Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

webkit.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 650 posts

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#561

Post by Xixi »

dman wrote: post #76
om2 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not complaining, we're explaining the lay of the land. Working on top of all three of these APIs is totally doable and will result in a better API for the web. Things worth noting: - We believe other browser vendors agree with us that the web API should work on all three of the major native APIs. - The web has security requirements which force us to go a bit higher-level than Vulkan anyway. I understand your de…

While I have your attention - what can be done to improve the state of Vulkan and OpenGL on the mac - its the single biggest reason for me to ragequit the OSX platform every time I try to give it a shot.

Not the person to whom you are asking, but this is my perception of Apple.

The state of OpenGL will never improve: if you've followed Apple at any point over the last 25 years, it's pretty clear that they disengage very quickly from any technology that is starting to look deprecated/not the future. It works for hardware and software: first iMac with only USB and Ethernet, dropping the floppy drive, dropping CD/DVD drives, avoiding Blue-Ray entirely [1], only USB-C on last MacBook Pro, flash, etc. So my opinion is that OpenGL will never be developed further at Apple. They will probably drop all OpenGL support at some point in the next few years.

The other thing that is clear is that Apple doesn't like having their hands tied by third parties. The lack of adequate Kaby Lake processors for the launch of the last MacBook Pro, and the subsequent heat/hatred directed towards Apple because of it [2], is probably making quite a few people think that at some point they will really have to move the whole Mac line to Apple made ARM processors.

Apple started to ship a working Metal implementation to iOS developers before Vulkan was more than a draft [3]. This freedom to move at their own pace is worth a lot to Apple. Vulkan is a great piece of technology, but I don't have high hopes for it to be supported by Apple anytime soon.

[1] There were some licensing issues there, but had Apple thought the future of media consumption to be BR I'm sure they would have found a comprise. Instead they found an excuse to promote streaming / the Apple TV.

[2] Including on HN, where I would have thought the average reader to be a little bit more sophisticated on these technical matters.

[3] I don't have the exact timeline in head, so I might be wrong.

Edit: typo

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#562

Post by hutzlibu »

lucideer wrote: post #559
hutzlibu wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Before you even start considering the pros and cons of Vulkan or WebVulkan, there's a very blatant case of cui bono to examine behind this." Not really. Because yes, it is well known that Apple closes down their system and wants full controll over it and locks other partys out. One of the Reasons for me, to not buy them. But what does this have to do, when they propose a new Web API? If Apple chooses to go a differe…

> But what does this have to do, when they propose a new Web API? The web being inherently cross-platform in nature there's a motivation on their part to not support it, or - in this case - cripple it (perhaps to a mild degree but at least enough to render it categorically inferior to native metal and not worth the trade-offs). I can't say that their proposal does this necessarily, but there's inarguably a motivation…

Hm, do you really believe, that Apple wants to artifical cripple the web?

I see, that they hypothetically might have motivation, to do so ... but this is not valid, since the web is inferior to native implemantations in the first place! The "only" advantage of the web is, that it is more or less, cross plattform.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#564

Post by MBCook »

dkersten wrote: post #542
MBCook wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Compared to Metal or the low level thing MS has (don't they have one?) 2) Apple is proposing an open standard here, they're not making WebMetal 3) Why do you think Apple's proposal doesn't?

1) The low level thing MS has is DirectX 12. I saw some benchmarks across multiple graphics cards that showed it was slower than Vulkan, but I can't seem to find it now... so its unclear to me if it is or isn't slower. 2) I think the people here would rather it be developed by an independent group like Khronos Group. For example, Apple created OpenCL as an open standard too and then abandoned it.

On one, ok. I haven't followed DirectX too closely. I knew 12 was designed to match modern GPUs much closer but I didn't know if that was sort of 'medium' between DX 11 and Vulcan, there being something even lower from MS.

Thanks.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#565

Post by blurbleblurble »

hutzlibu wrote: post #562
lucideer wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But what does this have to do, when they propose a new Web API? The web being inherently cross-platform in nature there's a motivation on their part to not support it, or - in this case - cripple it (perhaps to a mild degree but at least enough to render it categorically inferior to native metal and not worth the trade-offs). I can't say that their proposal does this necessarily, but there's inarguably a motivation…

Hm, do you really believe, that Apple wants to artifical cripple the web? I see, that they hypothetically might have motivation, to do so ... but this is not valid, since the web is inferior to native implemantations in the first place! The "only" advantage of the web is, that it is more or less, cross plattform.

As far as i can remember, they've been consistently behind on support for emerging web technologies (since the app store came out), it just doesn't seen to be in their business interests to keep up.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#566

Post by snarfy »

om2 wrote: post #41
NickGerleman wrote: post #9

"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?

We're not complaining, we're explaining the lay of the land. Working on top of all three of these APIs is totally doable and will result in a better API for the web. Things worth noting: - We believe other browser vendors agree with us that the web API should work on all three of the major native APIs. - The web has security requirements which force us to go a bit higher-level than Vulkan anyway. I understand your de…

If Vulkan doesn't have enough security features to support the web, you'd think Apple would work with Khronos to get them implemented, instead of rolling their own API.

It's yet more 'not invented here syndrome' from Apple.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#567

Post by robert_foss »

gerardnll wrote: post #554
robert_foss wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The features on that list are industry standard everywhere else. You 'working' on them is not entirely convincing. The sudden interest in a web graphics api is somewhat conspicuous coming from a company known not to adhere to web standards. There must be some reason for apples sudden interest in this stuff. Knowing apple they're interest probably isn't aligned with their users interest.

"Knowing apple their interest probably isn't aligned with their users interest." Explain cases please.

While going in-depth with this would be fun, it think mentioning some of the proprietary cables they force onto their users is one simple example:

    * Non-standard headphone connectors (to force license costs onto manufacturer)
    * Proprietary bluetooth codec (to force license costs onto manufacturers)
    * Not using USB connectors on phones even though they were a part of the EU
      group that concluded that all phones have to have USB connectors

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#568

Post by vetinari »

liuliu wrote: post #321
fnord123 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vulkan is a new API distinct from OpenGL. It's lower level but has a nicer API in some respects. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulkan_(API) Apple decided to not support Vulkan as it had been developing a competing API called Metal at around the same time. I don't know why they don't also support Vulkan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_(API)

Saying it is around the same time is to ignore the history. Metal is available since Jun 2014. Vulkan announced on 2015 and the initial release is on 2016.

Metal in 2014 is a different animal than Metal in 2016.

In 2014, it assumed that the GPU has unified memory architecture, for example (i.e. the GPU can access a memory buffer that you have a pointer to). That's why it was introduced on iOS only.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#569

Post by vetinari »

pjmlp wrote: post #537
vetinari wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And game availability relates to GPU API support available at the platform... how exactly? The fact that game studios decide to use one API or another is no factor in evaluating API availability. (Also note how many DX12 games not published by Microsoft are DX12 exclusives - that says something about Microsoft motives, but not about API qualities).

> And game availability relates to GPU API support available at the platform... how exactly? When given the option, professional game developers choose the one that better helps them achieving their goals.

There's a reason why DX had almost zero adaptation outside games. Maybe it is not that good API, if you need to support your app for a few years too. Games are fire and forget.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#570

Post by MBCook »

criddell wrote: post #560
tornadoboy55 wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consumers are bothered by games that get released much later (or not at all) on iOS instead of Android, or the other way around. They're not directly bothered by the cause, but they sure as hell hate the symptoms.

I don't like it, but I think consumers are pretty accepting of platform exclusives.

If you're a gamer, then you're quite used to this going back all the way to the old Sega vs Nintendo days. It may be annoying but it's something we by and large accept.
Post reply on HN