Wine Devs Have Mixed Feelings Over Direct3D In Gallium3D

[Remco]

especially when there is no BENEFIT.

The most important thing here is the lack of benefit. Legal issues can be solved, but this tracker is of little benefit. I can't stress enough how tiny the Direct3D/OpenGL specific parts of a game engine are. Direct3D is also not in any way easier than OpenGL. Graphics is a pretty simple thing, and the APIs to do graphics with are very easy to learn.

The only reason that there are few games for Linux: no money. As soon as a game company thinks Linux is a significant market, they will port their game.

The only reason that Direct3D is used on Windows instead of OpenGL: it has a bigger installed base. Many Windows desktops do not have OpenGL drivers. This is the reason why Chrome has a Direct3D translation layer for WebGL.

[V!NCENT]

Eh? The game industry doesn't care one way or another. Other industries seems to be agreeing just fine.

Yeah luckily Skype does... oh wait.

[droidhacker]

Linux doesn't have MS technology, it's just a kernel. If you don't want MS tech, don't use software that has it. Also, since when is D3D over G3D considered a poorly implemented technology?

D3D over G3D is native. That's the whole point of the news.

Name ONE NATIVE LINUX APPLICATION that uses D3D. AAAANNNNNNDDDDD There you go. Not native. Totally foreign.

Partly agree with you here, but we lack a better alternative to D3D.

Its called OpenGL. USE IT!

And it's not easy to just change D3D to screw us, we just have to implement the new bits they add to the API... Should be easy enough.

Are you bloody kidding? They've done it already a dozen times or more, and they haven't even implemented yet (to my knowledge, maybe they have...) a forced-encryption/DRM mode that depends on GPU vendor having non-revoked KEYS like those required for BD PLAYBACK.

There is a TON of nasty crap they WILL implement as it becomes necessary in order to keep the brainless masses locked in to their garbage platform!

[mdias]

If you took your head out of your ass, you would realize that MS implements things for no purpose EXCEPT to lock you into their platform. There is no reason to support their nonsense, especially when there is no BENEFIT.

I'll be glad to report you if you continue to use useless offensive language against me instead of participating in this discussion in a constructive way.

Microsoft creates tools that facilitates people's life in order to get costumers and therefore money. D3D currently excels at that in the graphics department, along with Visual Studio for programming and so on. So, we developers are given all the love when coding for D3D on Windows. That translates into more developers for windows. Note that MS doesn't offer money to people to use D3D on windows instead of OGL, so why do you think developers do it? Because it's a much superior API for graphics. There are examples of cases where MS fails at an API too (WinAPI) and people tend to avoid it if worth it...

Also, could you explain how using D3D legally on linux will lock you on MS's platform? I'm not following you here...

Name ONE NATIVE LINUX APPLICATION that uses D3D. AAAANNNNNNDDDDD There you go. Not native. Totally foreign.

Open your eyes. It's possible to use D3D natively on linux ONLY NOW, obvisually no big app exists that uses a technology that didn't exist in the past. But if anything counts, there are demos of D3D being used through G3D right now.

Its called OpenGL. USE IT!

Either you didn't understand the sentence "we lack a better alternative to D3D" or you never touched the D3D API. I'm willing to bet you're not even a serious developer.

Are you bloody kidding? They've done it already a dozen times or more, and they haven't even implemented yet (to my knowledge, maybe they have...) a forced-encryption/DRM mode that depends on GPU vendor having non-revoked KEYS like those required for BD PLAYBACK.

There is a TON of nasty crap they WILL implement as it becomes necessary in order to keep the brainless masses locked in to their garbage platform!

Surely linux isn't the reason DRM exists. The API exists in it's current form to closely match the architecture of current hardware. They'll not break the API just because someone decided to implement it in another OS. Other reasons might arise that makes them do that, but so what? We're talking about implementing D3D10/11 here, not D3D12+. It's always possible to follow our own route after that, which would slowly make a transition into a new API, which if better than D3D would be easy for developers to adopt (since it was a gradual transition) and we could end up with something usable instead of poor OpenGL... But hey, I'm just dreaming here...

[V!NCENT]

I'll be glad to report you[...]

Either do that to others that deserve it or don't.

D3D currently excels at that in the graphics department, along with Visual Studio for programming and so on.

What makes you think Direct3D 11 is leaps ahead of OpenGL 4.1?
And what makes Visual Studio so great? Last time I checked Microsoft devs bashed the latest itteration to death because it takes a visual approach to programming. Please explain to me why this match in hell is so ?ber alles?

Also, could you explain how using D3D legally on linux will lock you on MS's platform? I'm not following you here...

Increased marketshare means anything to you?

Either you didn't understand the sentence "we lack a better alternative to D3D" or you never touched the D3D API.

I, for one, don't. All I ever heared is that Direct3D results in the worst spagethi code on the planet and OpenGL works even on the most obscure platforms. Android and iOS 4 are pretty much kicking Windows Mobile's butt, hard. Where is Direct3D? -> On a locked desktop platform that's loosing marketshare 'the better it gets'.

I'm willing to bet you're not even a serious developer.

Nice move. Worth repporting too?

Surely linux isn't the reason DRM exists. The API exists in it's current form to closely match the architecture of current hardware. They'll not break the API just because someone decided to implement it in another OS. Other reasons might arise that makes them do that, but so what? We're talking about implementing D3D10/11 here, not D3D12+. It's always possible to follow our own route after that, which would slowly make a transition into a new API, which if better than D3D would be easy for developers to adopt (since it was a gradual transition) and we could end up with something usable instead of poor OpenGL... But hey, I'm just dreaming here...

Stop being so extremely delusional. You and I both know you're post argument making shit up just so that you can get your pro-D3D point proven.

[mdias]

I myself said I was just dreaming there.

OGL isn't the reason iOS, Android, etc are having huge success.

Feature-wise OGL may be on par with D3D, but there's more to it than just features.

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound agressive about you not being a serious developer, I meant that you probably don't win your money doing serious (as in big) projects that require realtime 3D graphics.

I am still to test the latest iteration of VStudio, so I cannot comment on that.

Increased market share of D3D doesn't lock you on a platform if you're free to implement it wherever you want.

I have nothing else to discuss with you since you're bashing D3D without having ever touched it.

[pingufunkybeat]

Microsoft creates tools that facilitates people's life in order to get costumers and therefore money.

You have to be either

1) new to computers
2) naive
3) astroturfing.

Every single tool Microsoft has ever produced has tried to lock you into their ecosystem.

D3D currently excels at that in the graphics department, along with Visual Studio for programming and so on.

They don't excel on anything other than Windows. See the previous sentence. They only excel if you use Windows and nothing other than Windows, and will prevent you from using or developing for anything else.

That's a typical lockout, and that's exactly why D3D was created. As soon as you make Linux dependent on it, they will unearth patents they hold, introduce new upgrades which will only work on Windows (by design) and Linux will be screwed.

Also, could you explain how using D3D legally on linux will lock you on MS's platform? I'm not following you here...

Direct3d on Linux will work like HTML on Linux worked when IE had a monopoly. They will corrupt the standard, give Windows developers libraries which implement the standard incorrectly, and everybody will code for this incorrect standard because it's "easier". And the Linux developers will be stuck trying to figure out how to make it work, because this incompatibility will not be public, or standard.

Surely linux isn't the reason DRM exists. The API exists in it's current form to closely match the architecture of current hardware. They'll not break the API just because someone decided to implement it in another OS.

You really haven't followed Microsoft in the last 20 years, have you?

They have done this with EVERY standard they laid their hands on. They did this with HTML, they did this with their Office formats. They did this with Kerberos. They couldn't do it with OpenGL, so they started their own thing, which locks you into Windows. They tried it with Java (make a popular fork of Java which only works on Windows), and when Sun sued them, they introduced .Net -- a slightly incompatible version of Java which only works on Windows.

Using MS technology on an alternative platform is like leaving your child with a paedophile. What the **** do you THINK they are going to do as soon as you adopt their technology? The same thing they've ALWAYS done.

[pingufunkybeat]

Feature-wise OGL may be on par with D3D, but there's more to it than just features.

There's FAR more to it:

- Open standards body
- Transparent decisions
- Anyone can join and influence the standard. All major players are represented in Khronos, only Microsoft makes the decisions for D3D
- Cross-platform availability

[pingufunkybeat]

Oh yeah, do you know that MS has sued people for using the FAT filesystem?

Do you know how much trouble the SAMBA team has had implementing the MS "standards" which didn't turn out to be so "standard" after all.

Do you know WHY there still is no stable out-of-the-box support for R/W NTFS in the Linux kernel?

And you think that you just have to make a state tracker for Gallium3d, and games will come to Linux? Just like that, so easy? And MS will be happy?

Seriously, do you get paid for this?

[pingufunkybeat]

Oh, and I have a question for you.

Mono has been developed for almost 10 years now.

Can it run all .Net programs without problems yet?

I thought so. Good luck with D3D and getting Windows-native stuff running on Linux.