Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DirectX...for X

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by curaga View Post
    But if it finds its way to a repo, the repo will have a source package available. I've seen some in both Ubuntu and Debian that have been fetched from trunk.

    Then there's only the compiling
    Debian provides source packages for their repos? If it's a trunk build it would seem more sensible to just provide a revision stamp to check out and leave it at that.

    Well, in any case, a Linux binary still doesn't help windows users much...

    Comment


    • #47
      I'm getting into game development and my idea was to make cross platform open source demos of my games, but release a closed source binary exclusively for linux with better textures, features, more levels, and overall more complete.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by portets43 View Post
        I'm getting into game development and my idea was to make cross platform open source demos of my games, but release a closed source binary exclusively for linux with better textures, features, more levels, and overall more complete.
        Great idea, this way you can piss off both crowds! Linux-specific closed binaries, that's a first.

        My advice: develop a great game and release it. Create it on Linux. Get it included in distros. Optionally cross-compile for Windows / Mac OS X. This is going to do a lot more for Linux than trying to create some artificial tie-in.

        No single game is going to suddenly bring gamers to Linux. However the *availability* of good games is a selling point.

        An interesting tidbit: my current project (a brain-computer interface with high-end 3d graphics, quad-buffer stereo, etc, written in C#) runs at 72fps on Linux vs 61fps on Windows. This is the same system, with a Radeon 4850 on catalyst 9.3 and vsync off. Same binaries, different runtimes (Mono vs .Net). I haven't been able to pinpoint the source of the difference yet, but it is there and it is significant; and if it persists, guess which operating system we are going to use for the final product.

        Comment


        • #49
          The original intent of this thread has some merit, I think. The expanded question, if I understand it correctly, is something like:

          "Why not build a DirectX "implementation" for X, that would allow commercial software developers to port their Windows applications to Linux and still make "native" DirectX API calls."

          I get it... that would simplify the whole process of porting software to the Linux platform simpler for developers that have standardized on the DirectX API for games, 3D apps, etc, because they could create Linux binaries that link to the "linux" DirectX-clone implementation.

          As several folks mentioned before, the problem is that it's much easier said than done. It would require an enormous amount of documentation about the inner workings of DirectX, and would require explicit driver support from the graphics card manufacturers, both of which would be very difficult to achieve.



          On a different topic... I agree that not enough work is being done on creating MacOS binary compatibility (or at least some type of compatibility layer similar to WINE) for Linux. That would be HUGE for the Linux platform, even if for one reason only: PHOTOSHOP. If it were possible to run the Mac version of Photoshop "natively" under Gnome or KDE, it would be an absolute game-changer for the PC OS marketplace, and the rate of Linux adoption would probably skyrocket. It would have to be easier to do this for Mac software than for Windows stuff, I don't understand why so much development has been done on Wine but so little on Mac binary compat.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
            Great idea, this way you can piss off both crowds! Linux-specific closed binaries, that's a first.

            My advice: develop a great game and release it. Create it on Linux. Get it included in distros. Optionally cross-compile for Windows / Mac OS X. This is going to do a lot more for Linux than trying to create some artificial tie-in.

            No single game is going to suddenly bring gamers to Linux. However the *availability* of good games is a selling point.

            An interesting tidbit: my current project (a brain-computer interface with high-end 3d graphics, quad-buffer stereo, etc, written in C#) runs at 72fps on Linux vs 61fps on Windows. This is the same system, with a Radeon 4850 on catalyst 9.3 and vsync off. Same binaries, different runtimes (Mono vs .Net). I haven't been able to pinpoint the source of the difference yet, but it is there and it is significant; and if it persists, guess which operating system we are going to use for the final product.

            well, the demo's will be open source. and when i create a sequel(or if enough time passes by) i will open the source to the first version. and besides, i'm trying to attract people from other os's. people under wincrap don't care about open source generally

            Comment


            • #51
              Direct3D under Linux? What about Gallium3D? It's not there yet, but that would seem to be the best route to take.

              Comment

              Working...
              X