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

81–90 of 650 posts

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#81

Post by scholia »

shmerl wrote: post #26
netule wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that, but Apple seems to have decided to stop supporting open graphics standards altogether, including OpenGL [1]. Apple used to be quite vocal and influential as part of the ARB, not sure what caused the shift of the last few years. [1] https://www.g-truc.net/doc/OpenGL%20Drivers%20Status.pdf

Yes, they clearly are deeply into their usual NIH routine. So it's highly hypocritical for them to complain, how open APIs aren't cross platform enough.

Apple supported Blu-ray and even took a seat on the Blu-ray board. How many Blu-ray drives did Apple ship?

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#82

Post by sydd »

om2 wrote: post #73
ChuckMcM wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The optics are just really bad. Apple could say "In the mean time we'll support Vulkan" and bam! there is a cross platform solution. Instead you say "We will generously let everyone implement our specifications, we hate to see everyone suffering so, but if everyone else works really hard to do what we say, things will be great!"

I don't get what you are suggesting. Apple supporting Vulkan on macOS and iOS wouldn't do anything to expose a new GPU API to the web. They are totally orthogonal. We're expecting work on the new web API to be super collaborative, so your framing is uncharitable and incorrect.

Why come up with a new API for this? Why not use the one supported by Google, and MS, Vulkan? We dont need another (a fourth!) API for the same thing. Introduce a web variant like Khronos with with WebGL (its almost like OpenGL ES, which is almost like OpenGL).

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#83

Post by om2 »

yellowapple wrote: post #75
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…

"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.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#84

Post by ioquatix »

om2 wrote: post #73
ChuckMcM wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The optics are just really bad. Apple could say "In the mean time we'll support Vulkan" and bam! there is a cross platform solution. Instead you say "We will generously let everyone implement our specifications, we hate to see everyone suffering so, but if everyone else works really hard to do what we say, things will be great!"

I don't get what you are suggesting. Apple supporting Vulkan on macOS and iOS wouldn't do anything to expose a new GPU API to the web. They are totally orthogonal. We're expecting work on the new web API to be super collaborative, so your framing is uncharitable and incorrect.

If Apple supported Vulkan, all major platforms would support the same API. Exposing this to the web would be relatively straight forward. So, I don't think your assertion that they are orthogonal goals is correct.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#85

Post by saurik »

MBCook wrote: post #54
whyileft wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://caniuse.com/#feat=notifications Every. single. other. browser. Including desktop Safari.

As an iOS and MacOS user..... GOOD. I hate websites trying to give me notifications. I like that I don't get stupid prompts from mobile Safari about that kind of thing.

Instead you get "stupid prompts from mobile Safari" to install apps, which websites mostly do so they can send you push notifications: same prompts, even more annoying (as often the "carrot" is that some of the content or UI requires the app).

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#87

Post by nothrabannosir »

yellowapple wrote: post #75
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…

"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…

As an outsider, I'm very curious as to why this was downvoted. Is it incorrect? I know nothing about 3D platforms.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#88

Post by modeless »

om2 wrote: post #79
hota_mazi wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I understand your desire to have Vulkan on Apple platforms, but it's really a separate issue from the right target for WebGPU. No, it's not a separate issue. If Apple supported Vulcan, the simple act of proposing this new API as a standard would be laughed out of the room. We can only speculate why Apple won't support Vulcan but I'm going to go with "Prefer a solution they designed themselves over one designed by o…

I think you are wrong on that. Vulkan is a low-level native API, not a JavaScript API for the web. Lots of design work needs to be done. In addition, even on platforms where there are unofficial Vulkan drivers (such as Windows), it's likely the natively available API will still have more complete support and better performance. So either way, we need a cross-platform graphics API. Let's focus this discussion on impro…

> Lots of design work needs to be done.

So support Vulkan and then let's do the design work! The choice of underlying system API has effects on the design of the upper layers. Your refusal to support Vulkan is blocking progress.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#89

Post by om2 »

cma wrote: post #60
om2 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that really a "just" or is it the right thing to do? Working on top of all the major APIs is the right thing for the web. We've discussed our proposal a lot with key players in this space (including other browsers, GPU vendors, relevant ISVs) and we're pretty sure a cross-API abstraction is the way to go. Some even want to build a form of cross-API abstraction at the native C/C++ level.

Apple knows they aren't going to push something closed like Metal itself onto the web, so they want to make the web API easy to use with Metal as a backend instead. The end goal is to maintain Metal as a proprietary bit of tech for native apps, in order to make it more burdensome for people to port native apps away from the Apple platform and as a result give Apple more exclusive apps and more artificial barriers to…

Turns out that you don't have to bend over backwards if you're already supporting Vulkan and DirectX 12. But still, the ability to run your awesome 3D web apps on Apple platforms seems to be a good reason to support a Metal back end.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#90

Post by om2 »

kuschku wrote: post #64
om2 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that really a "just" or is it the right thing to do? Working on top of all the major APIs is the right thing for the web. We've discussed our proposal a lot with key players in this space (including other browsers, GPU vendors, relevant ISVs) and we're pretty sure a cross-API abstraction is the way to go. Some even want to build a form of cross-API abstraction at the native C/C++ level.

> 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.
Post reply on HN