Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it's WebGPU like it shows in the code. Vulkan is a competing standard and technology.
You misunderstand. I wasn't asking what it's called. I was asking if the idea here is a Vulkan like API for the web.
Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
31–40 of 650 posts
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#32Anything that's not based on the Vulkan spec is just a land-grab by Apple to push their own technologies. As someone who spends a lot of time in that space I don't really see what this is solving, WebGL is good enough and anyone serious about performance/compute are going to drop down to native anyway.
> As someone who spends a lot of time in that space I don't really see what this is solving, WebGL is good enough and anyone serious about performance/compute are going to drop down to native anyway. Not true at all; if your primary performance bottleneck is the GPU code, not CPU code, you could use a better web API modeled after Vulkan, for the same reason people switch from GL to Vulkan. In general, if there's ever…
Another aspect that scares me about this is the security implications of exposing compute to the browser. Esp when you start talking about unified memory architectures. There's been more than a few exploits from a clever soul calling glReadPixels in the right circumstances. Increasing the surface area here doesn't seem like a great idea. Shader compilers are also great targets for instability and obscure bugs.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#33The API looks like a direct port of Metal to JavaScript.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#34Anything that's not based on the Vulkan spec is just a land-grab by Apple to push their own technologies. As someone who spends a lot of time in that space I don't really see what this is solving, WebGL is good enough and anyone serious about performance/compute are going to drop down to native anyway.
Yeah,what is wrong with WebGL anyway? It seems to work pretty well.
In the extreme case you get stuff like "GPU-Driven Rendering Pipelines" described in http://advances.realtimerendering.com/s2015/
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#35Will it be patent encumbered, like Apple's "proposal" for touch events API? > Meanwhile, GPU technology has improved and new software APIs have been created to better reflect the designs of modern GPUs. These new APIs exist at a lower level of abstraction and, due to their reduced overhead, generally offer better performance than OpenGL. The major platform technologies in this space are Direct3D 12 from Microsoft, Me…
The group's draft charter[1] proposes that contributing organisations would be required to agree to the W3C Community Contributor License Agreement[2], which includes a patent licensing commitment for all essential claims. So, if a specification came out of this, then it would not be patent encumbered; at least not by any patents held by Apple. I'm willing to give Apple the benefit of the doubt on this. Like any big…
So how come they didn't manage to have the same idea for touch events?
> Everyone supporting Vulcan would be nice, but a standardised, patent-free, cross-platform, web-enabled, low-level GPU API would still be a major step forward.
I'd say design and its roots matter. If they base it off Metal, and use Metal like technology, while Metal itself remains a closed Apple only API, then W3C should reject it. Consider the whole related ecosystem, like shaders and so on. Anything like that should be based on open APIs and related ecosystems, like WebGL is based on OpenGL.
If Apple want to help, let them base WebGPU on Vulkan. If not, they shouldn't waste everyone's time. I hope W3C participants will have enough common sense to come to the same conclusions.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#36That is a very deceptive way to put it. https://jakearchibald.github.io/isserviceworkerready/ Safari is intentionally crippled in several areas. Its very specific and obvious. It is dishonest for you to at this point pretend Apple is going full force for web standards while they are explicitly not implementing features that are available everywhere else. And how those specific features line up directly as features wh…
In terms of tracked features they're ahead of Edge with both their stable release and in development (TP) builds.
Don't let your own prejudices distort reality.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#37"The major platform technologies in this space are Direct3D 12 from Microsoft, Metal from Apple, and Vulkan from the Khronos Group. While these technologies have similar design concepts, unfortunately none are available across all platforms." So Apple, the only company not supporting Vulkan on their platforms, is complaining that there isn't a cross-platform solution?
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As someone who spends a lot of time in that space I don't really see what this is solving, WebGL is good enough and anyone serious about performance/compute are going to drop down to native anyway. Not true at all; if your primary performance bottleneck is the GPU code, not CPU code, you could use a better web API modeled after Vulkan, for the same reason people switch from GL to Vulkan. In general, if there's ever…
As soon as you clear up that GPU bottleneck guess what's going to be your next one? (Here's a hint, it's the thing that's dispatching to your GPU). Another aspect that scares me about this is the security implications of exposing compute to the browser. Esp when you start talking about unified memory architectures. There's been more than a few exploits from a clever soul calling glReadPixels in the right circumstance…
Memory bandwidth for your textures, geometry, and other data, quite often. Or nothing at all, if you can successfully reach your desired target framerate.
But if CPU turns out to be an issue, that's what WebAssembly is for.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#39Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#40That is a very deceptive way to put it. https://jakearchibald.github.io/isserviceworkerready/ Safari is intentionally crippled in several areas. Its very specific and obvious. It is dishonest for you to at this point pretend Apple is going full force for web standards while they are explicitly not implementing features that are available everywhere else. And how those specific features line up directly as features wh…
Wait... what? Deceptive... really? Come on now. http://caniuse.com/ In terms of tracked features they're ahead of Edge with both their stable release and in development (TP) builds. Don't let your own prejudices distort reality.
Every. single. other. browser. Including desktop Safari.