locked
OpenGL not up-to-date RRS feed

  • General discussion

  • I'm a big fan of Microsoft stuff, specially Visual Studio 2005/2008. But why is it that OpenGL newer libs and headers are not provided? We have to struggle our way through horrible glew or even worse extension codes to make stuff Linux developers just use. This makes us slower, this makes developers quit Visual Studio/Windows.

    DirectX is not as easy to integrate with other stuff, for example Qt, as OpenGL. If Microsoft starts pushing that I can't develop serious OpenGL in Windows, than I probably can't use Qt too, and in some point I'll be stuck with Microsoft stuff, just because I don't feel like quitting Windows/VStudio. Two things can come out of this: Microsoft will dominate the world and only Microsoft solutions will be used all over OR people will get sick of doing malabarism to do stuff that shoud be simple and portable, and will look for another Op. System.

    We should measure the probabilities.
    • Edited by rosaliags Tuesday, July 14, 2009 3:46 AM
    • Moved by nobugz Tuesday, July 14, 2009 4:49 AM not a c++ issue (From:Visual C++ General)
    Tuesday, July 14, 2009 3:38 AM

All replies

  • OpenGL is OpenSource...complain to OpenGL.org about how it does not support MS. You've got the shoes on the wrong feet. Also, complain to your video card manufacturer, since its their driver in the end, not Microsoft's.

    DirectX is Microsoft, and is also not included in VS by default; its a separate SDK. (You can get a similar OpenGL package, too.)

    I don't know if you are up on current events, but...Microsoft already dominates the world in the areas you are mentioning. Again, you're drinking that Linux Kool-Aid, I think ;)

    Seriously, though...OpenGL is also trying to be platform independent, and actually came to MS PCs late in its development. It works well in Linux because Linux was written to use it. (Same reason DirectX works well in an XBox360, or Windows.)

    Microsoft actually doesn't care that much whether you are using OpenGL, or DirectX...you are still using their OS, their IDE and promoting theur products in the process. What else would there be for a company that size to gain? (Companies don't have this thought process whereby they create agendas that are counterproductive to their bottom line. That is reserved for individuals.)

    The numbers are in already...Linux lost.
    Tuesday, July 14, 2009 4:10 AM
  • I'm not in a Microsoft vs Linux battle here, even though I do think your "Linux lost" is a little bit narrow-sighted.

    Anyway, I don't think you know what you are talking about. OpenGL.org does not support any compilers or operating systems, so I think you are the one needing to recheck your shoes. Also, you say I can get a similar OpenGL package. Please share the link, for WINDOWS UP-TO-DATE headers and libs.

    For "Microsoft actually doesn't care..", that is pretty much my point, it shouldn't care. But it does sabotage OpenGL. Needlessly.
    Tuesday, July 14, 2009 4:38 AM
  • It may have been narrow sighted say...fifteen years ago when Linux proponents were citing similar fates, but...its more of an observation of fact at this point. Linux has not done any of the giant killing it was supposed to do, and the market penetration is practically non-existent. Its just not ever going to happen.

    No, you are wrong. Microsoft does not write any OpenGL code. It is from your graphics card manufacturer. The libs and such are a product of that, not a thing that Microsoft either does, or does not do. OpenGL supports the standard that the drivers are written to...that is why you can complain to them...Microsoft has nothing to do with it, that's all.

    No, Microsoft does not sabotage OpenGL...they can safely ignore it as what it is...3rd party software.

    I understand your frustration...its just foisted at the wrong folks, that's all.
    Cheers.
    Tuesday, July 14, 2009 4:48 AM
  • Think of what you are writing. Do you seriously think Nvidia (my graphics card manufacturer) supports Linux, but not Windows? Or it might be that the OpenGL libs for my 9600 GT really are the 1.1 version, from 1996? Also, OpenGL headers do come with Visual Studio. If that does not prove, please don't answer anymore. I don't want to have this kind of discussion. Also, you say I can get a similar OpenGL package. Please share the link, for WINDOWS UP-TO-DATE headers and libs. You missed this part, right?
    Tuesday, July 14, 2009 4:57 AM
  • I'm not in a Microsoft vs Linux battle here, even though I do think your "Linux lost" is a little bit narrow-sighted.

    Anyway, I don't think you know what you are talking about. OpenGL.org does not support any compilers or operating systems, so I think you are the one needing to recheck your shoes. Also, you say I can get a similar OpenGL package. Please share the link, for WINDOWS UP-TO-DATE headers and libs.http://www.aproduct.info
    Tuesday, July 14, 2009 6:44 AM
  • OpenGL is a specification, not a software. Implementers include are Microsoft and video card producers.

    Just because you can use something in your own code does not mean it belongs to Visual C++, For example, the opengl related header files in the Windows SDK directory is well, from Windows SDK. If you need to know why Microsoft do not put the another implementation instead of an implement which, coincidentally, comes from Microsoft, ask in the Windows SDK forum.


    Please mark the post answered your question as the answer, and click the chartreuse pyramid floating over nothingness/null to mark other helpful posts as helpful. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    Visual C++ MVP
    Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:28 PM