For Those Interested In Direct3D Over Gallium3D

[BlackStar]

I remember trying to program a soundblaster on DOS. I also remember having to write my own blit functions in assembler to draw sprites. It boiled down to memcpying your data directly into the graphics memory. Not funny.

"OS does not matter" my ass.

Come on, VBE modes were fun! (when they worked on your graphics adapter)

Sound sucked big time, however. Funnily enough, that was one of the biggest improvements of Win95 vs MS-DOS for game developers. Big enough that they started porting stuff despite video performance being worse at first.

[V!NCENT]

Are you trying to create nostalgia, BlackStar? Pretty much everyone besides you on the planet still suffers from a blue square still printed on their retina...

The entire term 'computer rage' wouldn't have been invented were it not for Windows.

[mugginz]

So, what makes Windows an inferior product? Win95, were designed for home users, with a special interest for gaming. It managed to be great at its time. It could run games very well, it could run almost all DOS apps flawlessly, it had (primitive) plug n play support, it could connect to the internet etc. It could do almost everything a home user could ask for, and it was fairly easy for non-technical users to use. So what makes it a failure?

While I agree with the main thrust of your argument from the post with that paragraph, on the matter of the user friendliness of Win98/95 I think that doesn't hold true for your garden variety computer user.

As a tech in various computer outlets during that time period I can attest to the case of many, many users who had issues with even the basics of a Windows box. Windows and DOS didn't make a lot of sense to the lay person. To a tech, sure, but not to one untrained or unfamiliar with the MS ecosystem.

Those systems were decently learnable for those wanting to put the energy and effort into learning to drive and configure them properly though.

I get the feeling there could be some "rose coloured glasses" factor at play when looking back at how Win98 and Win98 was to use.

[Beiruty]

When we will be able to see D3D vs OpenGL benchs?
Still no plane for D3D 9.x?

[Drago]

I still want to see a single screen shot of D3D1x demo working on Linux.

[pingufunkybeat]

When we will be able to see D3D vs OpenGL benchs?
Still no plane for D3D 9.x?

I don't know what you want to benchmark?

There still isn't a single program out there making use of this. And no driver.

[Beiruty]

I don't know what you want to benchmark?

There still isn't a single program out there making use of this. And no driver.

I would love to see fur benchmark being ported.

http://www.ozone3d.net/smf/index.php/topic,784.0.html

[mugginz]

Exactly! Unlike its competitors, it had the right combination of features, applications, price and backwards compatibility to be adopted by the masses. The more advanced OS/2 was wrapped into WinNT which had higher hardware requirements, BeOS and MacOS didn't work on IBM compatibles and Unices weren't really designed with the desktop in mind. Add DOS/Win3 compatibility (which also means games!), add some marketing blitz and it's no wonder things turned out as they did.

Must agree.

Being good enough, and especial good in the right places is pretty key in a consumer good.

Technical superiority only gets you so far. It's only important when it delivers the right outcomes for the customer. If a turd of a slow program is made to look good via brute force PC throughput it will look better to someone than an efficient and well executed program on old, slow hardware for example.

Also, if a turd is marketed in the right way, in the right places, it will outsell better offerings as I'm sure we've all seen time and time again. And you cant discount group think either. I can't remember the amount of times I was asked "why would you want to use a mouse?" by PC users until they got Win3.0, then things were different because now their favourite platform can use one properly. Some can never be swayed away from their chosen platform.

While I don't think that Win3.0 really compared to the other platforms from a software point of view, it was hugely boosted by the fact that it got to run on cheap Taiwanese hardware that at each price point you got more CPU throughput per dollar when say compared to what you got from Commodore, Atari, Apple, etc, unless you were buying an I.B.M. brand PC

MS, at least a mostly competent company in the late 70's, got lucky with the initial IBM PC deal, built on top of that luck and moved lots of what was at times inferior product. By the time of Win98, their OS was pretty descent in my book, if still not totally user friendly, was at least good enough, with its then level of momentum carrying them forward to the point we have now.

The fact that OSX was able to claw back market share with a superior product in the view of some gives hope for those making an alternative. If that alternative is right in the right places of course. I think the Linux desktop is starting to be right in the right places for the general user. So soon it might only be momentum it's fighting, not whether one can or can't accomplish a particular task in an easy and pleasant way.

/rant

[TemplarGR]

I get a feeling there is no point trying to put sense to people's heads. Sentimental people judge based on feelings, not logic... Those hating Microsoft will never be able to be reasoned with...

Even if you had the absolute best OS, but it could run no software, it would still be a failure. An OS is as usefull as the application software you can run on it.

And Linux is not technologically superior in every way. There are sectors it excels and sectors it is lacking. Not to mention some features it took years to get, for example Kernel Mode Setting...

Windows95 did have problems but so Linux TODAY. Some of you are making the false assumption that Linux ecosystem today is without faults and problems...

In the end, there is not some kind of conspiracy keeping Linux at 1% range. Especially since Linux is free. People can just run their software with Windows and it is ok with them. So that means Windows are doing their job well...

And back on topic, Direct3D if implemented well could bring AAA gaming to Linux, and this is exactly what it lacks at the moment. I do not care what some snobs think, games are a vital factor, and most people who get in touch with Linux do not abandon Windows because of games...

[pingufunkybeat]

And back on topic, Direct3D if implemented well could bring AAA gaming to Linux

Why do you think this?

First of all, the people who bring AAA games to Linux professionally have already told you that this is wrong (Svartalf).

Furthermore, this particular technology will only work with Gallium3d drivers. Which means that, for the foreseeable future, Direct3d will run at roughly 1/3 of the speed of Windows. Not to mention that no Gallium3d driver supports most of DX10/11 features. It will take quite a bit of work before all of this is accelerated. We have OpenGL 2.1 (roughly DX9) accelerated on OpenGL 4 hardware at this moment.

Why do you think that this will bring AAA games to Linux, when it's easier and cheaper to use clean design and hire a couple of guys to port it over in a couple of months.

I think that this is wishful thinking on your part.