Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX • Hacker News Board

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#101

Post by pjmlp » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 3:52 PM UTC

jcromartie wrote: post #96

pjmlp wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't get how OpenGL support for consoles became such a urban legend. Anyone that cares about graphics programming on game consoles knows how broken or non existent such support is.

It's because console development is a fairly secretive process. The SDKs are all kept under a fairly tight lid, and unless you either work with it yourself or personally know someone who is willing to spill the beans, you cannot get a good idea of the process.

True, but that is no reason to start spreading the falsehood that OpenGL is everywhere used on consoles, as many FOSS advocates do.

Specially when enough information is actually publicly available for anyone that cares about game development, in online forums, games magazines, conferences and game courses.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#102

Post by laumars » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 3:59 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #101

jcromartie wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because console development is a fairly secretive process. The SDKs are all kept under a fairly tight lid, and unless you either work with it yourself or personally know someone who is willing to spill the beans, you cannot get a good idea of the process.

True, but that is no reason to start spreading the falsehood that OpenGL is everywhere used on consoles, as many FOSS advocates do. Specially when enough information is actually publicly available for anyone that cares about game development, in online forums, games magazines, conferences and game courses.

To be fair, the reason I though the Wii supported OpenGL was because that's what I thought I read from Nintendo when I was seriously considering writing some homebrew games for my Wii.

As to why and where I gained this misinformation I don't know. But somewhere along the line I've gotten my wires crossed.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#103

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 4:00 PM UTC

computerslol wrote: post #98

shiven wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about OSX? Does DirectX work (at all/well) on it? Linux? How feasible is it to program with DirectX on any non-MS platform? Edit: I guess the point I'm making is, OpenGL runs on non-MS as well as MS platforms (perfectly/badly is another question), but DirectX is locked to Microsoft only. That is what makes it of little to no value for people like me who need to care about cross-platform products and support.

A Microsoft OS still runs on over 90% of the desktop market.

[deleted]

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#104

Post by gtirloni » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 4:26 PM UTC

shadowmint wrote: post #64

MaulingMonkey wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really 'legacy' per se either... good luck running OpenGL on Microsoft's consoles or as a ModernUI application! DirectX being a broader and, in my opinion, better designed API certainly doesn't hurt it's adoption either.

Yeah, don't worry about those mobile devices. We've got plenty of directx support for those too. What are they again? Surface? Windows phone? I think I know one guy who has one.

One is usually enough for a guy.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#105

Post by csmuk » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 4:28 PM UTC

mistercow wrote: post #92

csmuk wrote: post #74

Even Microsoft ships WebGL with IE11... Perhaps they're getting the point?

What choice do they have? The don't have the market share anymore to launch a proprietary alternative based on DirectX.

Exactly! It's a good thing.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#106

Post by runjake » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 4:30 PM UTC

shiven wrote: post #60

MaulingMonkey wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really 'legacy' per se either... good luck running OpenGL on Microsoft's consoles or as a ModernUI application! DirectX being a broader and, in my opinion, better designed API certainly doesn't hurt it's adoption either.

What about OSX? Does DirectX work (at all/well) on it? Linux? How feasible is it to program with DirectX on any non-MS platform? Edit: I guess the point I'm making is, OpenGL runs on non-MS as well as MS platforms (perfectly/badly is another question), but DirectX is locked to Microsoft only. That is what makes it of little to no value for people like me who need to care about cross-platform products and support.

These questions are the entire point of the article.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#107

Post by runjake » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 4:32 PM UTC

computerslol wrote: post #98

shiven wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about OSX? Does DirectX work (at all/well) on it? Linux? How feasible is it to program with DirectX on any non-MS platform? Edit: I guess the point I'm making is, OpenGL runs on non-MS as well as MS platforms (perfectly/badly is another question), but DirectX is locked to Microsoft only. That is what makes it of little to no value for people like me who need to care about cross-platform products and support.

A Microsoft OS still runs on over 90% of the desktop market.

I wonder what the percentage is when you figure the entire "computer" gaming market (eg. consoles, tablets, and phones). I suspect Microsoft's dominance on gaming is (and will become even more) weaker than we believe.

OpenGL seems like a no-brainer for future survival as MSFT platform dominance exhibits entropy.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#108

Post by afreak » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 4:34 PM UTC

computerslol wrote: post #98

shiven wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about OSX? Does DirectX work (at all/well) on it? Linux? How feasible is it to program with DirectX on any non-MS platform? Edit: I guess the point I'm making is, OpenGL runs on non-MS as well as MS platforms (perfectly/badly is another question), but DirectX is locked to Microsoft only. That is what makes it of little to no value for people like me who need to care about cross-platform products and support.

A Microsoft OS still runs on over 90% of the desktop market.

Right now, yes. However we do know that this has been changing quite rapidly in the past years so why fall back on the use of this argument?

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#109

Post by gtirloni » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 4:41 PM UTC

frik wrote: post #15

This articles is from 2010 and is really dated. Even Microsoft supports WebGL (based OpenGL ES 2) in Internet Explorer 11. Beside that the article doesn't mention that OpenGL 2 came late (and 1.x is way outdated). And to bootstrap OpenGL 2+ on Windows you still need a OpenGL 1.4 context to create an OpenGL 2+ context. So not so trivial at all :/ As the article is pre-smartphone era: the future for OpenGL/WebGL is ver…

It's funny how many old stuff (that is supposed to rely on current data) is posted on HN. I am still getting used to this.

I was reading the article and he mentions WinXP is half of all gamers.. I couldn't believe my eyes. These things should come with a disclaimer here like "really really old stuff, i just want to pick a few points from it which are this and this. ignore the rest".

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#110

Post by vetinari » Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 4:45 PM UTC

jasin wrote: post #67

vetinari wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't _need_ GLEW, it is just convenience library.

Well, of course you don't _need_ it. You can always go and parse the extension string yourself, then call LoadLibrary() and GetProcAddress() to manually setup pointers to the extension functions etc. The point is that you don't have to care about any of that crap when using DirectX. Bear in mind, this is just one example.

In DX you have to care about version and capability bits (up to DX9) or speed (same caps, some may be implemented in software, DX10+). Same thing in slightly different way.