Kicking and dragging on WebRTC, WebCL, Vulkan. Business interests much?
Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
111–120 of 650 posts
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is DirectX support needed? Isn't Vulkan supported on the same platforms as DirectX anyway?
We expect DirectX 12 drivers to be more complete, more performant, and more likely to be available out of the box without a separate install. We expect Windows browsers will want to build on top of DirectX, not Vulkan.
I don't see why this would be the case. The vendors (i.e. NVidia) are providing the drivers, I see no reason why they would porposely cripple them.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
"We're not complaining, we're explaining the lay of the land." The "lay of the land" is that the rest of the world is adopting Vulkan, and therefore the right target for WebGPU is very obviously Vulkan. Even macOS and iOS can (theoretically) support it thanks to MoltenVK [0], and Vulkan is already available on Windows. Trying to wrap all three "major" native APIs is pointless when there's already one that works every…
Vulkan on Windows is all based on unofficial drivers that don't come with Windows and aren't supported by MS. We don't think it's right to depend on this even if it's theoretically possible. Likewise for unofficial macOS/iOS drivers.
What do you mean by "unofficial drivers"? Looking at the support matrix on Wikipedia, it seems that both NVIDIA and ATI support it in their official Windows drivers.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#114That 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…
Presumably the downvotes are because your comment went uncivil, by accusing another user of dishonesty and by insinuating astroturfing without evidence. Neither of those things are allowed on HN, so please don't do them again.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13593606 and marked it off-topic.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#115Hey Apple, how about developing your browsers to support modern web technologies first?
Isn't Safari Technical Preview supported 100% ES6? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11708840
Apple definitely keeps up with core JavaScript and CSS support, but essentially anywhere the web undermines their attempt to maintain control over a protocol, file format, or API--or for anything that makes the browser fundamentally more powerful (which undermines their attempt to get developers to focus on native applications, and which stuff like ES6 is fundamentally not an example)--they invest only a token amount of effort at best and at worst they seem to actively cause more fragmentation (by pushing Safari-only proprietary and sometimes even patent-encumbered alternatives).
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
"We're not complaining, we're explaining the lay of the land." The "lay of the land" is that the rest of the world is adopting Vulkan, and therefore the right target for WebGPU is very obviously Vulkan. Even macOS and iOS can (theoretically) support it thanks to MoltenVK [0], and Vulkan is already available on Windows. Trying to wrap all three "major" native APIs is pointless when there's already one that works every…
Vulkan on Windows is all based on unofficial drivers that don't come with Windows and aren't supported by MS. We don't think it's right to depend on this even if it's theoretically possible. Likewise for unofficial macOS/iOS drivers.
> We don't think it's right to depend on this even if it's theoretically possible. Likewise for unofficial macOS/iOS drivers.
Then focus on fixing that, instead of wasting time on bullshit like this.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#117That API looks potentially more pleasant to use than WebGL, which is a nice surprise given it's purportedly more low-level.
Maybe someone can enlighten me, but it doesn't actually look any more low level. The only lower level thing I see is the texture attachment load/store ops. Can you commit a command buffer more than once?
(edit: I realized this API is mostly designed 1:1 with the Metal API, so the docs for that API have filled in most of the missing pieces)
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
"We're not complaining, we're explaining the lay of the land." The "lay of the land" is that the rest of the world is adopting Vulkan, and therefore the right target for WebGPU is very obviously Vulkan. Even macOS and iOS can (theoretically) support it thanks to MoltenVK [0], and Vulkan is already available on Windows. Trying to wrap all three "major" native APIs is pointless when there's already one that works every…
Vulkan on Windows is all based on unofficial drivers that don't come with Windows and aren't supported by MS. We don't think it's right to depend on this even if it's theoretically possible. Likewise for unofficial macOS/iOS drivers.
Is it your position that the only drivers worth using are those produced by the operating system's vendor? While I suppose this would make sense to Apple, it sounds entirely crazy to me. IMHO, it makes much more sense for the hardware vendor to write the drivers.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Working on top of all the major APIs is the right thing for the web. No, the right thing for the broader ecosystem is working only on Vulkan, and forcing Apple to adopt Vulkan, so that one API is usable natively on every OS, device (even Nintendo will support Vulkan on its consoles!) and browser. If Apple wants to go their own way, sure, but they’ll be cut off from the rest of the world, and quickly realize where t…
Sounds like you're focused on what is best for Vulkan, not what is best for the web.
So far as I can see, the argument he's making is that there's already an actively emerging standard for a 3D API outside of the web, so it would make sense if the web also jumped on the same bandwagon, and we could have a single API everywhere.
That makes sense to me. What is special about the web that should exclude it from the single API narrative?
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#120"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?
I don't know why Apple thinks they're going to have any sway over the people working on 3D graphics. Their hardware support for 3d graphics has been so awful for so long, I have a hard time imagining there's a very big user base they can leverage to get their way. So far as I can tell, what Apple wants here is almost completely irrelevant to the industry.
The unstated point of leverage is iOS Safari. I would assume that at some point, they will deprecate webGL on iOS Safari.