By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Will Direct3D cease to be the primary 3D API?

the_bloodwalker on 08 June 2008

Open GL is mostly used for animation and object renders, is far moer capable than DX in this matter. However it's not so true in games for a Windows platform. but on Linux, its like fish in water.

With engines like ID tech 5, Open GL 2 has far more chances to ger recognition for they can be played in Macs and Linux and with this, Windows may not be at an advantage to be the OS with the most games in the future



Around the Network
Soleron on 08 June 2008
GlingGling said:
The question really should be as Soleron indicated, "When will Microsoft's stranglehold loosen?" When MS really starts to lose influence then we may see a strong move away from DX.

But Microsoft will only lose influence when DX goes away. It's a kind of self-reinforcing situation.



the_bloodwalker on 08 June 2008

DX will eventually go away as the Macs and the Ease of Use Linux benefit from games powered by multiplatfom Engines



GlingGling on 08 June 2008

.NET works on Linux/Mac. Mono is a very active project. Moonlight, by the developers of Mono, is also in development to bring cross-platform compatibility to Silverlight. We're going to see Microsoft more and more in cross-platform situations. Even MS will tell you their OS isn't as omnipresent as it used to be. Like Google they aren't stupid and they'll evolve to maintain their presence as a leading software company. Take a look at XNA (opening up console game development to indies) and the .net microframework (.net/C# in a 250-500kb footprint for microcontrollers). They learned from Google what it means to diversify.



epsilon72 on 08 June 2008

I sure hope so!

...but I doubt it.

If Valve ever gets off their collective butts ato finish the opengl version of the source engine, then there would be a much better chance of it happening. 

Also, linux should be put on everything.  Then all apps will be virtually 100% portable!



Around the Network
JaggedSac on 08 June 2008
GlingGling said:
.NET works on Linux/Mac. Mono is a very active project. Moonlight, by the developers of Mono, is also in development to bring cross-platform compatibility to Silverlight. We're going to see Microsoft more and more in cross-platform situations. Even MS will tell you their OS isn't as omnipresent as it used to be. Like Google they aren't stupid and they'll evolve to maintain their presence as a leading software company. Take a look at XNA (opening up console game development to indies) and the .net microframework (.net/C# in a 250-500kb footprint for microcontrollers). They learned from Google what it means to diversify.

Nicely said. Windows has had the problem of trying to maintain backwards compatibility with businesses software. They know this, we know this, and it is a problem. Luckily virtualization is becoming more common place and is likely to be the solution to their problem. They can now develop a new OS without having to worry about compatibility issues and make it much thinner.



epsilon72 on 08 June 2008
JaggedSac said:
GlingGling said:
.NET works on Linux/Mac. Mono is a very active project. Moonlight, by the developers of Mono, is also in development to bring cross-platform compatibility to Silverlight. We're going to see Microsoft more and more in cross-platform situations. Even MS will tell you their OS isn't as omnipresent as it used to be. Like Google they aren't stupid and they'll evolve to maintain their presence as a leading software company. Take a look at XNA (opening up console game development to indies) and the .net microframework (.net/C# in a 250-500kb footprint for microcontrollers). They learned from Google what it means to diversify.

Nicely said. Windows has had the problem of trying to maintain backwards compatibility with businesses software. They know this, we know this, and it is a problem. Luckily virtualization is becoming more common place and is likely to be the solution to their problem. They can now develop a new OS without having to worry about compatibility issues and make it much thinner.

.NET on linux?  I never knew it was possible 'till I saw GlingGling's post.  Of course, if MS would just use open standards in the first place, we wouldn't have this problem.

 



JaggedSac on 08 June 2008
epsilon72 said:
JaggedSac said:
GlingGling said:
.NET works on Linux/Mac. Mono is a very active project. Moonlight, by the developers of Mono, is also in development to bring cross-platform compatibility to Silverlight. We're going to see Microsoft more and more in cross-platform situations. Even MS will tell you their OS isn't as omnipresent as it used to be. Like Google they aren't stupid and they'll evolve to maintain their presence as a leading software company. Take a look at XNA (opening up console game development to indies) and the .net microframework (.net/C# in a 250-500kb footprint for microcontrollers). They learned from Google what it means to diversify.

Nicely said. Windows has had the problem of trying to maintain backwards compatibility with businesses software. They know this, we know this, and it is a problem. Luckily virtualization is becoming more common place and is likely to be the solution to their problem. They can now develop a new OS without having to worry about compatibility issues and make it much thinner.

.NET on linux? I never knew it was possible 'till I saw GlingGling's post. Of course, if MS would just use open standards in the first place, we wouldn't have this problem.

 


 Actually, .Net's main goal is interoperablity.  All .Net languages compile down to the same intermediate language.  So in essence, all languages could be used by every other language.  This is good because some languages are better at some things than others.



epsilon72 on 08 June 2008
JaggedSac said:
epsilon72 said:
JaggedSac said:
GlingGling said:
.NET works on Linux/Mac. Mono is a very active project. Moonlight, by the developers of Mono, is also in development to bring cross-platform compatibility to Silverlight. We're going to see Microsoft more and more in cross-platform situations. Even MS will tell you their OS isn't as omnipresent as it used to be. Like Google they aren't stupid and they'll evolve to maintain their presence as a leading software company. Take a look at XNA (opening up console game development to indies) and the .net microframework (.net/C# in a 250-500kb footprint for microcontrollers). They learned from Google what it means to diversify.

Nicely said. Windows has had the problem of trying to maintain backwards compatibility with businesses software. They know this, we know this, and it is a problem. Luckily virtualization is becoming more common place and is likely to be the solution to their problem. They can now develop a new OS without having to worry about compatibility issues and make it much thinner.

.NET on linux? I never knew it was possible 'till I saw GlingGling's post. Of course, if MS would just use open standards in the first place, we wouldn't have this problem.

 


Actually, .Net's main goal is interoperablity. All .Net languages compile down to the same intermediate language. So in essence, all languages could be used by every other language. This is good because some languages are better at some things than others.

Oh, I didn't know that.  Actually, wine's app database lists .NET as working fairly well, surprisingly.

 



Soleron on 09 June 2008
epsilon72 said:
JaggedSac said:
 

Actually, .Net's main goal is interoperablity. All .Net languages compile down to the same intermediate language. So in essence, all languages could be used by every other language. This is good because some languages are better at some things than others.

Oh, I didn't know that.  Actually, wine's app database lists .NET as working fairly well, surprisingly.

 


Only if you have a Windows license. .NETwas NOT designed for interoperability between platforms; it was designed for interoperability between the platforms Microsoft wants you to have (Windows, Xbox). If they had wanted real interoperability they would have made C#/.NET an completely open standard that anyone can implement. Instead, they threaten Mono and Linux with patent claims and then use the threat to 'buy out' companies (Novell has submitted to it, for example).