Win2K SP2 still ships OpenGL 1.1

There you go. The promised OpenGL 1.2 DLL’s are not being shipped with Service Pack 2.

Of course, as I recall, Microsoft said 1.2 would ship with “a future service pack for windows 2000”. Meaning, probably SP-Never.

Siwko

WHAAAATT!!! M$ Haven’t updated their OpenGL dll!!! Quick! Pass the smelling salts… I feel a little faint…

Nutty

Come on, be nice. It’s a small company and they are still trying to allocate resources to the project.

Does anyone want to make 3d textures in software ???

Just kidding

I would say that when you think of it. It isn’t nearly that bad afterall.

Think, with extensions, you know that you’ll get accelleration. Think of it as like DX’s CapBits.

Hehehehe… I love you guys.

Siwko

Mmmmm… Linux.

Originally posted by IsaackRasmussen:
Think, with extensions, you know that you’ll get accelleration. Think of it as like DX’s CapBits.

You have no guarantee that the extension is in hardware. None. In fact, EXT_texture3D
is supported all on NVIDIA hardware from the TNT up. In software, of course.

Go to the software vs. hardware thread on the suggestions forum, and cast your vote for a method to detect software rendering

Seriously guys, why would ms wanted to update ogl and make competition for their directx? I wouldn’t and neither would you if you were rational, that’s my own thinking. Besides the competition I read on ms directx mailing list that there is already a scramble for human resources at ms. Isn’t d3dx licensed from berkely? Let’s face it, ogl 1.1 is the last release on windows, stick to linux or beos for 1.2

*It’s all my speculation of course

DX isn’t really appropriate for more scientific stuff, so if M$ wants to keep customers from that area it would be sensible for them to get their act together with this.

I guess it depends on the needs of the individual. Ms probably feels more people need game api now and are catering to them. If there were more scientific guys coding on ms platforms ms would cater to them I guess Anyways, I feel that ogl will flourish on linux or other open source os because of the free access to its internals.

I have few questions now. Does mesa do hardware acceleration or software only? Is mesa the only free and open source ogl like api or are there others? Someday would like to try linux/ogl as I feel a common accessible(source code) os is important for software longetivity. Nevermind the handful of game nuts on linux, as I feel games will have to be written first to attract audience in linux world including driver gys. Then we could get out of a catch 22 situation.

Originally posted by ET3D:
You have no guarantee that the extension is in hardware. None. In fact, EXT_texture3D
is supported all on NVIDIA hardware from the TNT up. In software, of course.

Ohh… that sucks!

I have few questions now. Does mesa do hardware acceleration or software only?

Both.

Is mesa the only free and open source ogl like api or are there others?

Only one I know of.

Thanks rts Could you spare me little more of your time? Please

The way I understand opengl under windows is that ms provides a opengl32.dll that contains all wgl and gl functions. Then video chip driver exports few specific non opengl calls that the ms opengl32.dll calls, right? What about under linux. I just came from nvidia driver faq page and am confused about their binary only opengl driver. Does nvidia writes all opengl and non-gl functions in the driver itself and you call those from their dll like you would from ms opengl32.dll? I have geforce2 gts coming my way so naturally my curiosity is heightened There are some good per pixel lighting demos done with opengl I like to try, don’t feel like tessalating down the geometry is appropriate or is it faster than per pixel lighting? Back to linux, ATI gives specs out so does it mean mesa wrote ms opengl32.dll equivalent? Can someone shed some light on this linux/ogl driver situation? And what about glu library under linux? Does nvidia wrote that too? Can I use hw opengl without mesa? Lots of q’s but I’m slow, thanks in advance

The way I understand opengl under windows is that ms provides a opengl32.dll that contains all wgl and gl functions. Then video chip driver exports few specific non opengl calls that the ms opengl32.dll calls, right?

Beats me. I don’t do Windows.

Does nvidia writes all opengl and non-gl functions in the driver itself and you call those from their dll like you would from ms opengl32.dll?

Things are different in the nvidia world. I don’t have an nvidia card, so the following may be wrong.

As I understand it, nvidia not only provides drivers, they also provide an implementation of OpenGL for Linux that replaces Mesa.

So it goes something like:

nvidia OpenGL --> nvidia X driver --> nvidia kernel module --> H/W.

I think.

There are some good per pixel lighting demos done with opengl I like to try, don’t feel like tessalating down the geometry is appropriate or is it faster than per pixel lighting?

I don’t know.

Back to linux, ATI gives specs out so does it mean mesa wrote ms opengl32.dll equivalent?

Yes.

Can someone shed some light on this linux/ogl driver situation?

That’s what I’m doing, I hope.

And what about glu library under linux? Does nvidia wrote that too?

I believe so. There is also Mesa-GLU.

Can I use hw opengl without mesa?

If you are using an nvidia card you will be doing HW OpenGL without Mesa, since all Nvidia stuff is closed source/closely guarded secrets.

More general info available at http://dri.sourceforge.net/ and http://www.mesa3d.org/ and http://www.xfree86.org/

Cheers

Thanks for taking the time to answer my q’s Now the whole mesa vs. nvidia makes sense to me.

Hey guys.

I believe someone (maybe SGI) is currently trying to find a work-around for the OpenGL32.dll problem.

Any you guys read the OpenML announcement. The specifications should be published soon. It’s funny to see that M$ isn’t in the list of participants on that project!

Nutty

P.S. Finally got my GF3 stable with a bigger PSU! Though I had to disable one of my case fans aswell! Guess I need an even bigger PSU! :eek:

Nutty, what’s the minimum PS wattage gf3 system needs, I’ve got 300w. You using AMD or Intel cpu?

I’ve got an Athlon 1Ghz. I was using a 250, with combined rating of 125. This 300 has a combined rating of 150. Which still aint powerful enuff. Probably want a combined rating of 160 minimum.

The 300 Watter my PC supplier is getting for me is 160 combined, so I’m just using this one till then.

Nutty

That 300w is it AMD approved? Mine is. Do the amd approved PS have higher combined rating than generic PS? I too have 1ghz tbird but geforce2, one harddrive and cdrom also pc2100 ddr ram coming my way. Hope my PS will be able to run them.

P.S. what does the combined rating mean? Thanks.

[This message has been edited by JD (edited 05-19-2001).]