Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not even that. They seem to have abandoned OpenCL as well, and that was invented at Apple.
It's more like "let's mess everyone else, because we can".
Courage!
Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
301–310 of 650 posts
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#302Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's plenty of stuff if you want to go native or are you just talking web technologies? FWIW there's tons of things build on OpenGL ES 2(all of Android for instance). If you're going to write something to run on a wide range of platforms you're either going to deal with least-common denominator(GLES2) or write per-platform layers(like we'd do on consoles/etc).
> If you're going to write something to run on a wide range of platforms you're either going to deal with least-common denominator(GLES2) or write per-platform layers(like we'd do on consoles/etc). You say that like it's a good thing! The point of WebGL is to put that pain on the browser vendor. OpenGL ES 2 is incredibly limited, as you know. Yeah, you can do a lot with it, but there's a ton of stuff you can't do (te…
I definitely wasn't saying it was a good thing, just the reality in the graphics space.
I just don't see how you push it to the web. You're forcing device capabilites onto users and the web always lags well behind what's happening in the native domain.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#303Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Metal Shader Language use in our prototype is totally a placeholder, and the post says so. We expect the standards process to define new source and binary representations, possibly based on Khronos's SPIR-V. The shader language is partly independent of the API though, and we though the API was the interesting thing to prototype, more so than shaders.
That's already something. But you shouldn't have started with a bad placeholder, waiting for others to criticize and propose replacing it. Start with open languages and technologies right away.
Should they have invented a different place holder (and all the work that would require) just to throw it away and be all data they weren't using the shader language that Vulcan uses?
The post was VERY clear that that was temporary while working on the other basics and a real decision would be made later.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#304Related reading re. Vulkan "What a WebGL2 successor could look like and why it can’t be WebVulkan" - https://floooh.github.io/2016/08/13/webgl-next.html See also the the author's sketch of a next-gen web graphics API on top of WebGL ( https://floooh.github.io/2016/10/24/altai.html ) which is (perhaps unsurprisingl) broadly similar to the sketch given the article (minus command queues, shader libraries, ...).
Vulkan is a horrible choice for a web standard. Their hardware support is abysmal, the only graphics hardware that supports it was made from 2012 on wards. Even then a decent chunk of the support is experimental: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulkan_(API)
Vulkan is great, but you need to think about the cross compatibility of the web.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#305Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's already something. But you shouldn't have started with a bad placeholder, waiting for others to criticize and propose replacing it. Start with open languages and technologies right away.
Should they have invented a different place holder (and all the work that would require) just to throw it away and be all data they weren't using the shader language that Vulcan uses? The post was VERY clear that that was temporary while working on the other basics and a real decision would be made later.
This shows, that this idea wasn't thought through enough. And coming from Apple, it raises a concern naturally. These things should have solid foundations from the start.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#306Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.lunarg.com/faqs/microsoft-support-vulkan/ Microsoft won't support Vulkan officially, and apps would have to install their own Vulkan drivers.
Not true, Vulcan drivers are included in drivers of the GPU manufacturer.
No, Nvidia and AMD including Vulcan drivers. Intel isn't and said they don't plan to. Intel has a HUGE market share thanks to integrated graphics. There are other companies too.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#307Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The question then is whether to try to clone one of the native-level APIs, or make something that works on each of the top 3. We think working on all of them is better than tying ourselves to just one. Besides this approach being supportive of lock-in (of underlying closed APIs like Metal and DX), which is more than questionable, more importantly, what shading language should this Web API use for example?
When you look at the amount of effort that's gone into SPIR-V you'll only have one conclusion to this question.
Indeed, the question was rhetorical, and more of a poke at using Metal shaders in the initial proposal, instead of going right away with open languages and representations.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#308Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's their own. How convenient to propose your own standard as the standard, made specifically for your own engine...
No it's not. I get the feeling you didn't really read the blog post. This proposed standard is supposed to be able to be implemented on top of all 3 platform-specific APIs, it's not made specifically for Metal. Yes, they're using the Metal Shading Language in this initial proposal. But in the blog post they explicitly say that the choice of the shading language is likely to be contentious (or, as they put it, "fun"),…
While I'm far less negative about this blog post than most of the other commentators seem to be, the part where you cite seems more like "well yeah, we're proposing Metal, and that's obviously going to be contentious so lets sheepishly point out that again this is all subject to negotiation".
My interpretation might be too uncharitable, or yours might be too charitable by taking it at face value, it's pretty difficult to know without having insider knowledge.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#309Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I believe he means unofficial as in not provided by Microsoft. Microsoft works to make sure Direct3D works and I imagine they have lots of tests and compatibility suites there. I'm guessing they don't have any tests or standards were requirements around Vulcan.
Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API
#310Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
NVIDIA/AMD drivers with Vulkan support pass through WHQL, which is as official as a 3rd party driver can get. So calling them unsupported/unofficial is quite a stretch.
Does WHQL actually include any Vulcan tests? The driver may be officially certified but is the featur in question?