The Khronos Group Is Developing A New Graphics API From The Ground-Up

[omer666]

Hopefully the new API wont be in sync with the legacy stuff ever (hope I dint misunderstood what you meant).
Its time for a clean-sheet approach, a compromise with OpenGL will lead to big discussions and delays and I cant imagine it helping in any way whatsoever. Building a Legacy OpenGL layer on top of it should be feasible though and completely unrelated to the design of the API.

Using an API is app specific, that's not like switching from Xorg to Wayland. I remember Unreal Tournament on Mac OS 9 which supported 3 hardware acceleration API (+ Sofware Rendering mode), RAVE, OpenGL and Glide, all on the same GPU. There is no reason for future drivers not to support OpenGL AND the new API.

So Open Source games using OpenGL have no reason to switch if they don't want to (but switching would allow them to do new things, indeed).
And for 3D CAD guys that want to keep all that old bloat in OpenGL... well develop some portable software to begin with and then we'll talk.

[mdias]

Well, the people defending OGL with "all their teeth" usually try to point at that CURRENTLY OpenGL performs on par with Direct3D for CURRENT requirements.

It is rarely a matter of performance alone. I'm not going to list all the problems as there's enough info on that already. Most of the problems are invisible to the end user, which is why there were so many people defending it; they have no clue what OGL really is, many only know that it's cross-platform graphics API.

Many devs are too lazy and ignorant to understand that D3D != OGL and writing wrappers is not trivial and not the easier way to add OGL support for existing D3D software.

I don't believe you. If someone's porting from A to B they are studying one of them and probably already know the other one, therefore it's kind of hard not to understand enough of both by the end of the process.

Differences betwen D3D and OGL are not per se design flaws and weaknesses of OGL. I never heared about a guy claiming OGL is good enough for the future as it is.

I agree. However D3D was never claimed to be the solution. D3D is only brought up when talking about a specific problem that it solves better (not necessarily the best way possible).

My previous post wasn't supposed to praise D3D. There's just been many topics in the past where me and other devs stated our points of view regarding OpenGL and people would just go crazy about it, even though they don't really work with it.

[berillions]

If i understand, this new graphic API is beneficial for Linux gamers no ?

After to read the article here : https://www.khronos.org/news/press/k...engl-ecosystem and the comment by Johan Andersson, technical director at Frostbite - Electronic Arts, he said :

?We are super excited to contribute and work with the Next Generation OpenGL Initiative, and bring our experience of low-overhead and explicit graphics APIs to build an efficient standard for multiple platforms and vendors in Khronos,? ?This work is of critical importance to get the most out of modern GPUs on both mobile and desktop, and to make it easier to develop advanced and efficient 3D applications - enabling us to build amazing future games with Frostbite on all platforms.?

Very beautiful dream or not ?

[zanny]

If i understand, this new graphic API is beneficial for Linux gamers no ?

After to read the article here : https://www.khronos.org/news/press/k...engl-ecosystem and the comment by Johan Andersson, technical director at Frostbite - Electronic Arts, he said :


Very beautiful dream or not ?

If it is concise it should be easier to implement. There is a reason the compatibility profile was left at 3.0 in Mesa, because it is so much insane work to support all that backlogged bloat.

[OneTimeShot]

My previous post wasn't supposed to praise D3D..

Not sure if I believe you there!

If you do want me to stand up for OpenGL (even in its current form): it is *still* the only...

- cross-platform (ahem... Metal)
- cross-vendor (ahem.. Mantle)
- backwardly compatible
- currently available (ahem... DX12)
- vaguely open
- fully featured
- available as FOSS on Linux

...API currently available.


I'll admit that I have only poked around 3d as a developer (really simple FPS stuff) -but I didn't find OpenGL as an API all that hard to deal with. I'll take your word for it that the advanced stuff is a disaster compared to DX11.

Still, as long as my list of requirements above is met, I don't mind if they rebadge Mantle/Metal/DX12 as OpenGL 5.

[justmy2cents]

would be valid... if this new standard wouldn't replace old one. unlike in that joke, there will still be 14 standards.

[Ziple]

Not sure if I believe you there!

If you do want me to stand up for OpenGL (even in its current form): it is *still* the only...

- cross-platform (ahem... Metal)
- cross-vendor (ahem.. Mantle)
- backwardly compatible
- currently available (ahem... DX12)
- vaguely open
- fully featured
- available as FOSS on Linux

...API currently available.


I'll admit that I have only poked around 3d as a developer (really simple FPS stuff) -but I didn't find OpenGL as an API all that hard to deal with. I'll take your word for it that the advanced stuff is a disaster compared to DX11.

Still, as long as my list of requirements above is met, I don't mind if they rebadge Mantle/Metal/DX12 as OpenGL 5.

Let's hope that Khronos will provide real conformance tests for this new OpenGL and that the vendors will make their driver conformant. Because with current OpenGL, your application sometimes doesn't run on some drivers or run differently. Khronos claims that openGL is cross platform, the reality is that you always hit some uncoformant behaviour someday.

[smitty3268]

would be valid... if this new standard wouldn't replace old one. unlike in that joke, there will still be 14 standards.

I can pretty much guarantee you that OpenGL isn't going away.

There's way, way, way too much legacy applications out there for that to ever happen.

[profoundWHALE]

So, now that Khronos finally recognized that OpenGL is currently a big fail, everybody's suddenly happy to acknowledge that too?

Where are the people that used to defend OpenGL with all their teeth when devs criticized it?

on-topic: it should be far less work for drivers to support this API compared to OpenGL.

Considering how well it has done on every platform, it is far from fail.

However, it's very fragmented which makes Direct3D a lot more appealing to people developing on Windows because it is much more streamlined/locked down.

[justmy2cents]

I can pretty much guarantee you that OpenGL isn't going away.

There's way, way, way too much legacy applications out there for that to ever happen.

why would it go away, there are zillion legacy reasons on why it should stay. new gl just deprecates old without any fuzz since publishing vendor for both is the same, there is no question which one is better. i doubt we will see khronos bashing kronos or khronos praising the old. joke on the other hand was aimed at competing standards