So are you ok with me that an very old OpenGL program (for example a very basic 1.0 OpenGL code) have obligatory to work on a alls news opengl implementations, yes ?
I was a supporter of Longs Peak. So I would have been very happy with a clean, backwards incompatible break between old OpenGL and new OpenGL. So no, I’m not OK with drivers having to support 15+ year old software.
If no, this new opengl implementation isn’t a true OpenGL implementation (because it can’t pass the OpenGL tests), true ?
The OpenGL 3.2 specification does not require the support of old software. It has fully removed most of the ancient API cruft that makes writing drivers difficult. Practical realities make it hard for driver developers to break the link between 3.2 core and 3.2 compatibility, but perhaps this will happen in the future as the specification evolves.
And there are no “OpenGL tests.” I wish there were.
I have really problems to understand why a decent (software only perhaps) OpenGL implementation can’t be done on the PocketPC platform for example
Why do you use OpenGL? To draw semi-decent pictures at 1 frame per second? Or to make something at reasonable framerates?
If you want performance, you need dedicated hardware. A software only implementation is of no value to anyone wanting to do anything of significance on a PocketPC.
And don’t understand why we have to be obligatory aligned with the badest standard (that isn’t standard for others hardware/OS that itself …).
What is the “badest standard” you are talking about?
So, why the major platform doesn’t want to make as alls the others and help really for to use and upgrade a standardised API that exist since a very long time and that work on almost all the newests hardwares and OSs that are born since the first OpenGL implementation from SGI in 1992 and that is based on the IRIS GL API ???
Are you asking why Microsoft isn’t supporting OpenGL? Quite frankly, I don’t blame them.
Historically, the OpenGL Architectural Review Board has been terrible at exposing new functionality. OpenGL had a minor advantage in the GeForce 1-2 days. But when programmability came around, the ARB had nothing.
It wasn’t like hardware vendors were hiding the fact that there would be programmable hardware coming. Everyone know it was happening. But the ARB took a good year to come out with ARB_vertex_program. A year after Direct3D had vertex programmability. If you are a game developer, why would you make an OpenGL game that couldn’t even use this powerful new hardware, rather than a Direct3D game that could?
OpenGL has been behind the curve ever since. ARB_vertex_buffer_object came out long after D3D had solved that problem. ARB_framebuffer_object came out long after equivalent D3D functionality. GLSL appeared 2 years after D3D had shader functionality.
And here’s the thing: most of the OpenGL solutions have these really annoying stupidities with them. Buffer objects have their ill-defined usage hints. Framebuffer objects have this stupid hack where a driver can refuse an FBO for no particular reason. The myriad of problems centered around GLSL would take me far too long to explain.
That’s not to say that D3D doesn’t have API annoyances. But most of OpenGL’s problems are born out of things that sounded like a good idea at the time, yet now can never be changed. Because breaking backwards compatibility is a big no-no in OpenGL land. Whereas D3D can do it whenever it is appropriate. This allows them the freedom to correct mistakes.
Game developers need a graphics API that can evolve, one that can improve with the times. An API that, when new hardware comes out, will immediately provide them with access to it. OpenGL couldn’t do that. Not cross-platform; NVIDIA has always done a good job with coming up with strong extensions in a timely fashion. But they’re not cross-platform.
And you may say, “Who cares about what game developers want?” Well, game developers create the vast majority of software for graphics. They drive most graphics software. They force Max/Maya/etc to use whatever API that they use. And since that API is getting good performance, CAD houses start looking into using it.