Hmm… this is mor of a continuation of another
thread, than the direction of this one, but I just had
a thought. First, there are pretty much two reasons
why Windows people ask about the D3D API:
- They are worried about OpenGL support on the Win32
(especially WinXP) platform.
I’ve had enough of this FUD.
Vendors are AFRAID to drop OpenGL support. Microsoft weilds a big hammer,
but Id Software wields a bigger one in this area. There are millions of
people who play Id’s games and no vendor in their right mind will cut
themselves off from that many customers overnight.
Notice that chipsets such as those from Matrox, the Kyro II, and a host of
others have basically fallen by the wayside? Because their OpenGL support
was sub-par in comparison with the competition.
Microsoft has been promising an end to OpenGL support in Win32 for the
past four years now. But the chipset makers know that OpenGL is the one
hammer they’ve got, and some of them have been willing to whack Microsoft
with that hammer if they don’t at least play nice with DirectX. As for
software vendors, guess what? Companies are still making OpenGL games,
and many of them OpenGL-only games. A number of them now support also
DirectX, but warn that this is a slower path.
DirectX hurts SDL’s portability, but I wouldn’t mind seeing support for it
anyway, especially if SDL supported DX8 for its 2D functions natively.
- they like to use the D3D API…
I can’t speak for these people much. Direct3D’s API has improved, but
most of the people I know who prefer it do so for the standardization
rather than the API, which they agree still sucks it hard.
I think I just had a thought that might help. Mesa is
a (for all intents and purposes) full implementation
of the OpenGL API. I know Mesa is primarily known as
a software renderer, but (at least under Unix) it does
support several 3D cards. (I’m using Mesa to drive my
Voodoo Banshee.) Given that Mesa already supports
multiple backends (Software/Voodoo/Matrox), it seems
logical that it wouldn’t be that difficult to make it
able to support one more (D3D)… I’m sure this would
be no trivial task, but I’m sure it’s less daunting
than writing a complete OpenGL->D3D wrapper from
I can’t say this is even a good project in the context of SDL, because
it’s completely outside of SDL’s purpose. That said, if someone makes
Mesa build as a D3D wrapper, I’d be quite interested in seeing it running
with SDL. In that case, it should be trivial or unnecessary to alter SDL
for the purpose.
As for the people that wish to code to the D3D API, I
see no reason that they can’t licence TransGaming’s
I can, but I’m not at all fond of the company at the moment. That’s an
off-topic rant all its own though, so I’ll help preseve what remains of
Sam’s sanity and not bring it here. =)On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 01:22:14PM -0700, Loren Osborn wrote:
Joseph Carter Have chainsaw will travel
- Mercury calmly removes XT-Ream’s arm…
- Mercury then proceeds to beat XT-Ream with XT-Ream’s arm.
wow, all this quake hacking is making Mercury violent here
- mao is glad the quake forge project is in good hands
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed…
Name: not available
Size: 273 bytes
Desc: not available