Give any representitive from Microsoft the wrong date,time and place of meeting. If he/she still manages to show up make them sit in the corner with their back to everybody else, and force them to read a book about DirectX.
What the hell are you talking about. First of all, I read through the ARB Minutes and I have no clue what you are even referring to. Second of all, how is it that you would like this feature incorporated into OpenGL…you know, like the name of this forum:
Suggestions for the next release of OpenGL
At least get a clue before posting
September 19, 2000
New ARB Participants have signed up - Apple + numerous ISVs (see the ARB page on opengl.org for a relatively current list).
3Dlabs is now a permanent ARB member - inherited Intergraph’s membership.
WGL / opengl32.dll Status
Dave Aronson, MS - working internally and externally to push OpenGL forward; no major announcements since SIGGRAPH timeframe.
Dale - Microsoft’s future doesn’t seem to be OpenGL. IHVs have been having informal discussions about taking over, promoting, and adding OpenGL features on Windows (NT), integrating OpenML features, etc. Is there interest in specifying and developing an open implementation of this? ICD-centric; possibly NT-centric.
3Dlabs would like to see this, and is willing to do some of the work.
Bimal - Intel is interested in participating in a working group. Some WGL features leave a lot to be desired, e.g. error handling mechanism.
Jon - SGI is willing to open source opengl32.dll infrastructure, if Microsoft allows it. IP issues involved.
ChrisH - Different levels of IP. Probably no patents involved.
Dale - Mainly interested in what the application sees, and a specification of how that works. Easier on Win2K - Win98 does lots of this work inside opengl32.dll rather than the ICD.
George - Will Microsoft say just what IP they’re concerned about?
DaveA - Will research it and report back.
Dale - Thinks NT has actually hurt OpenGL by not evolving its support.
ChrisH - advocates taking control of the entire mechanism, to not rely on Redmond. Concerned about how much systems work is involved.
Michael - Ideally, ICD loader would come from Microsoft, if they can keep it up to date. Code effort required isn’t significant.
Jon - SGI has already done this work; the issue seems to be Microsoft finding engineering resources to test / package / ship it.
DaveA - Trying to find resources to get this done.
Kurt - it’s clear Microsoft won’t do this. If people want it, they need to just go do it.
ChrisH - volunteers to drive the spec, with Bimal, Michael, and Dale. Will create a working group through the regular ARB process.
Jon - concerned about compatibility issues with existing build/runtime environment.
Dale - don’t want to get into namespace wars with Microsoft. Will write up a proposal for ARB vote.
ChrisH - wants to make sure this includes Win9x too.
Dale - impromptu meeting at 5 PM.
This is what the hades I’m talking about!
Its’pretty clear to me.
?? a bit confusing…so what are you mad about, exactly? I too wonder why Microsoft is on the board, but I’m not understanding this argument.
I think his suggestion is that MS not be involved in the release of future versions of OpenGL. Makes sense to me since I am told they have been sitting on the new dll’s for half a year.
Well it’s pretty clear to me…
the issue seems to be Microsoft finding engineering resources to test / package / ship it.
FFS!!! M$, probably one of the most powerful companies in the world, cant find the resources just to update the win32 OpenGL system!!! It’s hardly rocket science!!!
Lamers! Everyone knows they are intentionally dragging their feet with opengl, cos they want d3d to take over!
Direct X? Direct Gayness more like!!!
And this is why I’m bidding M$ adieu and going to Mac OSX!!!