OpenGL versus DirectX - Linux

This is a discussion on OpenGL versus DirectX - Linux ; In light of my recent comments, it appears that both are steeped in history, though OpenGL's transmutations have probably been a little less disruptive than Direct3D's (the 3D variant of DirectX; I've no idea as to the precise Linux equivalent ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 74

Thread: OpenGL versus DirectX

  1. OpenGL versus DirectX

    In light of my recent comments, it appears that both are
    steeped in history, though OpenGL's transmutations have
    probably been a little less disruptive than Direct3D's
    (the 3D variant of DirectX; I've no idea as to the precise
    Linux equivalent though suspect SDL might work in a pinch).
    There's probably a number of SGI GL demonstrator programs
    *that still work*, for example. (The only one I remember
    is a 3D asteroids game.)

    Apparently it's only older versions of Direct3D that were
    cumbersome to use; modern versions are almost as good as OpenGL,
    according to

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...L_and_Direct3D

    except for the little issue of Direct3D's portability, which
    continues to frustrate non-Windows developers of course.

    http://www.gamedev.net/reference/art...rticle1775.asp

    might also be useful.

    One item hampering OpenGL's adoption in gaming is just that:
    OpenGL was originally designed for higher-end CAD systems,
    not gaming platforms. This may turn out to be an advantage,
    though.

    OpenGL's extensions can be queried (somewhat like X's), and
    the game engine can take appropriate actions if it sees an
    extension it likes, or cannot find an extension it prefers.
    DirectX doesn't have quite this capability, though it can
    use (and indeed depends on) COM in a pinch; in fact, COM
    method calls appear to be *versioned* and immutable. (This
    may be one reason why we see Direct3D 3, 5, etc. etc.; the
    newer versions introduce more functionality.)

    One strength: pixel shaders in DirectX appear to be better
    developed than in OpenGL, though the 2.0 version in OpenGL
    at least is sane now. (I don't know how well my nx9010
    supports them.)

    A feature comparison up to 8 is available at:

    http://newsletters.hagerman.com/news.../ebul60-WP.htm

    Near the bottom, one notes that OpenGL does *not* offer
    multiple monitor support. (It's not clear that it needs
    to; presumably such can be had transparently by using
    X's built-in multiple screen support. I've not gotten
    multiple monitor support quite working in X yet myself so
    can't test this. I'll admit I'm not sure I really need it
    or not; it might be nice if I'm debugging something to have
    the OpenGL on the main screen with debug/control console/info
    on the laptop's display screen.)

    For what all this is worth.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Linux. An OS which actually, unlike certain other offerings, works.
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  2. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    After takin' a swig o' grog, The Ghost In The Machine belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > In light of my recent comments, it appears that both are
    > steeped in history, though OpenGL's transmutations have
    > probably been a little less disruptive than Direct3D's


    Well, we /are/ talking about "API d'jur Microsoft" here!

    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...L_and_Direct3D


    > A feature comparison up to 8 is available at:
    >
    > http://newsletters.hagerman.com/news.../ebul60-WP.htm
    >
    > Near the bottom, one notes that OpenGL does *not* offer
    > multiple monitor support. (It's not clear that it needs
    > to; presumably such can be had transparently by using
    > X's built-in multiple screen support. I've not gotten
    > multiple monitor support quite working in X yet myself so
    > can't test this. I'll admit I'm not sure I really need it
    > or not; it might be nice if I'm debugging something to have
    > the OpenGL on the main screen with debug/control console/info
    > on the laptop's display screen.)
    >
    > For what all this is worth.


    Well, it shows that a system created by a single vendor (with help from
    other vendors, of course) for that vendor's nearly omnipresent
    consumer operating system, and developed over the course of about 12 or
    so years, can provide a lot of features and subsume many categories of
    functionality.

    That wikipedia article you allude to makes it clear that one should not
    confuse the two products. They overlap, but serve different "markets".

    --
    Learning French is trivial: the word for horse is cheval, and everything else
    follows in the same way.
    -- Alan J. Perlis

  3. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chris Ahlstrom

    wrote
    on Fri, 10 Oct 2008 21:24:41 -0400
    <89THk.73764$XB4.30922@bignews9.bellsouth.net>:
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, The Ghost In The Machine belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> In light of my recent comments, it appears that both are
    >> steeped in history, though OpenGL's transmutations have
    >> probably been a little less disruptive than Direct3D's

    >
    > Well, we /are/ talking about "API d'jur Microsoft" here!


    Not quite as bad as ActiveX, thank goodness. ;-)

    >
    >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...L_and_Direct3D

    >
    >> A feature comparison up to 8 is available at:
    >>
    >> http://newsletters.hagerman.com/news.../ebul60-WP.htm
    >>
    >> Near the bottom, one notes that OpenGL does *not* offer
    >> multiple monitor support. (It's not clear that it needs
    >> to; presumably such can be had transparently by using
    >> X's built-in multiple screen support. I've not gotten
    >> multiple monitor support quite working in X yet myself so
    >> can't test this. I'll admit I'm not sure I really need it
    >> or not; it might be nice if I'm debugging something to have
    >> the OpenGL on the main screen with debug/control console/info
    >> on the laptop's display screen.)
    >>
    >> For what all this is worth.

    >
    > Well, it shows that a system created by a single vendor (with help from
    > other vendors, of course) for that vendor's nearly omnipresent
    > consumer operating system, and developed over the course of about 12 or
    > so years, can provide a lot of features and subsume many categories of
    > functionality.
    >
    > That wikipedia article you allude to makes it clear that one should not
    > confuse the two products. They overlap, but serve different "markets".
    >


    I fail to see how, at a higher level. True, one can
    indeed see that the OpenGL stuff will support those
    games and products requiring the OpenGL API, whereas the
    Direct3D will support those games and products requiring
    the Direct3D API, but really, since both of them generate
    illusory landscapes and diagrams in pseudo-3D (and maybe
    someday in real 3D?) on a display system, what's the
    difference, really? :-)

    Color me puzzled on this particular subpoint.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    /dev/signature: Resource temporarily unavailable
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  4. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    After takin' a swig o' grog, The Ghost In The Machine belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > I fail to see how, at a higher level. True, one can
    > indeed see that the OpenGL stuff will support those
    > games and products requiring the OpenGL API, whereas the
    > Direct3D will support those games and products requiring
    > the Direct3D API, but really, since both of them generate
    > illusory landscapes and diagrams in pseudo-3D (and maybe
    > someday in real 3D?) on a display system, what's the
    > difference, really? :-)
    >
    > Color me puzzled on this particular subpoint.


    Apparently, OpenGL needs help from something like SDL to handle keyboard
    and joystick events.

    --
    /*
    * Oops. The kernel tried to access some bad page. We'll have to
    * terminate things with extreme prejudice.
    */
    die_if_kernel("Oops", regs, error_code);
    (From linux/arch/i386/mm/fault.c)

  5. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX


    "The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in message
    news:aba5s5-pip.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
    > In light of my recent comments, it appears that both are
    > steeped in history, though OpenGL's transmutations have
    > probably been a little less disruptive than Direct3D's
    > (the 3D variant of DirectX; I've no idea as to the precise
    > Linux equivalent though suspect SDL might work in a pinch).
    > There's probably a number of SGI GL demonstrator programs
    > *that still work*, for example. (The only one I remember
    > is a 3D asteroids game.)
    >
    > Apparently it's only older versions of Direct3D that were
    > cumbersome to use; modern versions are almost as good as OpenGL,
    > according to
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...L_and_Direct3D
    >
    > except for the little issue of Direct3D's portability, which
    > continues to frustrate non-Windows developers of course.
    >
    > http://www.gamedev.net/reference/art...rticle1775.asp
    >
    > might also be useful.
    >
    > One item hampering OpenGL's adoption in gaming is just that:
    > OpenGL was originally designed for higher-end CAD systems,
    > not gaming platforms. This may turn out to be an advantage,
    > though.
    >
    > OpenGL's extensions can be queried (somewhat like X's), and
    > the game engine can take appropriate actions if it sees an
    > extension it likes, or cannot find an extension it prefers.
    > DirectX doesn't have quite this capability, though it can
    > use (and indeed depends on) COM in a pinch; in fact, COM
    > method calls appear to be *versioned* and immutable. (This
    > may be one reason why we see Direct3D 3, 5, etc. etc.; the
    > newer versions introduce more functionality.)
    >
    > One strength: pixel shaders in DirectX appear to be better
    > developed than in OpenGL, though the 2.0 version in OpenGL
    > at least is sane now. (I don't know how well my nx9010
    > supports them.)
    >
    > A feature comparison up to 8 is available at:
    >
    > http://newsletters.hagerman.com/news.../ebul60-WP.htm
    >
    > Near the bottom, one notes that OpenGL does *not* offer
    > multiple monitor support. (It's not clear that it needs
    > to; presumably such can be had transparently by using
    > X's built-in multiple screen support. I've not gotten
    > multiple monitor support quite working in X yet myself so
    > can't test this. I'll admit I'm not sure I really need it
    > or not; it might be nice if I'm debugging something to have
    > the OpenGL on the main screen with debug/control console/info
    > on the laptop's display screen.)
    >
    > For what all this is worth.


    There's a thread in the Ubuntu forms that compares the two:

    http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-136630.html

    I think the key post here is this one:


    it would be a more fair comparison if you compared opengl in windows to
    opengl in linux, and it depends on your video card drivers the most, the
    vendors optimize their drivers more for windows than linux, especially if
    you have an ati card you can expect slower 3d in linux compared to windows
    and compared to an equivalent nvidia card


    I don't see how the two can be compared (performance wise) because it will
    always come down to the quality of the drivers and the video hardware.
    Comparing the two on the API is best done by someone with expertise in
    developing graphical apps.



  6. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    Micoshaft asstroturfing fraudster pounding the sock Ezekiel
    wrote on behalf of Half Wits from Micoshaft Department of Marketing:


    > I don't see how the two can be compared (performance wise) because it will
    > always come down to the quality of the drivers and the video hardware.



    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAAA!!!!

    You dumb ****!
    What do you know about video graphics performance?


    > Comparing the two on the API is best done by someone with expertise in
    > developing graphical apps.



    Oh is that so knowledge challenged one?

    BWAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAAA!!!!



    The windummy OSen has no chance of catching the high
    resolution video x frame rate envelope of Linux.

    Games developers should all switch to Linux and then
    specify and recommend Linux for all gamers.
    Linux is free and comes with source code for best tweeking.
    http://www.livecdlist.com

    And the free source code allow developers to address all
    programming issues. Also games like Nexuiz are proof
    of the immense gulf beteen windummy games and Linux
    game high resolution x frame rate evelope.
    And the source code for Nexuiz like all GPL'd Linux
    games is free so anyone can download it, learn all
    the game writing tricks and improve and
    distribute it as much as they want to get recognition.




  7. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    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.

  8. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    On Oct 11, 11:57*pm, Matt wrote:
    > Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    > > Apparently, OpenGL needs help from something like SDL to handle keyboard
    > > and joystick events.

    >


    OpenGL was designed to do graphics, nothing more.

    For joysticks, keyboards, etc. you need another library
    as well as OpenGL.

    > 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.



    SDL, GLUT and DirectX are libraries which can be used
    together with OpenGL to provide these functions.


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

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

  9. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    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.

    --
    "If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
    *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two."
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they the lunacy in advocacy

  10. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    > Apparently it's only older versions of Direct3D that were
    > cumbersome to use; modern versions are almost as good as OpenGL,
    > according to
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...L_and_Direct3D
    >
    > except for the little issue of Direct3D's portability, which
    > continues to frustrate non-Windows developers of course.


    Here is a visual comparison that might bring something useful to the
    discussion :P

    http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/1...0cx7so3kj7.jpg

    I bet you have seen this image before...
    - --
    Firefox 3.0.3 .::. Thunderbird: 2.0.0.17.::. Ubuntu 8.04

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFI8bv463YxZBOaK7sRAnJGAJ9/oLUENdH47aHwQypHFpJCHtBWVgCePu+u
    To2V57cFIADrqK14iIq/ofE=
    =z4yM
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  11. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 09:57:28 +0100, Tony Manco wrote:

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >> Apparently it's only older versions of Direct3D that were
    >> cumbersome to use; modern versions are almost as good as OpenGL,
    >> according to
    >>
    >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...L_and_Direct3D
    >>
    >> except for the little issue of Direct3D's portability, which
    >> continues to frustrate non-Windows developers of course.

    >
    > Here is a visual comparison that might bring something useful to the
    > discussion :P
    >
    > http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/1...0cx7so3kj7.jpg
    >
    > I bet you have seen this image before...
    > - --
    > Firefox 3.0.3 .::. Thunderbird: 2.0.0.17.::. Ubuntu 8.04
    >
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
    >
    > iD8DBQFI8bv463YxZBOaK7sRAnJGAJ9/oLUENdH47aHwQypHFpJCHtBWVgCePu+u
    > To2V57cFIADrqK14iIq/ofE=
    > =z4yM
    > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


    Nobody cares.
    You are a ****ing idiot TrManco...

    --
    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

  12. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

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

    > 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.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opengl

    OpenGL was designed to be graphic output-only: it provides only
    rendering functions. The core API has no concept of windowing
    systems, audio, printing to the screen, keyboard/mouse or other input
    devices. While this seems restrictive at first, it allows the code
    that does the rendering to be completely independent of the operating
    system it is running on, allowing cross-platform development. However
    some integration with the native windowing system is required to
    allow clean interaction with the host system. This is performed
    through the following add-on APIs: ...

    Listed are GLX/X11, WGL (Windows), CGL (Mac), AGL (Carbon), NSOOpenGL
    (Cocoa), GLUT, SDL, and GLFW.

    --
    Wanna tell you all a story 'bout a man named Jed,
    A poor mountaineer, barely kept his family fed.
    But then one day he was shootin' at some food,
    When up through the ground come a bubblin' crude -- oil, that is;
    black gold; 'Texas tea' ...
    Well the next thing ya know, old Jed's a millionaire.
    The kinfolk said, 'Jed, move away from there!'
    They said, 'Californy is the place ya oughta be',
    So they loaded up the truck and they moved to Beverly -- Hills, that is;
    swimmin' pools; movie stars.

  13. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    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!.


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

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

  14. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 12:39:46 -0700 (PDT), 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!.


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

  15. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    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





    --

    ************************************************** ***************************

    From the desk of:
    Jerome D. McBride

    16:33:10 up 14 days, 20:50, 5 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00

    ************************************************** ***************************


  16. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    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.

    --
    "By your and your buddies references, marketshare.hitslink.com, it has
    moved from .43 to .68 over the last year. Increasing by 58% over the last
    year doesn't seem to me like it hasn't changed much in 16 years."
    -- Rick in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  17. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    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...
    --
    It's not about, 'Where do you want to go today?' It's more like,
    'Where am I allowed to go today?'


  18. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    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?

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

    DRM is something other people wanted MS to include. For legal
    reaons. FWIW I think it sucks too.

  19. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    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

    > 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...

    > 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.

    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
    --
    For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat,
    and wrong. -- H. L. Mencken


  20. Re: OpenGL versus DirectX

    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.

    >
    >> 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.

    >
    >> 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.

    >
    > 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.

    --
    "Off the top of my head, I can't tell you which sites. They are ones that
    throw up some kind of dialog, I change the user agent and look at them
    again, then move on."
    -- Rick telling lies in comp.os.linux.advocacy

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