Some OpenGL community members said that with the OpenGL 4.1 release that OpenGL is almost done. GL_ARB_ES2_compatibility and WebGL are a statement for that. I completely dream of AMD and nVidia saling their graphics cards with a "It makes Internet faster!" sticker, NICE!
How to choose to use OpenGL everywhere for everything if we can't rich half of the platforms available? In the future, I think OpenGL aims up to high quality games and CAD softwares down to Minesweeper and Paint. When we see that Intel represents half of the graphics chip market and I think it's the biggest limitation for OpenGL grows and real-time graphics everywhere for everything On its side Intel OpenGL implementation is technically irrelevant and out-dated. The interest for gaming on MacOS X is high so it deserved high-end OpenGL support. I think that MacOS X is a great platform (happy owner of a MacBook Pro!) and With all the features of OpenGL 3.0 but GLSL 1.30, through the OpenGL extensions. MacOS X 10.6.4 is stocked to OpenGL 2.1 support
and cherry on the cake, EGL support!Ĭonsidering all these, I might say that AMD is currently more development centric than nVidia which is more features centric.įell free to desagree with me, I often disagree with myself!Īctually, all in all, what I find really interesting is just the idea that OpenGL immediate future is linked to these 2 sides.įinally, I haven't spoke about (or tested) Intel and Apple implementations.
So far nVidia drivers more or less only returns what glGetError would return in a much more convenient way, however this extension aims much more!ĪMD has updated the man pages for OpenGL 3.3 and 4.1. I just think that it's going to make OpenGL drivers and softwares much more reliable. It's easy to integrate in a software, to actually attached some debug informations for a bug report. In everyday life for an OpenGL developer, it will change everything by making OpenGL development much more efficient! Which is the feature announced at Siggraph 2010 that I am the most existed: I quite like the GLSL compiler, I don't think it is perfect but compared to the nVidia GLSL compiler it gives nicer error messages.įor the development it's great! It's necessary. On the AMD side, the philosophy is maybe a bit different which implies an other repartition of the efforts. However, these tests doesn't show how the GLSL compiler can be annoying and return irrelevant error messages sometime. (I mean, super nice!) and some bit of OpenGL 4.1 support.
I would say that feature wise, the nVidia drivers is better than AMD's and for this I can give a couple of examples: NVidia seems to have better drivers according to these results but I quite think that it is more or less true. What to think about those results? First, it's much better than in my previous statusįor the support of OpenGL 4.0 and the OpenGL 3.3 is quite good now.