer took about only 10% of my 3D
    engine's core code, about 20k LOC, also containing and
    abstracting stuff like access to the OS's memory management -
    malloc just isn't up to the job, when it comes to delayed
    loading of higher LOD levels, doing the job manually with
    mmap/mremap/munmap or VirtualAlloc/MemoryMove/VirtualFree is
    superior.

    Wolfgang Draxinger
    --
    E-Mail address works, Jabber: hexarith@jabber.org, ICQ: 134682867


  13. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Matt belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> I use Debian.

    >
    > Yeah ... why do you do that?


    Credibility innoculation.

    --
    Where there are visible vapors, having their prevenance in ignited
    carbonaceous materials, there is conflagration.

  14. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Khlmann belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > Matt wrote:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> I use Debian.

    >>
    >> Yeah ... why do you do that?

    >
    > He does not. He pretends to use it
    > Installing it in a virtual machine goes a long way for trolling purposes


    He knows Debian well enough to have screwed up his apt by mixing in etch
    backports with a lenny install.

    --
    If puns were deli meat, this would be the wurst.

  15. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    Peter Köhlmann writes:

    > Matt wrote:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> I use Debian.

    >>
    >>
    >> Yeah ... why do you do that?

    >
    > He does not. He pretends to use it
    > Installing it in a virtual machine goes a long way for trolling purposes


    And this virtual machine gave me all my knowledge about the video system
    hey Peter you paranoid twit?

    You know I use Debian. You KNOW I know more about it than the likes of
    High Plains Hypocrite and Liarmutt. God knows I have corrected them
    enough about it. And I certainly know more about it than you.

    Don't confuse laughing at COLA "advocates" as disliking Linux.

    --
    "The Linux community re-invents the wheel every month or so. The only
    problem is, their version is square"
    -- "Moshe Goldfarb." in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  16. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:13:33 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Khlmann belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Matt wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I use Debian.
    >>>
    >>> Yeah ... why do you do that?

    >>
    >> He does not. He pretends to use it
    >> Installing it in a virtual machine goes a long way for trolling purposes

    >
    > He knows Debian well enough to have screwed up his apt by mixing in etch
    > backports with a lenny install.


    Why am I not surprised at that.

  17. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 02:07:48 +0200, Peter Khlmann wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Peter Khlmann writes:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Peter Khlmann writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Jerry McBride writes:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Matt writes:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Apparently, OpenGL needs help from something like SDL to handle
    >>>>>>>>>> keyboard and joystick events.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> I don't know that OpenGL handles any joystick events. Keyboard
    >>>>>>>>> events can be handled by a user-supplied callback registered using
    >>>>>>>>> GLUT's or Freeglut's glutKeyboardFunc.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> DirectX found favour.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> MS courted and listened to what people wanted and needed.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Bulls****... Microsoft NEVER listened to their customers... except
    >>>>>>> when there's a huge swell of anger and disappointment... That why a
    >>>>>>> windows weenie and STILL buy windows xp instead of vista... and they
    >>>>>>> pay extra to do it... hehehahhahahha
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You have no idea what you are talking about.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> None.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> They frequently conduct User feedback projects. They worked WITH the
    >>>>>> games writers and the Video HW designers.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You don't know. No surprise there.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> That simply *has* to be the reason for XPs "activation". Or the very
    >>>>> much hated DRM of Vista. Or Vistas UAC, which is universally shunned
    >>>>> for its intrusiveness.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yes, MS is /obviously/ listening to its customers...
    >>>>
    >>>> What are you talking about?
    >>>
    >>> Learn to read.
    >>> I talk about windows users. You know, those you mentioned with
    >>> your "feedback" claim

    >>
    >> It was no claim. It was fact. But you being the loony you are now start
    >> waffling on about DRM. MS do do certain things many users do not like. I
    >> daresay they have their reasons. They also do do many feedback
    >> programs. Only a complete idiot would deny that.
    >>

    > They do a lot of "programs". Question is, did they actually heed the
    > results?
    > Why did the revamp the UI of MS Office? Most people I know absolutely hate
    > the changed UI, as they have gotten used to the established Office UI
    >
    > MS can claim all they want about "better UI". It still does not explain why
    > *all* users should learn a new UI
    >
    >>>> I gave examples of how they do and how that has benefited development of
    >>>> Video HW and entertainment SW.
    >>>
    >>> Yes. And they publish a new API and later tell people that it is dead.
    >>> Happened more than once.
    >>> Lots of talk to the very much surprised developers took place,
    >>> obviously...

    >>
    >> You are moving goalposts. APIs change Live with it.

    >
    > Well, there is a slight difference between a "changed API" and a "dead one"
    >
    >>>
    >>>> DRM is something other people wanted MS to include. For legal
    >>>> reaons.
    >>>
    >>> They could as well have told them to take a hike
    >>>
    >>>> FWIW I think it sucks too.
    >>>
    >>> It certainly does, when you play a video you yourself made and Vista
    >>> absolutely *demands* a secure connection to the screen.
    >>> What DRM is there? None.
    >>> What ledal reason is there? None
    >>> What other reason is obviously there: MS incompetence and laziness.

    >>
    >> You know more about it that me. I use Debian.

    >
    > No. You /claim/ to use it.
    > That does not mean that I would believe any of that.


    Few do.

    >>> And they have *not* talked to and listened to their users with this ****.
    >>> They simply ignored users wishes. Users be damned, they have already paid
    >>> for this garbage

    >>
    >> You are a paranoid loser.
    >>

    >
    > Really? In all the examples I provided, MS simply ignored or even acted
    > *against* users wishes.
    > So how come you can claim with a straight face that users are important to
    > them? All they have done in the past shows that for MS users are only good
    > for buying their latest incarnation of garbage


    Uh, yeah. M$ listen to their users alright:
    Think You Own Your Computer? Think Twice. Microsoft Shows Whos Boss.
    http://www.zoliblog.com/2007/09/14/y...-whos-boss/You


  18. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    Hadron wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann writes:
    >
    >> Matt wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I use Debian.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Yeah ... why do you do that?

    >>
    >> He does not. He pretends to use it
    >> Installing it in a virtual machine goes a long way for trolling purposes

    >
    > And this virtual machine gave me all my knowledge about the video system
    > hey Peter you paranoid twit?
    >
    > You know I use Debian.


    Nope. I know that your knowledge about linux is very limited. That you use
    Debian I simply do *not* know. And I believe none of it

    > You KNOW I know more about it than the likes of
    > High Plains Hypocrite and Liarmutt.


    Another thing I do *not* know. You have shown yourself too often as quite
    clueless about linux. They on the other hand have often enough posted
    articles where it could be seen that thewy indeed know their way around
    with linux

    > God knows I have corrected them enough about it.


    You did nothing of that sort. Using the Snot Glasser method of claiming
    to "have someone educated" when you learned the very same knowledge just
    then (and often enough by the very person you "educated") isn't going to
    work. You are a liar

    > And I certainly know more about it than you.


    Now that is really hilarious. Even *if* you started using linux about 2
    years ago (you didn't), that would give me a headstart of more than 8 years

    > Don't confuse laughing at COLA "advocates" as disliking Linux.
    >


    You are laughing at nobody. You try to insult anybody with your trash. Part
    of the reason is your extreme jealousy about anyone who achieved something
    in life.
    --
    What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth? Judging from realistic
    simulations involving a sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog,
    we can assume it will be pretty bad. --- Dave Barry


  19. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    William Poaster writes:

    > On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:13:33 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>> Matt wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> I use Debian.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yeah ... why do you do that?
    >>>
    >>> He does not. He pretends to use it
    >>> Installing it in a virtual machine goes a long way for trolling purposes

    >>
    >> He knows Debian well enough to have screwed up his apt by mixing in etch
    >> backports with a lenny install.

    >
    > Why am I not surprised at that.


    At Liarmutt telling lies?

    I brought Unstable components into Lenny. Different thing all
    together. Why? Because somethings come into unstable and take ages to
    move to testing (Lenny) and so you're screwed with newer HW at times.

    So : Cola Advocates tell lies and get caught out again.

    I also schooled him (politely enough to start) about him giving wrong
    advice on using NVidia installers on Debian systems. But he is trying to
    rewrite history, the sad little sycophantic arse kisser that he is.

    FWIW, Pinning/Backports etc are very powerful.

    --
    o how do we destroy Microsoft?"
    -- An unknown author in unknown

  20. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    On Oct 13, 4:19*am, Hadron wrote:
    >
    > Let me put it this way : they wanted to develop their OWN API so they
    > would be in charge of getting it improved. And for THIS reason they
    > worked with the developers and the HW manufacturers.
    >




    No they didn't, if that's what they wanted they'd have done the
    "embrace and extend" thing.

    OpenGL was cutting-edge technology back then, games developers
    were demanding it for Windows (OpenGL was already widely used
    under DOS on 3dfx cards).

    Microsoft already had OpenGL working in Windows NT 3.1, why
    would they refuse to put in in Windows 95 (until SP2) and instead
    go out and buy a crappy software renderer (ie. Renderware) and
    drag everybody through the process of gradually deprecating it
    and ending up with an API equivalent to OpenGL...

    ....just so that "they would be in charge of improvements"?

    Microsoft was a founding member of the OpenGL ARB and
    initially did some good work there - right up until somebody
    high up gave the order to obstruct OpenGL at all costs.

    Read the whole story here:

    http://www.azillionmonkeys.com/windo...sDirect3D.html



    > You do know OGL games have run fine on Windows?
    >


    Duh!

    The point is they could have run better and three or four
    years sooner - if Microsoft had just *listened* to what
    everybody was telling them instead of dragging the industry
    down into the festering bog which was early Direct3D.

    > You're biased.


    Why? Because I don't drink the Microsoft kool-aid?


    --
    <\___/>
    / O O \
    \_____/ FTB.

    http://www.topaz3d.com/ - New 3D editor!


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast