If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All of which are thing that Khronos can fix (and in fact, have put money into achieving for OpenGL ES already, which they clearly care far more about than regular OpenGL, likely due to the mobile market not already being dominated by a superior API).
From what I hear, the better handling of OGL ES is also due in part to the lack of stodgy legacy vendors that seem to have a lot of influence on the normal OpenGL process.
Weren't many of the ideas in OGL ES originally slated (in some form) for OpenGL 3.0, but then that plan shot down by vendor complaints (thus the semi-scandal when OGL 3.0 was released)?
When you allow people to download it, from countries where the patent is valid, on a non 'try it out to see if it works'-way.
They can still sue you!
The country they were in would have to be the one to carry out the suing, so the goal is to live in (or at least host information in) countries which don't allow, at the very least, stupid math/art/programming patents.
From what I hear, the better handling of OGL ES is also due in part to the lack of stodgy legacy vendors that seem to have a lot of influence on the normal OpenGL process.
Weren't many of the ideas in OGL ES originally slated (in some form) for OpenGL 3.0, but then that plan shot down by vendor complaints (thus the semi-scandal when OGL 3.0 was released)?
There was one vendor in particular that shot about everything down.
That vendor has left Khronos and it's name is Microsoft (no kidding !!!).
This is why Khronos had such a crappy history.
And after the release of OpenGL 3.0 Microsoft left the group.
An from then khronos could release some decent versions.
But they should really find a system where they can drop old stuff.
e.g. using context creation calls with major version number in so you can change stuff without breaking old stuff and the drivers can support both.
From what I hear, the better handling of OGL ES is also due in part to the lack of stodgy legacy vendors that seem to have a lot of influence on the normal OpenGL process.
Weren't many of the ideas in OGL ES originally slated (in some form) for OpenGL 3.0, but then that plan shot down by vendor complaints (thus the semi-scandal when OGL 3.0 was released)?
Comment