Originally posted by BlackStar
View Post
Regarding your remarks, all I can say is that my personal experience is that (a) OpenGL is easier to misuse and (b) its drivers blow up much easier compared to D3D, even when used correctly. The first is easy to fix, with experience and correct tools. The latter not so much.
As for being easier to misuse... Not so sure about that. Most of the "misuse" is because there's no conformance suite for the drivers in question whereas there is with D3D stuff. For example, NVidia's handling of shaders is more tolerant of mistakes within the code and AMD is more tightly following the specs themselves (Which is actually where people come to think the AMD drivers are "buggier" on Windows- it "works" on NVidia for things, when in reality NVidia's stuff LET you cheat.). You can't misuse AMD's drivers, but they get blamed for NVidia's letting you do the wrong stuff in the first place.
If there was an explicit conformance suite that HAD to be implemented before they could claim it was "OpenGL", and they had more manpower on supporting the code they produced- there'd be a similar situation with OpenGL as with D3D, based on my professional experience. Yours may vary, but that's something to be argued over, no?
D3D has the advantage of more testing and faster response to bugs (all those games...) With OpenGL you are pretty much SOL, unless you happen to run on Nvidia Quadros. Great if you can afford to dictate the hardware, sucks otherwise.
Comment