David Springer, Accusations and my responses - no more
Kendall Bennett
Hi all,
As much as I detest David Springer, his actions, his words and his
deliberate attempts to destroy the credibility of people who frequent
this newsgroup, I am no longer going to respond to his posts. In my
intense frustration and anger at him for deliberately trying to destroy
my personal and my companies credibility, I accused him publicly of
ripping off the Microsoft Direct3D Quake driver and releasing it as his
own work. If David really did manage to get a waiver of the Microsoft
NDA, and is using this code legitimately then I apologise for accusing
him of breaking any NDA's.
Unlike David Springer, I personally do not enjoy reading r.g.p anymore,
and I certainly do not enjoy throwing accusations about in this group,
nor recieving them. Over the last number of weeks, I managed to lose my
composure on quite a number of occasions due to David Springer's off
colour remarks. I understand most others in this group probably don't
enjoy reading my off-colour responses, and I apologise to all for my lack
of ettiqette.
It is pretty clear to me now that responding to David Springer's remarks
does not help at all, and in restrospect simply brings me and others in
my company down to the same low levels of ettiquette that he so clearly
displays. Although I do care about what David Springer says about me and
my company, I will no longer bring myself down to his level and involve
myself in these petty brawls. I will simply ignore his posts, and allow
people to make up their own minds about me and the products that my
company sells. If David Springer doesn't like them, then so be it. David
Springer is hardly the world's guiding light.
Regards,
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| SciTech Software - Building Truly Plug'n'Play Software! |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Kendall Bennett | To reply via email, remove nospam from |
| Director of Engineering | the reply to email address. Do NOT send |
| SciTech Software, Inc. | unsolicited commercial email! |
| 505 Wall Street | ftp : ftp.scitechsoft.com |
| Chico, CA 95928, USA | www : http://www.scitechsoft.com |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Mad Pete
>As much as I detest David Springer, his actions, his words and his
>deliberate attempts to destroy the credibility of people who frequent
>this newsgroup, I am no longer going to respond to his posts. In my
Two words: Kill file
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Thompson (aka Mad Pete)
DigiPen Graduate - more info at: www.digipen.com
Contact me at: rui...@ncmud.accessv.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
VGOEL
In article <MPG.ece986d5...@news.scitechsoft.com>,
Kendall Bennett <Kend...@nospam.scitechsoft.com> wrote:
>myself in these petty brawls. I will simply ignore his posts, and allow
>people to make up their own minds about me and the products that my
>company sells. If David Springer doesn't like them, then so be it. David
>Springer is hardly the world's guiding light.
>
I understand your frustration. Here is what I suggest: If you see some
factual mistakes with what Springer has to say about your product (or other
related products), just a quick note to all in the newsgroup correcting
those mistakes would suffice. Religious wars usually don't get anyone
anywhere specially on Usenet. Don't stoop down to Springer's level is what
I am saying pretty much.
Regards,
Vaibhav
Leath Muller
> Unlike David Springer, I personally do not enjoy reading r.g.p anymore,
> and I certainly do not enjoy throwing accusations about in this group,
> nor recieving them. Over the last number of weeks, I managed to lose my
> composure on quite a number of occasions due to David Springer's off
> colour remarks. I understand most others in this group probably don't
> enjoy reading my off-colour responses, and I apologise to all for my lack
> of ettiqette.
Don't worry about it... :) First of all, I back up Kendall 100%. I also
back-up just about everyone who has had _anything_ negatvie to do with
Springer, including people like Kendall, Angus Dorbie, Michael Gold,
all other SGI peoples (!), Chris Hecker (of whom I have MAJOR respect
for), etc etc.
Its a simple matter of David Springer being your typical immature news
junkie. He has nothing better to do, so he posts crap - mountains of it.
If he has no facts, he makes them up. Every single person I have ever
known to read the news group has thought, simply, 'what a wanker'. And
then thought nothing more of it. The reason no-one thinks any more of
it? Because he is so blatantly wrong, _all_ the time.
David Springer has admitted he has no experience with OpenGL and D3D. How
can he possibly argue for/against either API?
David Springer's most accomplished piece of work, is a card game. Sorry,
but this just doesn't rate against the dozens and dozens of game developers
who have produced major selling titles.
David Springer 'bags' people like Chris Hecker - who has been hired by
Michael Abrash (!). I happen to think Chris Hecker is one of the most
important people in the 3D games industry for the PC - along with Abrash
(was... ): Carmack, Sean Barrett, and a lot lot more... enuff said there
I think...
David Springer publicly flames John Carmack and id Software. Basically,
id use OpenGL for a reason. id is THE most important thing that has ever
happened in the PC games industry. From Wolf -> Doom -> Quake. People said
Wolf couldn't be done. People laughed when Doom's specs were released ("It'll
never happen; it's impossible to do that!"). Then, Quake, again delivered.
Technically, it went against all the odds. And yet, David Springer has
the hide to publicly create negative images of the company? Hmmm...
How can this man really be believed?
Kendall, PLEASE do not stop posting/reading rec.games.programmer - I like
your input, as do an awful lot of other people. Don't be worried by somebody
who is, quite simply, the most commonly 'kill filed' person on r.g.p!
Anybody who is as stupid as Springer to completely flame just about every
single major player in the PC industries SW development arena, can't be to
bright...
> It is pretty clear to me now that responding to David Springer's remarks
> does not help at all, and in restrospect simply brings me and others in
> my company down to the same low levels of ettiquette that he so clearly
> displays.
No, responding against his BS is the right way to go - don't stop it! :)
There are 2 major groups of people reading r.g.p - those who know what they
are talking about already; and those learning still. Those learning how
to code and use API's etc LOVE hearing from the companies themselves that
develop things like the MGL! It doesn't take that person long to learn how
to use the MGL and then learn more about programming games, etc in general.
Once they learn everything, they approach the level of those above them;
the experienced 'ones'... of whom know better about DS...
Still correct his BS; just don't flame him...
> Although I do care about what David Springer says about me and
> my company, I will no longer bring myself down to his level and involve
> myself in these petty brawls. I will simply ignore his posts, and allow
> people to make up their own minds about me and the products that my
> company sells. If David Springer doesn't like them, then so be it. David
> Springer is hardly the world's guiding light.
Hmmm, I suggest not brawling, but commenting against his technical accusations
against the MGL... that way, you don't have much to write... ;)
Leathal.
Russ Williams
Leath Muller wrote in message ...
[...]
>Don't worry about it... :) First of all, I back up Kendall 100%. I also
>back-up just about everyone who has had _anything_ negatvie to do with
>Springer, including people like Kendall, Angus Dorbie, Michael Gold,
>all other SGI peoples (!), Chris Hecker (of whom I have MAJOR respect
>for), etc etc.
Oh, good. I had a 'negative experience' with David about year ago, in one
of those "The US is the best country in the world" threads. So, can I count
on you to back me up in defending him? Good.
>Its a simple matter of David Springer being your typical immature news
>junkie. He has nothing better to do, so he posts crap - mountains of it.
>If he has no facts, he makes them up. Every single person I have ever
>known to read the news group has thought, simply, 'what a wanker'. And
>then thought nothing more of it. The reason no-one thinks any more of
>it? Because he is so blatantly wrong, _all_ the time.
Care to cite any examples? Or is he just wrong because you don't
agree with him?
>David Springer has admitted he has no experience with OpenGL and
>D3D. How can he possibly argue for/against either API?
By simply pointing out that one has drivers for all cards and that the
other has a couple of drivers entering beta, but will have full support
Real Soon Now? That is a very valid point, IMHO, and doesn't matter
a damn about the actual API.
>David Springer's most accomplished piece of work, is a card game.
>Sorry, but this just doesn't rate against the dozens and dozens of game
>developers who have produced major selling titles.
So? What you're saying is that he's not qualified to talk about Carmack?
Just because his only claim to (games) fame is IGames doesn't mean
that he's automatically wrong.
>David Springer 'bags' people like Chris Hecker - who has been hired by
>Michael Abrash (!). I happen to think Chris Hecker is one of the most
>important people in the 3D games industry for the PC - along with Abrash
>(was... ): Carmack, Sean Barrett, and a lot lot more... enuff said there
>I think...
So? Are you saying that these perfect people never fuck up? Never
make errors of judgement? That we should just ignore them when they
happen? If I get something wrong, I don't mind being corrected. I should
think that most people feel similarly. Sure, it stings a bit, but most
people
don't like sycophants.
>David Springer publicly flames John Carmack and id Software.
So?
>Basically, id use OpenGL for a reason.
Would you care to expand on that? What reason? Other than it being
simpler? Or pure egotism? Or knowing that IHVs will support anything
they use?
>id is THE most important thing that has ever happened in the PC
>games industry.
Some people might disagree there...
>From Wolf -> Doom -> Quake.
>People said Wolf couldn't be done.
Why would they say that? Ultima Underworld was released before Wolf,
and used a more advanced engine, IIRC.
>People laughed when Doom's specs were released ("It'll never happen;
>it's impossible to do that!").
Who laughed, exactly?
>Then, Quake, again delivered. Technically, it went against all the
>odds.
So? Many companies produce long strings of hits. Bullfrog, Namco,
Nintendo, Squaresoft, Lucasarts and I'm sure quite a few more all
regularly produce very good games
>And yet, David Springer has the hide to publicly create negative
>images of the company? Hmmm...
Why not? Some of us don't blindly worship idols. id have done a lot
of good, but that doesn't mean that everything they do must be good.
If you want to pray to Carmack, then go ahead, but not everyone
thinks that OpenGL is the right choice at the moment.
>How can this man really be believed?
Why shouldn't he be? Because he attacks Carmack's choice of API?
[...]
>Anybody who is as stupid as Springer to completely flame just about every
>single major player in the PC industries SW development arena, can't be to
>bright...
Every single major player? Last time I looked, that arena was a lot bigger
than id and SGI.
---
Russ
sumatose
Glenn Corpes wrote in message ...
>xy...@plugh.com (Daniel Phillips) wrote:
>>
>> Here's a snip from Netscape's (excellent) netiquette article:
>
>What a surprise, one of Microsoft's competitors gets an 'excellent' from
>Daniel, you don't let up for a second do you :)
>You are without doubt, the nearest thing to David Springer's opposite
>number, for every pointless, smug "just face it, microsoft are going to
>win, GL/Scitech/GNU/whatever are screwed" that David posts there is a
>completely irrational "use GL/Java for no other reason than they aren't
>owned by MS, do you need another reason?" from you. If you really have
>David in your killfile (which I doubt), you won't be responding to him
>and he will lose a major source of the microphobic crap that he doesn't
>seem able to ignore.
Quite right : Phillips hates microsoft as much as Springer loves it.. 8-)
It's quite pathetic to see Phillips constantly quote netiquette to others
when he keeps posting 'you're an asshole' and 'fuck off' posts constantly.
Try to find the last time he's posted programming help or technical info.
If you find one, count the flame posts in between.
Sending knowledgable people and professionnals to hell when they make
positive point about anything MS just shows off his MS-hate hidden agenda
which as nothing to do with this newsgroup. I can't believe, for example,
that he just shitted on the Javier Aravelo's head on another thread and
attacked is credibility (!!). Christ, he's got a pretty big of himself, for
someone who have never used either OpenGL or Direct3D and keeps posting
about it _every_fucking_day_.
What I enjoy about Springer is that if you correct him with facts, he'll
shut up. (Assuming you're actually addressing what he said, of course, and
not just generally flaming him.) Can't say the same with Phillips : he'll
just call you an asshole, eventually.
Daniel Phillips
Mad...@Mad.Pete says...
>
>On Sat, 8 Nov 1997 15:41:08 -0800, Kend...@nospam.scitechsoft.com (Kendall
>Bennett) wrote:
>
>>As much as I detest David Springer, his actions, his words and his
>>deliberate attempts to destroy the credibility of people who frequent
>>this newsgroup, I am no longer going to respond to his posts. In my
>
>Two words: Kill file
Much nicer than my two words. Sorry, if I offended some delicate ears,
but I don't retract them - they're accurate and richly deserved.
Here's a snip from Netscape's (excellent) netiquette article:
"Do not mis-use the net for personal flames, silly jokes, commercial or
political advertising, chain letters, or anything that is illegal in
one of the participating countries. And never follow-up to any of these
if they happen to occur. Usually it is best to ignore them (hoping that
someone else will take care of the offender) and to put the offending
subject line or author name into your "kill file". If you must react,
then use private mail to the author or to his system administrator."
I've got Springer and Roger Nelson (who posts to this group using the
allias "sumatose") in my kill file. I respectfully request that they
also put me, and whoever else they can't carry on a civil dialogue with
in their respective kill-files. That should lower the temperature in
RGP quite a bit, and improve the signal-to-noise ratio.
--
Daniel Phillips
phillips at dowco.com
Glenn Corpes
xy...@plugh.com (Daniel Phillips) wrote:
> Mad...@Mad.Pete says...
> >
> >On Sat, 8 Nov 1997 15:41:08 -0800, Kend...@nospam.scitechsoft.com (K
> endall
> >Bennett) wrote:
> >
> >>As much as I detest David Springer, his actions, his words and his
> >>deliberate attempts to destroy the credibility of people who frequen
> t
> >>this newsgroup, I am no longer going to respond to his posts. In my
> >
> >Two words: Kill file
>
> Much nicer than my two words. Sorry, if I offended some delicate ears
> ,
> but I don't retract them - they're accurate and richly deserved.
>
> Here's a snip from Netscape's (excellent) netiquette article:
What a surprise, one of Microsoft's competitors gets an 'excellent' from
Daniel, you don't let up for a second do you :)
>
> "Do not mis-use the net for personal flames, silly jokes, commercial
> or
> political advertising, chain letters, or anything that is illegal in
>
> one of the participating countries. And never follow-up to any of th
> ese
> if they happen to occur. Usually it is best to ignore them (hoping t
> hat
> someone else will take care of the offender) and to put the offendin
> g
> subject line or author name into your "kill file". If you must react
> ,
> then use private mail to the author or to his system administrator."
Or maybe his boss...
> I've got Springer and Roger Nelson (who posts to this group using the
> allias "sumatose")
What exactly are you trying to achieve by telling everyone Sumatose's
name?
> in my kill file. I respectfully request that they
> also put me, and whoever else they can't carry on a civil dialogue wit
> h
> in their respective kill-files. That should lower the temperature in
> RGP quite a bit, and improve the signal-to-noise ratio.
You are without doubt, the nearest thing to David Springer's opposite
number, for every pointless, smug "just face it, microsoft are going to
win, GL/Scitech/GNU/whatever are screwed" that David posts there is a
completely irrational "use GL/Java for no other reason than they aren't
owned by MS, do you need another reason?" from you. If you really have
David in your killfile (which I doubt), you won't be responding to him
and he will lose a major source of the microphobic crap that he doesn't
seem able to ignore.
-=< gco...@ea.com, Project Leader Bullfrog >=-
Daniel Phillips
gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron says...
>
>xy...@plugh.com (Daniel Phillips) wrote:
>>Here's a snip from Netscape's (excellent) netiquette article:
>
>What a surprise, one of Microsoft's competitors gets an 'excellent' from
>Daniel, you don't let up for a second do you :)
You're making that comment without reading the article, I suppose? =)
>>"Do not mis-use the net for personal flames, silly jokes, commercial
>>or political advertising, chain letters, or anything that is illegal
>>one of the participating countries. And never follow-up to any of
>>these if they happen to occur. Usually it is best to ignore them
>>(hoping that someone else will take care of the offender) and to put
>>the offending subject line or author name into your "kill file". If
>>you must react, then use private mail to the author or to his system
>>administrator."
>
>Or maybe his boss...
Make your own decision; ;-)
[...]
>What exactly are you trying to achieve by telling everyone Sumatose's
>name?
You mean Roger Nelson? Just that we're real people here on Usenet -
this isn't make-believe. He shouldn't be hiding behind an alias while
he does his mud-slinging. Let alone that he shouldn't be slinging
mud.
>You are without doubt, the nearest thing to David Springer's opposite
>number,
Thank you. I'll take it to mean that I don't make unwarranted personal
attacks, I try to be logical in whatever arguments I present, I try to
be truthful, and for the most part, respectful, even towards people
whose opinions I don't agree with.
>for every pointless, smug "just face it, microsoft are going to
>win, GL/Scitech/GNU/whatever are screwed" that David posts there is a
>completely irrational "use GL/Java for no other reason than they aren't
>owned by MS, do you need another reason?" from you.
That is untrue and unjustified. My arguments in favour of using
OpenGL and Java are based on my belief that they are worthwhile. Not
being controlled by Microsoft is also a big plus in my opinion, but
that fact would be completely worthless if these APIs weren't also
technically better.
>If you really have David in your killfile (which I doubt),
Why do you doubt that? It's quite true. He was in my kill file a
while back, and that helped, but I changed systems and it took me a
while to get around to putting him back in there. As a result, he
shows up on my screen as an "already read" article.
>you won't be responding to him
Didn't I say that myself?
>and he will lose a major source of the microphobic crap
"Microphobic crap" is your term. Other's opinions may be different
from yours. Why are you so concerned about suppressing criticism
of Microsoft? Microsoft richly deserves criticism - by taking a
position against criticizing Microsoft you do yourself a disservice.
Criticim is a _good thing_ when it's deserved, and when it can
accomplish something positive.
>that he doesn't seem able to ignore.
You got that right. That's his problem.
P.S., didn't you just cause two posts to appear consisting mainly of
off-topic noise, mine and yours.? You are welcome to email me next
time. (This invitation does *not* apply to flamers,)
Glenn Corpes
xy...@plugh.com (Daniel Phillips) wrote:
> >What exactly are you trying to achieve by telling everyone Sumatose's
> >name?
>
> You mean Roger Nelson? Just that we're real people here on Usenet -
> this isn't make-believe. He shouldn't be hiding behind an alias while
> he does his mud-slinging. Let alone that he shouldn't be slinging
> mud.
But if he chooses to should you be 'outing' him publicly?
> >You are without doubt, the nearest thing to David Springer's opposite
> >number,
>
> Thank you. I'll take it to mean that I don't make unwarranted persona
> l
> attacks, I try to be logical in whatever arguments I present, I try to
> be truthful, and for the most part, respectful, even towards people
> whose opinions I don't agree with.
You know what I meant.
> >for every pointless, smug "just face it, microsoft are going to
> >win, GL/Scitech/GNU/whatever are screwed" that David posts there is a
> >completely irrational "use GL/Java for no other reason than they aren
> 't
> >owned by MS, do you need another reason?" from you.
>
> That is untrue and unjustified. My arguments in favour of using
> OpenGL and Java are based on my belief that they are worthwhile. Not
> being controlled by Microsoft is also a big plus in my opinion, but
> that fact would be completely worthless if these APIs weren't also
> technically better.
>
> >If you really have David in your killfile (which I doubt),
>
> Why do you doubt that? It's quite true. He was in my kill file a
Because you have never let up arguing with him, just talked about it a
lot.
> while back, and that helped, but I changed systems and it took me a
> while to get around to putting him back in there. As a result, he
> shows up on my screen as an "already read" article.
>
> >you won't be responding to him
>
> Didn't I say that myself?
>
> >and he will lose a major source of the microphobic crap
>
> "Microphobic crap" is your term. Other's opinions may be different
> from yours. Why are you so concerned about suppressing criticism
> of Microsoft? Microsoft richly deserves criticism - by taking a
> position against criticizing Microsoft you do yourself a disservice.
> Criticim is a _good thing_ when it's deserved, and when it can
> accomplish something positive.
I don't try to suppress anything, just address misinformation, I find it
worrying that someone with little experience of openGL or D3D advises
newbies on which API to use, when it's obvious from other threads that
you are anti MS above everything else. I suspect that you consider
newbie posts saying stuff like "D3D is dead right?" as a victory for the
cause.
sumatose
Daniel Phillips wrote in message <648cj2$msj$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>Do I have to put my hand into boiling water to know that it's hot?
>Obviously not - I can learn that by asking. By the same token, I don't
>have to become a D3D programmer to know that the D3D API is awkward,
>I've been using OpenGL for a couple of weeks now, [..]
...
Two years. He's been posting in comp.api.graphics.opengl for two years.
sumatose
sumatose
Mad Pete
On 9 Nov 1997 08:10:57 GMT, <xy...@plugh.com> (Daniel Phillips) wrote:
>>Two words: Kill file
>
>Much nicer than my two words. Sorry, if I offended some delicate ears,
>but I don't retract them - they're accurate and richly deserved.
Thank you :) I try not to flame anyone and overall I think I've done
a pretty good job of avoiding flame wars (I think I only lost it a couple
of times during the OpenGL vs D3D flamewars against Springer,
before I saw him for what he really was). I regret losing it back
then, and now whenever I see someone trying to bait me, I just
shrug and even laugh that they're actually trying to bait me,
then I ignore it.
>I've got Springer and Roger Nelson (who posts to this group using the
>allias "sumatose") in my kill file. I respectfully request that they
>also put me, and whoever else they can't carry on a civil dialogue with
>in their respective kill-files. That should lower the temperature in
>RGP quite a bit, and improve the signal-to-noise ratio.
I don't have anyone in my kill file. I just treat Springer with extreme
sympathy and fascination (much like I would to a poor abandoned
child seeking attention.. "here, want a cookie?").... he HATES that :)
As for Roger Nelson... ummm... isn't that supposed to be the name
of some sort of a celebrity? I seem to remember hearing it before...
if so, it's another fake name. If not, why is it that it rings a bell for
some reason?
I dunno why people in general use fake names but if I was Bill Gates,
I'd sure as hell use a fake name :) I don't try to hide my name
since I'm pretty flame resistant. :P
Daniel Phillips
>>>number,
>>
>>Thank you. I'll take it to mean that I don't make unwarranted persona
>>l attacks, I try to be logical in whatever arguments I present, I try
>>to be truthful, and for the most part, respectful, even towards people
>>whose opinions I don't agree with.
>
>You know what I meant.
Good reply. I knew you would know I knew what you meant...
Comparing me to David Springer is unwarranted.
>I don't try to suppress anything, just address misinformation, I find it
>worrying that someone with little experience of openGL or D3D advises
>newbies on which API to use, when it's obvious from other threads that
>you are anti MS above everything else. I suspect that you consider
>newbie posts saying stuff like "D3D is dead right?" as a victory for
>the cause.
It's an exaggeration to say D3D is dead. But it's not an exaggeration
to say OpenGL is perfectly appropriate for a new game project. The
existence proof is Quake2. I hope you've seen it - it's stunningly
beautiful and completely smooth on a 3DFX - you just can't argue about
that. You also can't argue with the fact that OpenGL is a nice API,
and it's very general, though if you want your game to work on a
wide range of hardware this Christmas you'd have to stick to the
QuakeGL subset. It's a moot point, because if you're starting now
you can pretty well figure on general availability of OpenGL ICD
drivers in time for your release.
Do I have to put my hand into boiling water to know that it's hot?
Obviously not - I can learn that by asking. By the same token, I don't
have to become a D3D programmer to know that the D3D API is awkward,
and that it's going to be an uphill battle to get D3D rendering to
produce consistent results across a bunch of different display cards.
I've been using OpenGL for a couple of weeks now, and I find it very
pleasant to use - very fast to prototype in, just like John Carmack
said. Before you get your knickers in a knot, please note that I'm
hardly an inexperienced 3D programmer, plus I studied the API pretty
thoroughly a long time before I began to use it. When I actually did
begin to use it, it met my expectations. The availability of and
usefulness of source code examples exceeded my expectations.
Daniel Phillips
James....@team17.com says...
>
>> Do I have to put my hand into boiling water to know that it's hot?
>> Obviously not - I can learn that by asking. By the same token, I don't
>> have to become a D3D programmer to know that the D3D API is awkward,
>> and that it's going to be an uphill battle to get D3D rendering to
>> produce consistent results across a bunch of different display cards.
>
>than any other API. It's just a case of learning. I belive that to
>be able to use something to it's best, you have to work at it.
>
>I'm not Pro or Anti MS, I'm just using an API that I was given and making
>the best of it.
And if you get to choose, how does that change things? Huh?
James E Fisher
Daniel Phillips <xy...@plugh.com> wrote in article
<649ntl$cpm$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
OpenGL, but thats only because I want an SGI machine on my desk :-)
--
James E Fisher, C++ Tools Programmer, Team 17 Software Ltd
http://www.team17.com http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lakes/5639
sumatose
Daniel Phillips wrote in message <64bbkn$hgi$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>>the same old assumption that the drivers will be available (I hope you're
>>right,
>
>Again, I'm not hoping. It's a statement of fact. We're using SGI OpenGL
>for Windows here with 3DFX acceleration, where it really flys, and with
>software emulation where it doesn't exactly fly, but it does run on
>*everything* and it looks a lot like the hardware-accelerated version,
>(Not as sexy, to be sure, but good enough for development.) *This isn't
>a bad starting situation* and it's obviously improving pretty quickly,
>in particular, things seem to be right on schedule for our project.
It should look _exacly_ like the hardware accelerated version, just slower.
If it doesn't, it's broken. (Or are you telling us that OpenGL doesn't look
the same on hardware that on software?)
Scott Le Grand
That's not actually true. Quoting page 605 of the red book: "OpenGL is
not a pixel-exact specification. It therefore doesn't guarantee an
exact
match between images produced by different OpenGL implementations."
But we get a lot of people proclaiming drivers buggy because they
believe
that it is when it's really a question of differing hardware
capabilities
and mathematical tricks within individual drivers. What IS guaranteed
is that
images produced by the SAME implementation are EXACT in some cases which
boil
down to the concept that rendering-irrelevant state changes should not
change
the output of images...
An example would be if brand x graphics accelerator has 4 bits of of
sub-texel
coordinates and brand y has 16, then brand y is going to render texels
more
accurately than brand x. Therefore, textures rendered by brand x and
brand y will
look different, and the software edition could look different from both
of them
without breaking conformance. Only the worst kind of geek is going to
raise
a fuss about this and proclaim OpenGL as bad as Direct3D over such
nonsense.
The real worry to me, as others have indicated, is whether the drivers
will
spread far and wide or not
Scott Le Grand
James E Fisher
> From: Daniel Phillips <xy...@plugh.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.games.programmer
> Subject: Re: David Springer, Accusations and my responses - no more
> Date: 11 November 1997 1:32 am
[large snip]
> Do I have to put my hand into boiling water to know that it's hot?
> Obviously not - I can learn that by asking. By the same token, I don't
> have to become a D3D programmer to know that the D3D API is awkward,
> and that it's going to be an uphill battle to get D3D rendering to
> produce consistent results across a bunch of different display cards.
Sorry, I must but in here. I myself use D3D and find it no harder to use
than any other API. It's just a case of learning. I belive that to be
able
to use something to it's best, you have to work at it.
I'm not Pro or Anti MS, I'm just using an API that I was given and making
the best of it.
> I've been using OpenGL for a couple of weeks now, and I find it very
> pleasant to use - very fast to prototype in, just like John Carmack
> said. Before you get your knickers in a knot, please note that I'm
> hardly an inexperienced 3D programmer, plus I studied the API pretty
> thoroughly a long time before I began to use it. When I actually did
> begin to use it, it met my expectations. The availability of and
> usefulness of source code examples exceeded my expectations.
Daniel Phillips
gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron says...
>
>xy...@plugh.com (Daniel Phillips) wrote:
>>
>> I've been using OpenGL for a couple of weeks now, and I find it very
>> pleasant to use - very fast to prototype in, just like John Carmack
>> said. Before you get your knickers in a knot, please note that I'm
>> hardly an inexperienced 3D programmer, plus I studied the API pretty
>> thoroughly a long time before I began to use it. When I actually did
>> begin to use it, it met my expectations. The availability of and
>> usefulness of source code examples exceeded my expectations.
>
No, you're wrong, This isn't an argument, it's a statement of fact.
>the same old assumption that the drivers will be available (I hope you're
>right,
Again, I'm not hoping. It's a statement of fact. We're using SGI OpenGL
for Windows here with 3DFX acceleration, where it really flys, and with
software emulation where it doesn't exactly fly, but it does run on
*everything* and it looks a lot like the hardware-accelerated version,
(Not as sexy, to be sure, but good enough for development.) *This isn't
a bad starting situation* and it's obviously improving pretty quickly,
in particular, things seem to be right on schedule for our project.
>as i've said before i'd like the GL option and the competition is
>good for everyone, I know it's massively improved D3D), the same old
>reference to Carmack's out of date D3D review,
I though you said you didn't reread it. :-O I did, and it was a good
read - 95% of it is still 100% accurate.
>the point is that you accused me of "suppressing
>criticism of Microsoft" (although you edited this out of the above
>post), which is about the most fucked up personal attack on someone's
>credibility that you can make in this newsgroup.
No, you can do much worse. Sorry, just point it out. I try to edit
for better reading and lower load on Usenet bandwidth. You might
consider doing this yourself, as your habit of quoting entire articles
and putting a few lines at the end is one of the few things that is
mentioned in *every* article about netiquette. Not that I think your
netiquette is bad, compared to some posters on this newsgroup, but it
could certainly stand improving.
>But of course you don't make personal attacks, change the subject or misuse
>quotes...
I try not to. I'm human, OK? Sometimes I slip.
David Springer
Daniel Phillips <xy...@plugh.com> wrote:
> Again, I'm not hoping. It's a statement of fact. We're using SGI OpenGL
> for Windows here with 3DFX acceleration, where it really flys, and with
Great... the only card that doesn't need an OpenGL ICD has one.
By the way, aren't you breaking your NDA with 3dfx by talking about it ?
Naughty, naughty... ;)
Anyhow, as long as you're willing to talk about it how about telling
us what TIMEDEMO and TIMEREFRESH in glQuake and Quake 2 have to say
about it. I didn't get the beta driver 'cause I don't need no more
steeeeenking NDA's to worry about - got me plenty enough of those already.
David Springer
--
*************** IGAMES INTERNET GAME LOBBY ****************
* *
* NOW SUPPORTING MICROSOFT DirectPlay 3 LOBBY STANDARD ! *
* *
* A real-time game lobby for the internet with many *
* exciting games and thousands of players. Game *
* developers, players, and ISP's can try it out at: *
* *
****************** http://www.igames.com ******************
sumatose
Kendall Bennett wrote in message ...
>In article <64bc37$4uj$1...@wagner.videotron.net>, suma...@NOSPAM.usa.net
>says...
>> >*everything* and it looks a lot like the hardware-accelerated version,
>> >(Not as sexy, to be sure, but good enough for development.) *This isn't
>> >a bad starting situation* and it's obviously improving pretty quickly,
>> >in particular, things seem to be right on schedule for our project.
>>
slower.
>> If it doesn't, it's broken. (Or are you telling us that OpenGL doesn't
look
>> the same on hardware that on software?)
>
>version.
Of course it should.. there was no mention of disabling features in the
original post.
>Why? Because when you have hardware acceleration you can use
>features that you would not normally use when running in software, [...]>
>If the software version ran 30fps and the hardware version ran 30fps and
>they both looked the same, what is the point of the hardware version?
That's rather obvious point.. ;)
sumatose
Mad Pete wrote in message <346b0357...@news.bconnex.net>...
>On 12 Nov 1997 04:34:31 GMT, <xy...@plugh.com> (Daniel Phillips) wrote:
>
>>>as i've said before i'd like the GL option and the competition is
>>>good for everyone, I know it's massively improved D3D), the same old
>>>reference to Carmack's out of date D3D review,
>>
>>I though you said you didn't reread it. :-O I did, and it was a good
>>read - 95% of it is still 100% accurate.
>
>Well... the OpenGL side of the article may still be accurate, but the D3D
>side of it is really outdated now, since it was attacking D3D v3.0 with
>execute buffers. You won't get any argument from anyone that
>execute buffers were hideous abortions and whoever created it should be
>dragged slowly over molten hot spiky coals. But since people don't deal
with
>execute buffers any more, then Carmack's article is outdated.
>
>Don't get me wrong, I like OpenGL better, but I'm tired of people arguing
>against D3D because of the execute buffers... nobody uses those anymore :)
It's not like Carmack's .plan file is really rosy about OpenGL either.
Anyway, bring in the balloons. The line bellow marks my last post in this
group for this year.
Enjoy. 8)
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
*-*
.
Daniel Phillips
>>Again, I'm not hoping. It's a statement of fact. We're using SGI
>>OpenGL for Windows here with 3DFX acceleration, where it really flys,
>>and with
>
>Glide.
Glide is probably faster, all right - we'll measure the difference some
time in the next few days. Maybe it's minimal, who knows? Given
equivalent rendering pipelines, I don't really see why there's a good
theoretical reason why the performance should differ by more than 1%
or so. If it's worse than that then I see a good opportunity for one
of us here to go present themselves to SGI with a contract proposal to
fix up the guts of it properly so it flys.
>> software emulation where it doesn't exactly fly, but it does run on
>> *everything* and it looks a lot like the hardware-accelerated version,
>> (Not as sexy, to be sure, but good enough for development.) *This isn
>
>Is this any use at all?, I can't imagine what kind of game you are
>writing if it can handle 30X+ performance scalabilty.
Yes, this is a great deal of use - it means absolutely everybody can run
the thing, to check out the graphics for example, even if it isn't
necessarily playable. This is particularly important with the artists,
not all of whom have 3D accelerators installed. And why should they?
They're painting textures etc. - they just need to see how it looks,
not how it plays.
Interesting point about the scaleability limits. I guess one way to get
an idea what the limits really are is to compare Quake2 running in
320x200x8 at 15 FPS to Quake2 running in 800x600x24 bit OGL at 60 FPS on
a Riva, for instance. Hmm, just the resolution, color depth and FPS
difference is worth a factor of - let's see - (800*600*3*60/320*200*15)
= 90. Already a factor of 90, and we haven't even started talking
about filtering, gouraud shading, alpha blending etc. Question
answered?
>> in particular, things seem to be right on schedule for our project.
>
>Maybe this says more about your project?
What's that, a mean-spirited swipe? Projects take time - I'm sure
you're aware. Can you say "Dungeon Keeper"? ;-)
>>>as i've said before i'd like the GL option and the competition is
>>>good for everyone, I know it's massively improved D3D), the same old
>>>reference to Carmack's out of date D3D review,
>>
>>I though you said you didn't reread it. :-O I did, and it was a good
>>read - 95% of it is still 100% accurate.
>
>Bullshit, anyone who actually knew DX3 will tell you that Execute
>buffers were 80%+ of the problem, of course you find the article
>accurate, you used it to program your brain with your API preferences in
>the first place and haven't revised your attitude at all in over a year.
Bullshit yourself. I said 95% *of the article* is still 100% accurate.
*** REREAD THE ARTICLE BEFORE ARGUING THAT POINT FURTHER *** Otherwise,
you're just blowing foul air out the wrong end of your digestive tract.
The main point of John Carmack's article is that OpenGL is better for
trying new ideas out than D3D. That point remains true today, IMO.
You said yourself that the setup in D3D still sucks. I don't doubt
that there are a few other parts of D3D that still suck as well.
Daniel Phillips
Mad...@Mad.Pete says...
>>>good for everyone, I know it's massively improved D3D), the same old
>>>reference to Carmack's out of date D3D review,
>>
>>I though you said you didn't reread it. :-O I did, and it was a good
>>read - 95% of it is still 100% accurate.
>
>side of it is really outdated now, since it was attacking D3D v3.0 with
>execute buffers. You won't get any argument from anyone that
>execute buffers were hideous abortions and whoever created it should be
>dragged slowly over molten hot spiky coals. But since people don't deal with
>execute buffers any more, then Carmack's article is outdated.
>
>Don't get me wrong, I like OpenGL better, but I'm tired of people arguing
>against D3D because of the execute buffers... nobody uses those anymore :)
Agree. My point is that Carmack's article is still a good read - if
you're interested in how he thinks and want to learn something about his
methods, which IMO, every 3D programmer ought to do since he is (I
believe) the best 3D progammer on the planet. I mean, some people have
an ego problem with admitting that to themselves, but just how many times
does it have to be demonstrated?
Here's the article:
http://www.directx.com/carmack.htm
(Please don't snip this link if you reply. People ought to be able to
make up their minds for themselves. Caveat: the exact example that
Carmack uses has been fixed up by Microsoft, and that exact part of
D3D doesn't suck nearly as much as it used to. The rest of the article
is still a good read.)
Carmack's most recent public comment on the subject was "with the
addition of DrawPrimitive, D3D doesn't suck as badly, but it still sucks".
Since then he's stopped commenting publicly, which is a darn good idea,
since he already made his point, and he succeeded in changing the
world of 3D on the PC by doing that. Anybody want to argue this?
Glenn Corpes
xy...@plugh.com (Daniel Phillips) wrote:
Just a theory: I think he stopped commenting publicly because he doesn't
want to look a total hypocrite when Quake II ships with D3D support
after all it would be a couple of weeks work for Brian Hook, I listened
to him talk at Siggraph (very impressive) where he refused to get drawn
in to the D3D/GL argument even though several SGI cocksuckers tried to
prompt him with loaded questions. Id just haven't announced anything
because they know they are openGL's _only_ hope and don't need to
announce anything in advance. In fact the success of openGL as a game
API probably hangs on the quality and timing or NVidia's Riva ICD
Paul Shirley
In article <memo.19971112...@frog.compulink.co.uk>, Glenn
Corpes <gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron> writes
>Bullshit, anyone who actually knew DX3 will tell you that Execute
>buffers were 80%+ of the problem, of course you find the article
>accurate, you used it to program your brain with your API preferences in
>the first place and haven't revised your attitude at all in over a year.
And that other 20% is not much of a problem if you can order one of your
staff to hide it for you ;)
---
Paul Shirley: my email address is 'obvious'ly anti-spammed
Currently considering hiring a cheap programmer to do my work for me ;)
Chris Lomont
Daniel Phillips wrote in message <64g7cq$2e7$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron says...
>>xy...@plugh.com (Daniel Phillips) wrote:
>>>
>OK - you want to argue this. What do you eat for breakfast, raw
meat?
>;-) Well, if I had to have someone as my only hope, I'd choose John
>Carmack. Let's hope he doesn't get killed in a plane crash or gunned
>down by Microsoft agents! Seriously, I think you would have been
right
>at one time, but that time was a while ago. OpenGL is a fact now, go
D3D has been a fact for two years, go ahead, try to deny it.
>ahead, try to deny it. Drivers are super important, but if by some
D3D drivers exist and have for several years. I hope OpenGL catches
up, but the fact remains, they have not yet.
>wierd quirk of fate (or some underhanded business deal) the NVidia
>OpenGL driver fails to arrive it's just going to be money in the
pocket
>of 3DFX.
And a lot smaller OpenGL game market, giving D3D more (unneeded)
momentum.
The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
market? It's not rocket science to see where the development/marketing
has been. If OpenGL wants to catch up, it had better deliver product
soon, or MS will eventually get D3D 6.0 or 7.0 or whatever to a very
nice API - fast, supported, and integrated - and OpenGL will never
enter that market again.
Chris Lomont
Chris Lomont
Daniel Phillips wrote in message <64dn9f$r4r$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>
>Carmack's most recent public comment on the subject was "with the
>addition of DrawPrimitive, D3D doesn't suck as badly, but it still
sucks".
>Since then he's stopped commenting publicly, which is a darn good
idea,
>since he already made his point, and he succeeded in changing the
>world of 3D on the PC by doing that. Anybody want to argue this?
Perhaps he realizes D3D has evolved very rapidly from 'sucks' to much,
much better than it started, and with several new releases slated, it
might surpass OpenGL 1.1 in many aspects, since OpenGL hasn't changed
very much at all for several years. Since D3D can change rapidly to
meet market demands, while OpenGL is controlled by the ARB and is thus
slow to evolve, perhaps soon D3D will be the platform of choice for
all?
Chris Lomont
David Springer
Glenn Corpes <gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron> wrote:
> Just a theory: I think he stopped commenting publicly because he doesn't
> want to look a total hypocrite when Quake II ships with D3D support
> after all it would be a couple of weeks work for Brian Hook, I listened
> to him talk at Siggraph (very impressive) where he refused to get drawn
> in to the D3D/GL argument even though several SGI cocksuckers tried to
> prompt him with loaded questions. Id just haven't announced anything
> because they know they are openGL's _only_ hope and don't need to
> announce anything in advance. In fact the success of openGL as a game
> API probably hangs on the quality and timing or NVidia's Riva ICD
If Quake 2 comes out with Direct3D support I'll be sure to get some
dejanews quotes and have a lot of fun. I've been waiting months for
that day. :-)
go...@berkelium.com.xyzzy
"Chris Lomont" <clo...@omni.cc.purdue.edu> writes:
>> Perhaps he realizes D3D has evolved very rapidly from 'sucks' to much,
>> much better than it started, and with several new releases slated, it
>> might surpass OpenGL 1.1 in many aspects, since OpenGL hasn't changed
>> very much at all for several years.
We have covered this already. The fact is, D3D's "improvement" came
from copying the OpenGL syntax. Sure, the more D3D copies from
OpenGL, the better it gets. There is no innovation here, and D3D will
not surpass OpenGL by copying from it. OpenGL has changed but not as
dramatically as D3D, primarily because it was done (mostly) right the
first time, borrowing from 10 years of experience with IRIS GL. DX5
was an attempt to catch up through copying, not leapfrog through
innovation. We don't have DX6 yet, but OpenGL 1.2 is also in the
works, and the extension process occurs asynchronously (see below).
>> Since D3D can change rapidly to meet market demands, while OpenGL
>> is controlled by the ARB and is thus slow to evolve, perhaps soon
>> D3D will be the platform of choice for all?
Your premise is incorrect. OpenGL may be extended by any vendor at
any time. For example, the new version of GLQuake uses the new
multitexture extension, written by SGI and implemented by 3DFx in
their beta ICD.
sumatose
go...@berkelium.com.xyzzy wrote in message ...
>"Chris Lomont" <clo...@omni.cc.purdue.edu> writes:
>
>>> Perhaps he realizes D3D has evolved very rapidly from 'sucks' to much,
>>> much better than it started, and with several new releases slated, it
>>> might surpass OpenGL 1.1 in many aspects, since OpenGL hasn't changed
>>> very much at all for several years.
>
>We have covered this already. The fact is, D3D's "improvement" came
>from copying the OpenGL syntax. Sure, the more D3D copies from
>OpenGL, the better it gets. There is no innovation here, and D3D will
>not surpass OpenGL by copying from it.
That's pure fanatism. You basicly think that every 3D Api in the world has
to 'copy' from OpenGL to do anything. You _are_ aware, don't you, that
OpenGL didn't invent 3D graphics and that they are hundreds of 3D APIs out
there? That using using things like a function to draw an array of
triangles wasn't invented or is not exclusive to OpenGL ? (Not to mention
that it wasn't even in OpenGL 1.0). People should really give up using
these intelligence-insulting arguments to push _any_ API. If OpenGL is just
a 'function syntax', then it really isn't much. You sound soooo scared. PS
: Direct3D is trying to borrow from _proprietatry_ apis like GLIDE, not
OpenGL.
Sander v.R.
>The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
>years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
>market?
Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
How many good 3d games use d3d?
______________________________________________________________________
EMail: s...@vr.xs4all.nospam.nl
(remove nospam before sending me a mail)
Sander v.R.
On 14 Nov 1997 21:03:56 GMT, David Springer <spri...@matrix.eden.com>
wrote:
>Glenn Corpes <gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron> wrote:
>
>> Just a theory: I think he stopped commenting publicly because he doesn't
>> want to look a total hypocrite when Quake II ships with D3D support
>> after all it would be a couple of weeks work for Brian Hook, I listened
>> to him talk at Siggraph (very impressive) where he refused to get drawn
>> in to the D3D/GL argument even though several SGI cocksuckers tried to
>> prompt him with loaded questions. Id just haven't announced anything
>> because they know they are openGL's _only_ hope and don't need to
>> announce anything in advance. In fact the success of openGL as a game
>> API probably hangs on the quality and timing or NVidia's Riva ICD
>
>If Quake 2 comes out with Direct3D support I'll be sure to get some
>dejanews quotes and have a lot of fun. I've been waiting months for
>that day. :-)
I have a nice qoute for you w...i mean, david:
"This is my view of the people who work at Microsoft: You have
a choice. You have to realize that what you're doing is bad for the
industry. If you're doing stuff that you don't even agree with and do
it for the money- we have a word for that: Whore." - Brian Hook
Sander v.R.
On Sun, 16 Nov 1997 17:23:08 -0500, "sumatose" <suma...@usa.net>
wrote:
>
>go...@berkelium.com.xyzzy wrote in message ...
>>We have covered this already. The fact is, D3D's "improvement" came
>>from copying the OpenGL syntax. Sure, the more D3D copies from
>>OpenGL, the better it gets. There is no innovation here, and D3D will
>>not surpass OpenGL by copying from it.
>
>That's pure fanatism.
yeah, right...and your remarks AREN'T????
is there one thing about ms that ISN'T fanatic???
fanatic lie-ers, fanatic decievers, fanatic manipulators, fanatic
thieves, fanatic etc. etc. etc. etc.
How many companies haven't they destroyed just because those companies
didn't want to do what ms wanted!?
>You basicly think that every 3D Api in the world has
>to 'copy' from OpenGL to do anything. You _are_ aware, don't you, that
>OpenGL didn't invent 3D graphics and that they are hundreds of 3D APIs out
>there? That using using things like a function to draw an array of
>triangles wasn't invented or is not exclusive to OpenGL ? (Not to mention
>that it wasn't even in OpenGL 1.0). People should really give up using
>these intelligence-insulting arguments to push _any_ API. If OpenGL is just
>a 'function syntax', then it really isn't much.
Hah, so you can't really say that microsoft invented it either, can
you??
you're basicly saying microsoft just copied stuff that was tought up
years ago!!
They're not doing a very good job copy-ing it then, are they!?
Actually, they're very slow at it, aren't they!?
Tsk...it's actually just a load of junk code then, isn't it???
>You sound soooo scared.
You sound soooo stupid
....oh wait a minute...you ARE stupid!!
Yeah! You support microsoft, so your IQ MUST be lower then your
shoesize!!
Don't you get it!?
This is not about winning! !
This is about what's best for the industry and the end-users!
Which is usually the opposite of what ms does!!!
They only do what's best for them and their bank-accounts!!!
Do you really think that they earn these billions of dollars just
because they make 'good quality products'????
Are you really THAT naive????
Bill gates isn't the richest man in the world for being a great guy!!
You don't get that rich by being 'nice' and 'friendly'!!
Idiot.
> PS: Direct3D is trying to borrow from _proprietatry_ apis like GLIDE, not
>OpenGL.
heh...borrowing...that's a novelty...
And where do you think Glide got it from??
geez....use your fuckin' brain for once asshole!
And what's up with this 'sumatose' stuff?? are you too ashamed to say
these things under your real name??
Sander v.R.
<snip>
So we're all basicly agreeing that d3d is just a collection of copied
parts of various other API's, eh?
Just not what from which one ;-D
Sander v.R.
On Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:39:56 -0500, Oren Laskin
<las...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>> ii) They will support hardware acceleration of 3d
>Which BeOS and Rhapsody certainly will. Linux currently has Voodoo
>hardware acceleration.
nope, mesa opengl is 100% opengl and supports 3dfx and apparently 3
other chipsets (but i'd be damned if i knew which ones)
Sander v.R.
On Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:26:25 -0400, Roger Christie
<rchr...@spinach.xylogics.com> wrote:
>David Springer wrote:
>>
>> Sander v.R. <foremaila...@my.signature> wrote:
>>
>> > Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
>> > quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
>>
>> Quality more important that quantity ? Piffle. One word: Myst
>>
>> Timing is more important than quality. Hitting the transition to
>> a critical new technology and marketing is more important than
>> quality. Hell, the picture on the front of the box is more important
>> than quality. A "Designed for Windows 95" logo ON the box is more
>> important than what is IN the box.
>>
>> David Springer
>> --
>>
>
>I think this sums up both you /and/ Microsoft
>very nicely.
>
>Timing is more important than quality.
Hahahaha, good one ;-)
Sander v.R.
On Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:45:15 -0600, Matt Craighead
<crai...@citilink.com> wrote:
>David Springer wrote:
>> If I were Bill Gates I'd be living on my own island being swarmed over
>> by native island girls and I'd keep a hookah the size of a baseball
>> bat constantly burning by my side. Why would Gates want to do anything
>> sleazy ? He's the richest guy in the world FFS. He'll be on top
>> for as long as he lives no matter what he does from here.
>
>Isn't the Sultan of Brunei richer? Or someone like that...
nope.
Bill gates has 36.8 billion dollars, and the Sultan of Brunei, who now
is the second richest man in the world, has something of 35 or 36
billion dollars...
It's criminal that people can have that much money....
Sander v.R.
On Fri, 21 Nov 1997 13:03:00 -0000, "Russ Williams"
<ru...@algorithm.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Daniel Phillips wrote in message <6533pd$el0$2...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>>ru...@algorithm.demon.co.uk says...
>>>
>>>Daniel Phillips wrote in message <652qkd$4p9$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>>>>
>>>>Last night I played Warcraft on a Mac. Not my machine - what you'd call
>>>>a "naive user" - a musician. Cross-platform is the Next Big Thing for
>>>>games.
>>>
>>>Yup. Portability is cool. It doesn't need Java or OpenGL, though, just
>>>some
>>>thought with the design to hide platform-specific code.
>>
>>For a 3D game, what portability options have you got besides
>>OpenGL? I mean, other than writing your own 3D api c/w hardware
>>support for each platform?
>
>Actually, that's your *only* option.
I hope you won't be TOO shocked when i tell you that there are other
computers besides the PC and the PSX/Saturn....trust me on this.
>OpenGL isn't available on PSX/Saturn
>(even the SGI-based N64 doesn't use it). It's not as difficult as it seems,
>since (after a little setup) all 3d APIs basically exist as a way to draw
>polygons... Porting from one hardware interface to another is fairly
>easy.
Yeah, but why do that if you don't have to!
Sure, some systems might require you to write your own drivers...
but you'd have to do that anyway for those systems!
Why not use existing drivers when you can?
Sander v.R.
On Thu, 20 Nov 1997 22:44:43 -0500, sumatose <suma...@NOSPAM.usa.net>
wrote:
>Sander v.R. wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 1997 17:23:08 -0500, "sumatose" <suma...@usa.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >That's pure fanatism.
>>
>> yeah, right...and your remarks AREN'T????
>> is there one thing about ms that ISN'T fanatic???
>> fanatic lie-ers, fanatic decievers, fanatic manipulators, fanatic
>> thieves, fanatic etc. etc. etc. etc.
>> How many companies haven't they destroyed just because those companies
>> didn't want to do what ms wanted!?
>[...]
>>
>> geez....use your fuckin' brain for once asshole!
>>
>> And what's up with this 'sumatose' stuff?? are you too ashamed to say
>> these things under your real name??
>
>HA! Beautiful. *Daniel Phillips* posting under an Alias.
Hehehe....don't know if Daniel would like to be compared to me ;-)
or the other way around for that matter, not that i dislike him.
Just don't like to be compared to other people.
>How about using _your_ real name??
Oh, but I do.
Sander van Rossen.
Born and raised in Rotterdam, Holland.
>(and new arguments and insults?)
Hehehe...
Don't take it too personal if i get a bit carried away.
It's not my intention to 'insult'.
Sander v.R.
On Sat, 22 Nov 1997 02:18:20 GMT, Mad...@Mad.Pete (Mad Pete) wrote:
>On 21 Nov 1997 04:20:41 GMT, David Springer <spri...@matrix.eden.com> wrote:
>
>>A great game is evidenced by how many people are willing to buy it.
>>That's it. Bottom line.
>
>Riiiight.... if that were the case, Lands of Lore II would be the most awesome
>game in the world. This might come as a shock to you but there are actually
>people who program games for FUN!
Games that aren't worth buying just won't be bought on such a large
scale.
The ammount of copies of a certain game that are sold certainly define
how populair and good a game is...
Personally i think that the game-industry is virtually the only
industry where you can say that the ammount of sold copies (more or
less) equals how good a product is.
(notice the more or less)
Sander v.R.
On 20 Nov 1997 06:12:00 GMT, David Springer <spri...@matrix.eden.com>
wrote:
>Minh Truong <truo...@email.uc.edu> wrote:
>
>
>> Sander v.R. wrote in article <346bb64e...@192.168.100.1>...
>> >I have a nice qoute for you w...i mean, david:
>> >
>> >"This is my view of the people who work at Microsoft: You have
>> >a choice. You have to realize that what you're doing is bad for the
>> >industry. If you're doing stuff that you don't even agree with and do
>> >it for the money- we have a word for that: Whore." - Brian Hook
>
>Microsoft has done more to make "Personal Computer" a household word than
>any single company other than *maybe* Intel, IBM, or Apple. They supply
>impossibly inexpensive software to so many millions of people around
>the world it boggles the mind. If that's "bad" for the industry then
>there's no such thing as "good".
Yes, MS-DOS was a good thing.
Windows was just good marketing
OS/2 was just bad marketing
just because they've done one good thing doesn't mean they've got a
free ticket to do whatever they want!!
come on!
>You might ask Hook if he gets paid to work on a game that is the most
>bloody, violent concoction to earn the moniker "entertainment" since
>"Friday the 13th". I'd call that person a scum sucking bottom feeder
>before I applied the term to anyone else. Capitalizing on visions
>of violence, death, and destruction peddled to children. Yeah, that's
>a great definition of world class citizen all right. Do you worship
>Charles Manson too or was he before your time ?
If he killed Bill Gates i would.
But seriously, I'd prefer to virtually kill someone over destroying
people in real life any day.
>> This surprised me when I first saw it, but it's no big shock w/ Brian's
>> background in academia. Many people in this industry aren't in it just to
>
>WTF are you smoking ?
what's up with this smokeing thing??
are you so used to be hallucinating after you smoke that you naturally
assume everybody else is doing the same? (when they're saying things
you don't agree with?)
>I want some.
I knew it! ;-D
>Hook has no acedemic background whatsoever. No degree.
>I don't think he even took a single college class.
Hmm...impressive...
than he really must be talented, doing all that without an education.
>You should research your idols a bit more before idolizing
>them in public.
Ooh...good point david! go on and research Billy boy, will ya?
>> do good for the industry. Come on, it's the almighty buck that drives the
>> industry. Maybe the question you should ask is if you were Billy G.,
>> wouldn't you lie, cheat, twist arms to be on top?
>
>If I were Bill Gates I'd be living on my own island being swarmed over
>by native island girls and I'd keep a hookah the size of a baseball
>bat constantly burning by my side.
Yeah, but even billy doesn't do that.
He just want's to make more money....pathetic...
>Why would Gates want to do anything sleazy ?
>He's the richest guy in the world FFS. He'll be on top
>for as long as he lives no matter what he does from here.
yeah....probably because he sells 'high quality products at a low
price', eh?
Sander v.R.
On Fri, 21 Nov 1997 16:21:14 -0600, Matt Craighead
<crai...@citilink.com> wrote:
>David Springer wrote:
>>
>> Roger Christie <rchr...@spinach.xylogics.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I think you'll find a large percentage of the linux users are
>> > adults, many of them in engineering and other technical fields.
>> > And thus, with money in their pockets.
>>
>> Hmmmm... I can believe that. Of course that begs the question
>> of what kind of 3D game. How about "Pocket Protector Madness" ;)
>>
>> Seriously though... Linux users tend to be WAY above average in
>> the computer literacy department. I would suspect that the group
>> you mentioned will have dual boot setups if they're interested
>> in games.
>>
>> It seems like the starving college student crowd would either
>> have the same setup or, if Linux only, have a system too
>> underpowered to play any 3D game well which of course makes
>> that a barren market.
>
>The following seems to verify your remarks.
>
>I have had to deal with some people who use Linux exclusively and
>actually insult me when I report a bug in a Windows version of a cross-
>platform game... (this was in multiplayer, so it was in real-time)
>
<conversation snip>
>
>I got fed up with him soon afterwards... he started to refuse to answer
>my questions, probably because he didn't have any good answers.
>
>Oh, and it wasn't that he had a slow computer. He just hated all
>graphics.
Well, i guess that you just spoke to the wrong person.
I assure you that his views are not the views of the average linux
user.
I know quite a view and none of them dislike 3d, OpenGl or graphics.
Linux is a good platform for games....technically that is....because
it really isn't user friendly....maybe that'll change one day.
For instance:
Quake runs about..hmm...20%..faster under linux compared to dos or
windows....but it's a bitch to get to work...
If XWindows was more stable and user friendly, linux could really be a
threat to ms-windows.
note that XWindows is a shell for linux, just like W95 is a shell for
dos.
linux is stable, xwindows isn't *that* stable....
Sander v.R.
On Fri, 21 Nov 1997 02:11:27 -0000, "Russ Williams"
<ru...@algorithm.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Paul Miller wrote in message <3474D57C...@fxtech.com>...
>>Russ Williams wrote:
>>> Ooh. Linux. BIG market share there. Lot's of 'Joe Public's buying
>>> games...
>>
>>You'd be surprised.
>
>Yeah, right. Linux is *not* a consumer OS.
ofcourse it is, you idiot.
for instance:
did you know that NASA uses linux in their space shuttles?
(because it's so much more stable, faster and more power saveing than
any other os)
are they not consumers?
>>> i) BeOS / Rhapsody / Linux will some day take a noticable market share.
>>Linux is already getting a noticeable market share. Where have you been?
>
>Linux is only noticable because it's proponents are particularly vocal.
yeah, right.
Learn the facts before you start shouting bullshit.
Linux happends to be one of the, if not THE, most fastests and stable
OS in the world.
ofcourse, this all depends on which version you use, the newest
versions aren't that stable since...well...they're new....
Take a somewhat older version compared to the newest version
and you've got a pretty damn good OS with lot's of updates comeing
every DAY!
I'd choose a linux server over a NT server ANY DAY!
>>> ii) They will support hardware acceleration of 3d
>>
>>Linux already does at least.
>
>AIUI, that would be Glide only...
nope. full OpenGl,
>>> iv) Portability is more important than performance
>>
>>Where did you get this idea? Used "C" lately?
>
>Portability over performance was implied since OpenGL is next to useless
>on most machines.
Don't be to sure about that.
There are a lot of types of computers that support OpenGl
Linux for instance supports it and linux itself can be run on lot's of
computers...
And the ammount of OS's and types of computers that support OpenGl are
likely to increase...
>The only fully compliant implementation I've seen on PC
>(that works with glQuake) is MS' software driver (although I'm sure SGIs is
>just as good). Real good performance.
SGI's driver is *supposed* to be twice as fast...
it isn't that stable yet tough..
(heh...you would expect that from the MS driver)
>I use C a lot. What's your point?
maybe because in reality there's no such thing as 'ANSI C'...
Sander v.R.
On 20 Nov 1997 05:41:49 GMT, David Springer <spri...@matrix.eden.com>
wrote:
>Michael John Pohoreski <mpoh...@sfu.ca> wrote:
>> "Chris Lomont" <clo...@omni.cc.purdue.edu> writes:
>
>> >Perhaps he realizes D3D has evolved very rapidly from 'sucks' to much,
>> >much better than it started, and with several new releases slated, it
>> >might surpass OpenGL 1.1 in many aspects, since OpenGL hasn't changed
>> >very much at all for several years. Since D3D can change rapidly to
>> >meet market demands, while OpenGL is controlled by the ARB and is thus
>> >slow to evolve, perhaps soon D3D will be the platform of choice for
>> >all?
>
>> Now which API do I want to use (for game development):
>> - one that has a bad design thus requiring hacks to fix it every year, or
>> - one that doesn't need continually updating (a testimony to its good design)
>
>> Tough choice.
>
>> Thank god we _all_ have a _choice_, since I'll be using the
>> better designed one (even if it isnt the most popular.)
>
>In fact if you want to ship an accelerated game OpenGL isn't among
>your choices unless you cough up $250K to license the Quake engine
>then you get to use the OpenGL functions that Carmack talked 3dfx
>into supporting...
>
>In fact your choices are exactly two: Glide or D3D.
>
>With the former you get support on exactly one chipset, Voodoo (two
>if you count its poor cousin Voodoo Rush). If you use Direct3D you
>get support on virtually every chipset with a remotely valid claim
>to 3D acceleration including the Voodoo.
>
>Yeah, a REALLY tough choice. NOT.
Yeah, real smart david.
As if d3d is a complete game engine.
The quake engine is *a little* more than just rotateing vertices and
drawing triangles, eh??
Sander v.R.
On Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:39:53 -0000, "Russ Williams"
<ru...@algorithm.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Oren Laskin wrote in message ...
>[D3d vs Glide...]
>>> Yeah, a REALLY tough choice. NOT.
>>
>>And you're completely limited to the Windows 95/NT OS...
>
>Oh no! Only 90% of the whole computer market!
<sigh> unfortuneatly
>>It's not a tough choice for me, OpenGL has far better use for me in its
>>portability. Who wants to rewrite code to support D3D?
>>It's becuase Id chose OpenGL that there is now GlQuake and
>>Quake2Test for Linux and can be moved to other OS's as well as they
>>appear.
>
>Ooh. Linux. BIG market share there. Lot's of 'Joe Public's buying games...
Can you tell the future?
maybe someday linux WILL have a large market share...it sure has a
large market share of the internet..
You don't know that.
Now who's makeing the 'assumptions' here?
>>Will D3D exist on the BeOS? No... Rhapsody... no. But fairly likely
>>there will be implementations of OpenGL.
>
>Implicit assumptions:
>
>i) BeOS / Rhapsody / Linux will some day take a noticable market share.
possibly...who can tell the future?
>ii) They will support hardware acceleration of 3d
linux already has.
>iii) The rest of the code is 100% portable
nothing is 100% portable...but about 80% is.
>iv) Portability is more important than performance
in which case you should stick to OpenGl since it has better
performance
>I'll let the list speak for itself...
lists don't speak...tsk...really... :-)
Sander v.R.
On 20 Nov 1997 00:32:10 GMT, David Springer <spri...@matrix.eden.com>
wrote:
>Sander v.R. <foremaila...@my.signature> wrote:
>
>> Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
>> quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
>
>Quality more important that quantity ? Piffle. One word: Myst
That's a matter of taste, i don't like Myst myself.
Quality IS more important than Quantity!
>Timing is more important than quality.
>Hitting the transition to a critical new technology and marketing is more
>important than quality. Hell, the picture on the front of the box is more
>important than quality.
>A "Designed for Windows 95" logo ON the box is more important than
>what is IN the box.
Heh...to make profit maybe!
But money is NOT the issue here!!
There's actually more to life than money!!!
Choseing between money and happyness i'd chose happyness!
Hapyness != Money, Money != a God
There is nothing more sickning than a man worshipping money.
Money is not the goal, it's a tool to get to your goal!!
Idiot.
Do you think it's right that there are people with more than 1 billion
dollar????
That's more money than they'll ever need!!
There are people starveing because they can't afford a loaf of bread!
And don't go telling me shit like "that's not their responsibility"
because it IS!
It's everyone's responsibility.
Hehe....guess i got a little of topic, eh?
Sander v.R.
On Thu, 20 Nov 1997 17:49:32 -0000, "Russ Williams"
<ru...@algorithm.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>And effectively useless on >99%...
nope.
>>> Ooh. Linux. BIG market share there. Lot's of 'Joe Public's buying
>>>games...
>>I'll ignore stupid comments. You're associating the OS with applications.
>>The OS is free, the application developers can choose if they wish to sell
>>their software. If this is your argument, it's pathetic.
>
>OK. Go into your local Electronics Boutique and ask how many people
>there have heard of Linux. No-one uses it.
Yeah, indeed. everybody who doesn't know that much about computers
doesn't know about it.
And yes, nobody uses it.
Just...
Nasa, most hospitals (in america, europe and the middle east), a lot
of labs, most universities, the north pole base, and gee several
million people around the world.
>>> i) BeOS / Rhapsody / Linux will some day take a noticable market
>>>share.
>>Which is not an impossibility. Make no assumptions about the future
>>because of current market share. Companies in the past have done
>>this and fallen.
>
>Granted. But what will make Rhapsody a better option than Taligent
>was?
We'll see won't we?
>>> ii) They will support hardware acceleration of 3d
>>Which BeOS and Rhapsody certainly will.
>
>Assuming the drivers are there.
If they've got any brainpower they will.
(not the OS's, the people behind the OS's ;-D)
>This is related to part (i).
heh...you just sound like a lawyer.
>>Linux currently has Voodoo hardware acceleration.
incorrect, it supports multiple chipsets (don't know which)
>Bit of a bastard if you've got a Riva 128, though, isn't it?
Don't worry, it'll be supported soon.
This is linux we're talking about, every day linux is better then the
last day...
>>> iii) The rest of the code is 100% portable
>>I'm not going to post on the portability of C++ code, it's been talked out
>>about enough. However keeping a consistent API among platforms is
>>benfificial to protable code.
>
>True. But almost all 3d APIs are trivially equivalent.
well, no.
It isn't that simple.
>FFS, they all boil down to a 'DrawTriangle' call...
If it only was that simple.
>Any hardware-based engine is likely to be *incredibly*
>portable
or not.
depends if the other system can handle or even supports
hardware based accel.
>(with far less work than general OS specifics).
well, don't know about that...
>>> iv) Portability is more important than performance
>>When both are fairly important and the use of two different APIs to
>>get an incremental improvement is not considered effective.
>
>OpenGL is implemented as software only on >95% of the market.
>(Almost all PCs, Macs,...). A nice, portable API is completely
>useless without the back-end to make it work...
Yeah, so why use any 3d API? why use d3d if most users don't have a 3d
accel card anyway!
Come to think of it, virtually all games use software 3d, why
shouldn't that be portable?
Sander v.R.
On 20 Nov 1997 03:02:42 GMT, ke...@mnsinc.com (Paul Speed) wrote:
>David Springer (spri...@matrix.eden.com) wrote:
>: Sander v.R. <foremaila...@my.signature> wrote:
>
>: > Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
>: > quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
>
>: Quality more important that quantity ? Piffle. One word: Myst
>
>: Timing is more important than quality. Hitting the transition to
>: a critical new technology and marketing is more important than
>: quality. Hell, the picture on the front of the box is more important
>: than quality. A "Designed for Windows 95" logo ON the box is more
>: important than what is IN the box.
>
> Windows 95 supporter or not, that sticker has always bugged me.
>"Designed for Windows 95" on a game sounds like a bunch of guys sitting
>around writing a game around a scroll bar. "Implemented for Windows 95"
>makes more sense, but has less marketing impact.
Well, personally i just never look for the w95 logo...
i couldn't care less.
i buy a game because i like the game, not because i like the os.
> In some programs it is necessary to consider OS during the design,
>but I would certainly hope that it isn't the central thought when
>conceiving and designing a game.
Yeah, it usually ends up in a crap game...
Just look at all those MS games, eh?
> But about the picture on the box, that's dead on. I catch myself
>with this one all of the time, judging a game by its box art. I'm also
>awe-struck when I actually see a game box without a single screen shot or
>graphic. What publisher thought that was a good idea? :) I usually
>figure the game must really suck if they thought they would sell more if
>they didn't include a screen shot, even a bad one.
Hehe, very true indeed.
You can actually tell a lot about the cover of a game.
If it looks good it usually means that a lot of money has been put
into the game.
If there are no screenshots the game probably sucks
and if the screenshots show only nice rendered pictures it's probably
a game not worth buying...
Unless you like those kind of games, ofcourse.
The same more or less applies to films too.
Sander v.R.
On Tue, 18 Nov 1997 22:00:09 -0500, "Minh Truong"
<truo...@email.uc.edu> wrote:
>Sander v.R. wrote in article <346bb360...@192.168.100.1>...
>>>>We have covered this already. The fact is, D3D's "improvement" came
>>>>from copying the OpenGL syntax. Sure, the more D3D copies from
>>>>OpenGL, the better it gets. There is no innovation here, and D3D will
>>>>not surpass OpenGL by copying from it.
>>>
>>
>>yeah, right...and your remarks AREN'T????
>>is there one thing about ms that ISN'T fanatic???
>>fanatic lie-ers, fanatic decievers, fanatic manipulators, fanatic
>>thieves, fanatic etc. etc. etc. etc.
>
Ouch!....
1-0 for you ;-)
Sander v.R.
On 20 Nov 1997 08:33:48 GMT, gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron
(Glenn Corpes) wrote:
>foremaila...@my.signature (Sander v.R.) wrote:
>
>> >The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
>> >years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
>> >market?
>>
>> Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
>> quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
>> How many good 3d games use d3d?
>
>Almost all future ones except those based on the Quake engine and I
>wouldn't be surprised if they don't too, eventually.
Well, i'd have to see it to believe it.
I haven't seen that much games which run under windows and actually
where good.
Only Red alert and hehe...your dungeon keeper spring to mind as being
good games which run under windows...
There are probably others, but i can't think of them right now...
Sander v.R.
On 20 Nov 1997 06:33:52 GMT, <xy...@plugh.com> (Daniel Phillips)
wrote:
>spri...@matrix.eden.com says...
>>
>>Why would Gates want to do anything sleazy ? He's the richest guy in the
>>world FFS.
>
>>David Springer
>
>At one time, Adolf Hitler was the most powerful man in the world. Why
>would he want to do anything sleazy? Oops! I guess I lose this debate!
>;-)
Hahaha....yep, you lost the debate ;-D
Sander v.R.
>
>
>Sander v.R. wrote in article <346bb64e...@192.168.100.1>...
>>I have a nice qoute for you w...i mean, david:
>>
>>"This is my view of the people who work at Microsoft: You have
>>a choice. You have to realize that what you're doing is bad for the
>>industry. If you're doing stuff that you don't even agree with and do
>>it for the money- we have a word for that: Whore." - Brian Hook
>
>This surprised me when I first saw it, but it's no big shock w/ Brian's
>background in academia. Many people in this industry aren't in it just to
>do good for the industry. Come on, it's the almighty buck that drives the
>industry. Maybe the question you should ask is if you were Billy G.,
>wouldn't you lie, cheat, twist arms to be on top?
Not everybody thinks that the "Almighty Buck" is the almighty goal in
life.
Sander v.R.
On 21 Nov 1997 03:25:45 GMT, David Springer <spri...@matrix.eden.com>
wrote:
>Paul Miller <st...@fxtech.com> wrote:
>> Russ Williams wrote:
>
>> > Oh no! Only 90% of the whole computer market!
>
>> It's been said before and I'll say it again. Why fight to have 1% of a
>> huge market full of crappy games which you are trying to compete with
>> when you can have almost 100% of other markets where games do not exist
>> and are in demand?
>
>Development costs ammortized over unit sales...
>You'd have to work through the numbers to see if it was practical.
indeed.
>I used that same approach with Igames but I went to the ignored market
>of games for middle aged people. I have no idea of the demographics
>for Linux users. However, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to
>figure out there's a zillion middle aged people with a Win95 personal
>computer at home just now discovering the internet. So I made games that
>appeal to them... worked out great. :-)
>
>> > Ooh. Linux. BIG market share there. Lot's of 'Joe Public's buying games...
>
>> You'd be surprised.
>
>Quite possibly. Still, I liked the old fogey gambit better. No doubt
>that market's huge. They're also older adults, bored housewives with
>kids moved out or in school ie; people with some time and money vs.
>my perception of most Linux users being starving college students.
Well, linux is a pretty respected OS in the business world.
It does wonders as a server...if you've got the time to learn to work
with it...
And it's stability is incredible.
A lot of hospitals use linux instead of dos, windows or any other
system because Linux is just so damn stable, you have to really do
something wrong to let linux crash.
And in places like hospitals you don't want that to happen.
Technically it has no equal OS....it's just that it just is not user
friendly....
But Linos, the one who started the linux project, seems to want to
change this...so who knows?
as for linux as a gameing platform, as long as it's not user friendly
i don't think it will be a really good gameing platform....
it may be worth it to port your games to linux, but that's it.
But once they've made it more user friendly....pffhew....well,
i'd be the first to create games for linux...
Sander v.R.
On 20 Nov 1997 08:33:53 GMT, gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron
(Glenn Corpes) wrote:
>foremaila...@my.signature (Sander v.R.) wrote:
>
>[loads of bollocks from the latest 'micro$oft sux' merchant snipped]
>> Don't you get it!?
>> This is not about winning! !
>> This is about what's best for the industry and the end-users!
>> Which is usually the opposite of what ms does!!!
>> They only do what's best for them and their bank-accounts!!!
>> Do you really think that they earn these billions of dollars just
>> because they make 'good quality products'????
>> Are you really THAT naive????
>> Bill gates isn't the richest man in the world for being a great guy!!
>> You don't get that rich by being 'nice' and 'friendly'!!
>> Idiot.
>>
>> > PS: Direct3D is trying to borrow from _proprietatry_ apis like GLID
>> E, not
>> >OpenGL.
>>
>> heh...borrowing...that's a novelty...
>>
>> And where do you think Glide got it from??
>
>They got it from wanting an API to draw triangles, how the fuck are you
>supposed to draw triangles in an efficient way and not look like GL?, it
>seems that I have been ripping off GL's syntax for about eight years, as
>have most 3D programmers...
tsk tsk....copying from opengl,eh? ;-) (yeah, i'm kidding)
still, nobody can claim that ms has 'developed' these things, can
they...
I really think that MS is doing a bad job copying...
Sander v.R.
On 20 Nov 1997 10:51:44 GMT, <xy...@plugh.com> (Daniel Phillips)
wrote:
>gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron says...
>>foremaila...@my.signature (Sander v.R.) wrote:
>>
>>>>The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
>>>>years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
>>>>market?
>>>
>>>Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
>>>quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
>
>If only it were true - that Microsoft hasn't got a chance, that is.
>Sadly, I'm afraid they've got a considerably more than a chance, if things
>continue as they are. Microsoft has every intention of dominating the
>"content" side of the games industry now that it has taken control of
>the platform side.
Looking at all the games MS has made so far, i'm not nervous...yet...
But since they've got an almost unlimited supply of money i guess they
could buy almost anyone to make their games....
Let's hope that doesn't happen....
>>>How many good 3d games use d3d?
>>
>>Almost all future ones except those based on the Quake engine and I
>>wouldn't be surprised if they don't too, eventually.
>
>Have you got a crystal ball? Seems to me that the drop-dead beauty of
>Quake 2 practically garauntees there's a major flock of OpenGL games
>on the way. Remember the Doom phenomenon? Bullfrog was about the only
>company that *didn't* make a doom clone. My crystal ball says it's
>going to happen again with OpenGL.
I certainly hope so...
At least *some* markets should be spared from the tirany of MS....
Sander v.R.
On Fri, 21 Nov 1997 22:06:55 -0600, Paul Miller <st...@fxtech.com>
wrote:
>Matt Craighead wrote:
>
>> I got fed up with him soon afterwards... he started to refuse to answer
>> my questions, probably because he didn't have any good answers.
>
>That's the problem with Linux - many users expect EVERYTHING to be free
>with source-code, and they'll insult you if you even mention that you
>expect to get some money out of a program.
well, i'd replace that 'many' with 'some'.
Most linux users realize that if they want linux to become a more
succesfull operating system that they have to attract companies to
create commercial software to run under the linux system..
Sander v.R.
On 21 Nov 1997 04:20:41 GMT, David Springer <spri...@matrix.eden.com>
wrote:
>Paul Miller <st...@fxtech.com> wrote:
>> Roger Christie wrote:
>
>> > > Yeah, a REALLY tough choice. NOT.
>
>> > Sure are a lot of folks supporting Glide though David.
>> > How inconvenient for your thesis.
>> > And unlike d3d, those games tend to be extremely good.
>> > See Longbow 2 for reference.
>
>> Yeah and how about Tomb Raider? That game ROCKED. I have yet to see a
>> REALLY GOOD game out there written with D3D. With all this pervasive
>> driver support, you'd think SOMEONE would have made a decent game by
>> now? On the other hand, Tomb Raider, Quake, and Hexen II were great
>> games, and a bunch of the up-coming Quake-engine games look pretty good
>> too. I haven't seen people raving about "Monster Truck Madness" or
>> "Fury" or other D3D games lately.
>
>> I wonder how many games David plays to make him such an expert on what a
>> good game entails?
>
>A great game is evidenced by how many people are willing to buy it.
>That's it. Bottom line.
true.
>D3D/Glide/OpenGL have nothing at all to do with the quality of a
>game although it may have something to do with how many people
>have hardware ready to play it.
I disagree: it does effect quality, it just doesn't define the
quality.
>Some games that sell really really well <gasp> don't even need
>a 3D accelerator.
>Now, if the thought of that makes your little
>woody wilt, you better not check the game sales stats for 1997 or
>you might see Barbie Fashion Designer in number 9 right behind
...unbelievable...
>Quake at number 8.
8?
>Or Microsoft Flight Simulator leading both
>of them.
Which goes beyond me...
And no, not because it's from MS, i just think it's the most boreing
'game' there is...
>Ok, reality check is over. You can get back to pulling your puds
>with one hand and pulling the trigger in Quake with the other. :-)
Ah...i feel better already ;-D
Sander v.R.
>Daniel Phillips wrote in message <652qkd$4p9$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>>ru...@algorithm.demon.co.uk says...
>>>
>>>So? This is about games programming. The games playing customers
>>>generally do not run Linux.
>>
>>"Generally?"
>
>Joe Public doesn't run Linux. Unix clones are *too technical*. Hell, most
>people think Windows is too difficult to use.
Yeah, well..if they can't work with windows they're not likely to play
games anyhow.
>>Aren't some folks playing Quake on Linux?
>
>Yes. Does that mean that Linux is a viable platform? Or that id doesn't
>care about making a profit on LinuxQuake?
both i guess.
>>Last night I played Warcraft on a Mac. Not my machine - what you'd call
>>a "naive user" - a musician. Cross-platform is the Next Big Thing for
>>games.
>
>Yup. Portability is cool. It doesn't need Java or OpenGL, though, just some
>thought with the design to hide platform-specific code.
Yeah, but why do it the hard way? It doesn't mean you CAN use them?
Do you have something against Java and/or OpenGL?
>>I know it's been a deliberate policy at EA for years (maybe not in the
>>Bullfrog division though!).
>
>I *like* the idea of portable games. You have to admit, though, that it
>makes more sense to support the big-money markets as a priority, then
>port if your code is portable enough...
I'd do that.
>After all, who wouldn't want to see their 3d game running on a high-end
>SGI - that alone is enough of a reason to do an OpenGL port -
>but it doesn't make sense to develop on an Onyx and then try to port to PC.
Did anyone say that??
I didn't think so.
Sander v.R.
On 20 Nov 1997 00:26:41 GMT, David Springer <spri...@matrix.eden.com>
wrote:
>Sander v.R. <foremaila...@my.signature> wrote:
>> >The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
>> >years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
>> >market?
>
>> Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
>> quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
>> How many good 3d games use d3d?
>
>Lots of them. Have a look around at your local software superstore and
>read the requirements fine print on the game boxes.
Lot's of them? name one GOOD game!
Sander v.R.
On Fri, 21 Nov 1997 05:10:21 GMT, burnnn*@*hotmail.com (Burnnn) wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Nov 1997 23:02:00 GMT, foremaila...@my.signature
>(Sander v.R.) wrote:
>
>>>The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
>>>years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
>>>market?
>>
>>Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
>>quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
>>How many good 3d games use d3d?
>
>
>Of the top of my head :
>
>Forsaken
>G-Police
>Jedi Knight
that's one...
it uses d3d??? hmm....supriseing....
>Interstate 76
suposed to be a good game, but not my type of game...
so, two.
>Mechwarrior 2
same here, three
>Moto Racer
>Nuclear Strike
>Shadows of the Empire
>Terracide
>Tomb Raider 2
that's four...
(well...altough tomb raider itself was pretty innovative game concept,
the technology they used wasn't....the same could be said about 2,
i guess)
The most dominating games (ie the most popular)
are the ones without d3d (with the exception of Jedi Knight)
Coincidance?
Now, shall we make a list of all the good non-d3d games???
Quake
Quake II
Prey
Unreal
Daikatana
Sin
Privateer II
Wing commander IV & V & VI
Red alert (just kidding! still a good game tough ;-D)
Duke nukem 3d
Duke nukem Forever
Blade
Blade runner
The dark project
Hexen II
etc. etc. etc.
And there are lots more which i just don't remember right now.
>Care for more clueless?
clueless? look who's talking..
Hehehe, two film titles in one sentence ;-D
>Go read a game mag or something.
I always do
go...@berkelium.com.xyzzy
"sumatose" <suma...@usa.net> writes:
>> That's pure fanatism. You basicly think that every 3D Api in the
>> world has to 'copy' from OpenGL to do anything. You _are_ aware,
>> don't you, that OpenGL didn't invent 3D graphics and that they are
>> hundreds of 3D APIs out there?
Its no coincidence that the DirectPrimitive API is a virtual clone of
OpenGL's immediate mode commands. To suggest that Microsoft came up
with this paradigm on their own is pure fantasy.
>> That using using things like a function to draw an array of
>> triangles wasn't invented or is not exclusive to OpenGL ? (Not to
>> mention that it wasn't even in OpenGL 1.0). People should really
>> give up using these intelligence-insulting arguments to push _any_
>> API. If OpenGL is just a 'function syntax', then it really isn't
>> much. You sound soooo scared.
I never said SGI invented 3D graphics. You are putting words in my mouth.
See also: David Springer's rants on "straw man".
>> PS : Direct3D is trying to borrow from _proprietatry_ apis like
>> GLIDE, not OpenGL.
Where do you think Glide got it from? Much of Glide was copied from
OpenGL. One of the authors admitted as much. :-)
Sander v.R.
On 22 Nov 1997 11:58:41 GMT, gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron
(Glenn Corpes) wrote:
>crai...@citilink.com (Matt Craighead) wrote:
>
>> David Springer wrote:
>> > If I were Bill Gates I'd be living on my own island being swarmed ov
>> er
>> > by native island girls and I'd keep a hookah the size of a baseball
>> > bat constantly burning by my side. Why would Gates want to do anyth
>> ing
>> > sleazy ? He's the richest guy in the world FFS. He'll be on top
>> > for as long as he lives no matter what he does from here.
>>
>> Isn't the Sultan of Brunei richer? Or someone like that...
>>
>> --
>> Matt Craighead
>> Utumno developer: http://www.citilink.com/~craighea/utumno/
>>
>
>Bill Gates overtook him a month or two ago but I think he dropped back
>into second in the recent stock market crash.
ahh....poor bill ;-)
he must really feel miserable....
Paul Speed
go...@berkelium.com.xyzzy wrote:
: "sumatose" <suma...@usa.net> writes:
Besides which, none of that is really the point anyway.
The point is that people always say "Wow, look how fast D3D is
moving, it must really be on the go!" when, in fact, the reason it is
moving so fast is to make up for deficiencies that the programmers were
complaining about.
Now, whether or not OpenGL made this more of a priority, or
whether this momentum will still continue in the future are left up to
further speculation. (Which we never seem to have too little of here)
It is interesting that the line between an API "on the go" and
one that's unstable or a "moving target" has proven to be market presence.
Oh, well,
-Paul
sumatose
go...@berkelium.com.xyzzy wrote:
>
> "sumatose" <suma...@usa.net> writes:
>
> >> That's pure fanatism. You basicly think that every 3D Api in the
> >> world has to 'copy' from OpenGL to do anything. You _are_ aware,
> >> don't you, that OpenGL didn't invent 3D graphics and that they are
> >> hundreds of 3D APIs out there?
>
> Its no coincidence that the DirectPrimitive API is a virtual clone of
> OpenGL's immediate mode commands. To suggest that Microsoft came up
> with this paradigm on their own is pure fantasy.
They have nothing in common semanticly. MS didn't invent anything, but a
function to draw an array of triangles is definitly not an invention of
OpenGL (not to mention that they only came with OpenGL 1.1 ). ;-)
In fact, I remember mentionning in a thread last january that people
shouldn't refer to DrawPrimitive as OpenGL-like, because it would make
its sound too good! 8-)
Minh Truong
Sander v.R. wrote in article <346bb360...@192.168.100.1>...
>On Sun, 16 Nov 1997 17:23:08 -0500, "sumatose" <suma...@usa.net>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>go...@berkelium.com.xyzzy wrote in message ...
>>>We have covered this already. The fact is, D3D's "improvement" came
>>>from copying the OpenGL syntax. Sure, the more D3D copies from
>>>OpenGL, the better it gets. There is no innovation here, and D3D will
>>>not surpass OpenGL by copying from it.
>>
>>That's pure fanatism.
>
>yeah, right...and your remarks AREN'T????
>is there one thing about ms that ISN'T fanatic???
>fanatic lie-ers, fanatic decievers, fanatic manipulators, fanatic
>thieves, fanatic etc. etc. etc. etc.
Of course yours is very insightful.
[rest of diatribe snipped]
Minh Truong
David Springer
Sander v.R. <foremaila...@my.signature> wrote:
> Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
> quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
Quality more important that quantity ? Piffle. One word: Myst
Timing is more important than quality. Hitting the transition to
a critical new technology and marketing is more important than
quality. Hell, the picture on the front of the box is more important
than quality. A "Designed for Windows 95" logo ON the box is more
important than what is IN the box.
David Springer
--
*************** IGAMES INTERNET GAME LOBBY ****************
* *
* NOW SUPPORTING MICROSOFT DirectPlay 3 LOBBY STANDARD ! *
* *
* A real-time game lobby for the internet with many *
* exciting games and thousands of players. Game *
* developers, players, and ISP's can try it out at: *
* *
****************** http://www.igames.com ******************
Paul Speed
David Springer (spri...@matrix.eden.com) wrote:
: Sander v.R. <foremaila...@my.signature> wrote:
: > Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
: > quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
: Quality more important that quantity ? Piffle. One word: Myst
: Timing is more important than quality. Hitting the transition to
: a critical new technology and marketing is more important than
: quality. Hell, the picture on the front of the box is more important
: than quality. A "Designed for Windows 95" logo ON the box is more
: important than what is IN the box.
Windows 95 supporter or not, that sticker has always bugged me.
"Designed for Windows 95" on a game sounds like a bunch of guys sitting
around writing a game around a scroll bar. "Implemented for Windows 95"
makes more sense, but has less marketing impact.
In some programs it is necessary to consider OS during the design,
but I would certainly hope that it isn't the central thought when
conceiving and designing a game.
But about the picture on the box, that's dead on. I catch myself
with this one all of the time, judging a game by its box art. I'm also
awe-struck when I actually see a game box without a single screen shot or
graphic. What publisher thought that was a good idea? :) I usually
figure the game must really suck if they thought they would sell more if
they didn't include a screen shot, even a bad one.
Later,
-Paul
: David Springer
Daniel Phillips
truo...@email.uc.edu says...
I guess that depends on what your values are. From my own point of view,
there are more important things than $40 billion. For example, would you
rather have $40 billion and brain cancer, or have $40 thousand and be
healthy? Similarly, there are other relevant consideration, some of them
a bit more subtle. If I were Billy G, I'd know when to quit being an
asshole.
--
Daniel Phillips
phillips at dowco.com
David Springer
Michael John Pohoreski <mpoh...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> "Chris Lomont" <clo...@omni.cc.purdue.edu> writes:
> >Perhaps he realizes D3D has evolved very rapidly from 'sucks' to much,
> >much better than it started, and with several new releases slated, it
> >might surpass OpenGL 1.1 in many aspects, since OpenGL hasn't changed
> >very much at all for several years. Since D3D can change rapidly to
> >meet market demands, while OpenGL is controlled by the ARB and is thus
> >slow to evolve, perhaps soon D3D will be the platform of choice for
> >all?
> Now which API do I want to use (for game development):
> - one that has a bad design thus requiring hacks to fix it every year, or
> - one that doesn't need continually updating (a testimony to its good design)
> Tough choice.
> Thank god we _all_ have a _choice_, since I'll be using the
> better designed one (even if it isnt the most popular.)
In fact if you want to ship an accelerated game OpenGL isn't among
your choices unless you cough up $250K to license the Quake engine
then you get to use the OpenGL functions that Carmack talked 3dfx
into supporting...
In fact your choices are exactly two: Glide or D3D.
With the former you get support on exactly one chipset, Voodoo (two
if you count its poor cousin Voodoo Rush). If you use Direct3D you
get support on virtually every chipset with a remotely valid claim
to 3D acceleration including the Voodoo.
Yeah, a REALLY tough choice. NOT.
David Springer
Daniel Phillips
vane...@blarg.net says...
>
>go...@berkelium.com.xyzzy wrote
>> We have covered this already. The fact is, D3D's "improvement" came
>> from copying the OpenGL syntax. Sure, the more D3D copies from
>> OpenGL, the better it gets.
>
>Yep, sure. Now they've caught up, and they can get on with innovations if
>that's Microsoft's cup of tea.
Caught up?? Oh - I see, you're posting from Seattle. Actually an M$
employee, or just a paid Usenet spammer? D3D will never lose the
pockmarks left over from it's terminal case of acne as a juvenile API.
Know what I mean? And the concensus still seems to be that D3D still
sucks, just not as bad as it used to. You're out in left field.
[...]
>Microsoft has tremendous advantages for driving innovations. It remains
>to be seen whether they'll make judicious use of those advantages or not.
We already know the answer to that one. Microsoft will continue to use
its advantages to try to cram proprietary APIs down our throats with the
sole purpose of helping themselves maintain their monopolies and expand
them into other areas. I suppose you could call that "judicious", if
you're holding Microsoft stock. ;-)
>However, the recent track record of the D3D group is that they fix what's
>broken. Shooting the software-centric London team helped a great deal.
Oh, I can see that. Maybe shooting some of their critics would help as
well.
Daniel Phillips
spri...@matrix.eden.com says...
>
>Why would Gates want to do anything sleazy ? He's the richest guy in the
>world FFS.
>David Springer
At one time, Adolf Hitler was the most powerful man in the world. Why
would he want to do anything sleazy? Oops! I guess I lose this debate!
;-)
--
Glenn Corpes
foremaila...@my.signature (Sander v.R.) wrote:
> >The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
> >years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
> >market?
>
> Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
> quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
> How many good 3d games use d3d?
Almost all future ones except those based on the Quake engine and I
wouldn't be surprised if they don't too, eventually.
-=< gco...@ea.com, Project Leader Bullfrog >=-
Glenn Corpes
foremaila...@my.signature (Sander v.R.) wrote:
[loads of bollocks from the latest 'micro$oft sux' merchant snipped]
> Don't you get it!?
> This is not about winning! !
> This is about what's best for the industry and the end-users!
> Which is usually the opposite of what ms does!!!
> They only do what's best for them and their bank-accounts!!!
> Do you really think that they earn these billions of dollars just
> because they make 'good quality products'????
> Are you really THAT naive????
> Bill gates isn't the richest man in the world for being a great guy!!
> You don't get that rich by being 'nice' and 'friendly'!!
> Idiot.
>
> > PS: Direct3D is trying to borrow from _proprietatry_ apis like GLID
> E, not
> >OpenGL.
>
> heh...borrowing...that's a novelty...
>
> And where do you think Glide got it from??
They got it from wanting an API to draw triangles, how the fuck are you
supposed to draw triangles in an efficient way and not look like GL?, it
seems that I have been ripping off GL's syntax for about eight years, as
have most 3D programmers...
-=< gco...@ea.com, Project Leader Bullfrog >=-
David Springer
Sander v.R. <foremaila...@my.signature> wrote:
> >The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
> >years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
> >market?
> Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
> quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
> How many good 3d games use d3d?
Lots of them. Have a look around at your local software superstore and
read the requirements fine print on the game boxes.
David Springer
Daniel Phillips
gle...@cix.co.uk.notthisbityoumoron says...
>foremaila...@my.signature (Sander v.R.) wrote:
>
>>>The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
>>>years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
>>>market?
>>
>>Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
>>quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
If only it were true - that Microsoft hasn't got a chance, that is.
Sadly, I'm afraid they've got a considerably more than a chance, if things
continue as they are. Microsoft has every intention of dominating the
"content" side of the games industry now that it has taken control of
the platform side.
>>How many good 3d games use d3d?
>
>Almost all future ones except those based on the Quake engine and I
>wouldn't be surprised if they don't too, eventually.
Have you got a crystal ball? Seems to me that the drop-dead beauty of
Quake 2 practically garauntees there's a major flock of OpenGL games
on the way. Remember the Doom phenomenon? Bullfrog was about the only
company that *didn't* make a doom clone. My crystal ball says it's
going to happen again with OpenGL.
--
Oren Laskin
> With the former you get support on exactly one chipset, Voodoo (two
> if you count its poor cousin Voodoo Rush). If you use Direct3D you
> get support on virtually every chipset with a remotely valid claim
> to 3D acceleration including the Voodoo.
>
> Yeah, a REALLY tough choice. NOT.
And you're completely limited to the Windows 95/NT OS... It's not a tough
choice for me, OpenGL has far better use for me in its portability.
Who wants to rewrite code to support D3D?
It's becuase Id chose OpenGL that there is now GlQuake and Quake2Test for
Linux and can be moved to other OS's as well as they appear. Will D3D
exist on the BeOS? No... Rhapsody... no. But fairly likely there will be
implementations of OpenGL.
Oren Laskin
las...@andrew.cmu.edu
Russ Williams
Oren Laskin wrote in message ...
[D3d vs Glide...]
>> Yeah, a REALLY tough choice. NOT.
>
>And you're completely limited to the Windows 95/NT OS...
Oh no! Only 90% of the whole computer market!
>It's not a tough choice for me, OpenGL has far better use for me in its
>portability. Who wants to rewrite code to support D3D?
>It's becuase Id chose OpenGL that there is now GlQuake and
>Quake2Test for Linux and can be moved to other OS's as well as they
>appear.
Ooh. Linux. BIG market share there. Lot's of 'Joe Public's buying games...
>Will D3D exist on the BeOS? No... Rhapsody... no. But fairly likely
>there will be implementations of OpenGL.
Implicit assumptions:
i) BeOS / Rhapsody / Linux will some day take a noticable market share.
ii) They will support hardware acceleration of 3d
iii) The rest of the code is 100% portable
iv) Portability is more important than performance
I'll let the list speak for itself...
---
Russ
Roger Christie
David Springer wrote:
>
> Sander v.R. <foremaila...@my.signature> wrote:
> > >The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
> > >years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
> > >market?
>
> > Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
> > quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
>
> read the requirements fine print on the game boxes.
>
> David Springer
> --
How much does BG pay you to be his shill David?
I noticed that you adroitly avoided his question btw.
To paraphrase:
Why, after five revisions, does d3d /still/ suck dogwater?
I have yet to see a single game that uses the 3dfx on my system
that is even /remotely/ impressive. It doesn't matter how many
repellent pieces of crap there are on the market, the question
still remains, where are the /good/ ones?
Roger Christie
Russ Williams wrote:
>
> Oren Laskin wrote in message ...
> >> [D3d vs Glide...]
> >> Oh no! Only 90% of the whole computer market!
>
> And effectively useless on >99%...
>
> >> Ooh. Linux. BIG market share there. Lot's of 'Joe Public's buying
> games...
> >The OS is free, the application developers can choose if they wish to sell
> >their software. If this is your argument, it's pathetic.
>
> OK. Go into your local Electronics Boutique and ask how many people
> there have heard of Linux. No-one uses it.
>
This is just plain stupid. And two can play.
Go into your local bookstore and see how many books there are on Linux.
Try CompuPro. See how many CDs there are.
FYI, estimates for the number of linux users range as high as
10 million at this point.
Its important enough for Bay to support it with our remote access
products.
Paul Miller
Russ Williams wrote:
> Oh no! Only 90% of the whole computer market!
It's been said before and I'll say it again. Why fight to have 1% of a
huge market full of crappy games which you are trying to compete with
when you can have almost 100% of other markets where games do not exist
and are in demand?
> Ooh. Linux. BIG market share there. Lot's of 'Joe Public's buying games...
You'd be surprised.
> i) BeOS / Rhapsody / Linux will some day take a noticable market share.
Linux is already getting a noticeable market share. Where have you been?
> ii) They will support hardware acceleration of 3d
Linux already does at least.
> iii) The rest of the code is 100% portable
Not too hard when not using MS proprietary APIs. 99% of the code in the
game I am working on is portable.
> iv) Portability is more important than performance
Where did you get this idea? Used "C" lately?
> I'll let the list speak for itself...
Sorry, but it doesn't say much.
--
Paul Miller | st...@fxtech.com
Paul Miller
Roger Christie wrote:
> > Yeah, a REALLY tough choice. NOT.
> Sure are a lot of folks supporting Glide though David.
> How inconvenient for your thesis.
> And unlike d3d, those games tend to be extremely good.
> See Longbow 2 for reference.
Yeah and how about Tomb Raider? That game ROCKED. I have yet to see a
REALLY GOOD game out there written with D3D. With all this pervasive
driver support, you'd think SOMEONE would have made a decent game by
now? On the other hand, Tomb Raider, Quake, and Hexen II were great
games, and a bunch of the up-coming Quake-engine games look pretty good
too. I haven't seen people raving about "Monster Truck Madness" or
"Fury" or other D3D games lately.
I wonder how many games David plays to make him such an expert on what a
good game entails?
--
Paul Miller | st...@fxtech.com
Michael John Pohoreski
"Chris Lomont" <clo...@omni.cc.purdue.edu> writes:
>Perhaps he realizes D3D has evolved very rapidly from 'sucks' to much,
>much better than it started, and with several new releases slated, it
>might surpass OpenGL 1.1 in many aspects, since OpenGL hasn't changed
>very much at all for several years. Since D3D can change rapidly to
>meet market demands, while OpenGL is controlled by the ARB and is thus
>slow to evolve, perhaps soon D3D will be the platform of choice for
>all?
Now which API do I want to use (for game development):
- one that has a bad design thus requiring hacks to fix it every year, or
- one that doesn't need continually updating (a testimony to its good design)
Tough choice.
Thank god we _all_ have a _choice_, since I'll be using the
better designed one (even if it isnt the most popular.)
--
--
"Life's not too short, you've been dead for too long!"
-- Anonymous
David Springer
Minh Truong <truo...@email.uc.edu> wrote:
> Sander v.R. wrote in article <346bb64e...@192.168.100.1>...
> >I have a nice qoute for you w...i mean, david:
> >
> >"This is my view of the people who work at Microsoft: You have
> >a choice. You have to realize that what you're doing is bad for the
> >industry. If you're doing stuff that you don't even agree with and do
> >it for the money- we have a word for that: Whore." - Brian Hook
Microsoft has done more to make "Personal Computer" a household word than
any single company other than *maybe* Intel, IBM, or Apple. They supply
impossibly inexpensive software to so many millions of people around
the world it boggles the mind. If that's "bad" for the industry then
there's no such thing as "good".
You might ask Hook if he gets paid to work on a game that is the most
bloody, violent concoction to earn the moniker "entertainment" since
"Friday the 13th". I'd call that person a scum sucking bottom feeder
before I applied the term to anyone else. Capitalizing on visions
of violence, death, and destruction peddled to children. Yeah, that's
a great definition of world class citizen all right. Do you worship
Charles Manson too or was he before your time ?
> This surprised me when I first saw it, but it's no big shock w/ Brian's
> background in academia. Many people in this industry aren't in it just to
WTF are you smoking ? I want some. Hook has no acedemic background
whatsoever. No degree. I don't think he even took a single college
class. You should research your idols a bit more before idolizing
them in public.
> do good for the industry. Come on, it's the almighty buck that drives the
> industry. Maybe the question you should ask is if you were Billy G.,
> wouldn't you lie, cheat, twist arms to be on top?
If I were Bill Gates I'd be living on my own island being swarmed over
by native island girls and I'd keep a hookah the size of a baseball
bat constantly burning by my side. Why would Gates want to do anything
sleazy ? He's the richest guy in the world FFS. He'll be on top
for as long as he lives no matter what he does from here.
David Springer
Matt Craighead
David Springer wrote:
> If I were Bill Gates I'd be living on my own island being swarmed over
> by native island girls and I'd keep a hookah the size of a baseball
> bat constantly burning by my side. Why would Gates want to do anything
> sleazy ? He's the richest guy in the world FFS. He'll be on top
> for as long as he lives no matter what he does from here.
Isn't the Sultan of Brunei richer? Or someone like that...
Brandon Van Every
go...@berkelium.com.xyzzy wrote in article
<wkiuttp...@berkelium.com.xyzzy>...
> "Chris Lomont" <clo...@omni.cc.purdue.edu> writes:
>
> >> Perhaps he realizes D3D has evolved very rapidly from 'sucks' to
much,
> >> much better than it started, and with several new releases slated, it
> >> might surpass OpenGL 1.1 in many aspects, since OpenGL hasn't changed
> >> very much at all for several years.
>
> from copying the OpenGL syntax. Sure, the more D3D copies from
> OpenGL, the better it gets.
Yep, sure. Now they've caught up, and they can get on with innovations if
that's Microsoft's cup of tea. We'll see. I'm at least happy with what
I'm hearing from their development group as of late.
> We don't have DX6 yet, but OpenGL 1.2 is also in the works,
OpenGL 1.2 is uninteresting.
> >> Since D3D can change rapidly to meet market demands, while OpenGL
> >> is controlled by the ARB and is thus slow to evolve, perhaps soon
> >> D3D will be the platform of choice for all?
A while ago I said that the next "front" of the OpenGL vs. Direct3D wars
would be in modelling/animation software. Today, I note that Ray Dream
Studio, Caligari TrueSpace, and 3D Studio Maxx R2 are all shipping with D3D
support. You can bet that SoftImage will not be far behind as it's owned
by Microsoft.
>Your premise is incorrect. OpenGL may be extended by any vendor at
>any time. For example, the new version of GLQuake uses the new
>multitexture extension, written by SGI and implemented by 3DFx in
>their beta ICD.
An extension that's only good on a few cards belies the utility of a
standard API.
Also, most OpenGL development is geared towards Viewperf and GLPerf, and
these benchmarks do not contain any forwards-looking features.
Ziff-Davis's new ZDBOp "3D Winmark" is a step in the right direction in
that it tests features not yet fully implemented by industry.
Unfortunately, Ziff-Davis is mainly interested in consumer products,
Microsoft has decidedly won that mindshare battle with D3D, and so ZDBOp
won't be driving OpenGL development. OpenGL needs a comparable
benchmarking mechanism to force innovations.
Microsoft has tremendous advantages for driving innovations. It remains to
be seen whether they'll make judicious use of those advantages or not.
However, the recent track record of the D3D group is that they fix what's
broken. Shooting the software-centric London team helped a great deal.
Cheers,
--
Brandon J. Van Every <vane...@blarg.net> DEC Commodity Graphics
<http://www.blarg.net/~vanevery> NT Intel Alpha OpenGL D3D
Come to Seattle Vtalk, to discuss all aspects of online virtual worlds!
Bi-weekly meetings, <http://www.emeraldnet.net/~tobler/VTALK/Vtalk.htm>
Chris Lomont
Daniel Phillips wrote in message <6514o0$t86$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>>>How many good 3d games use d3d?
>>
>>Almost all future ones except those based on the Quake engine and I
>>wouldn't be surprised if they don't too, eventually.
>
>Have you got a crystal ball? Seems to me that the drop-dead beauty
of
>Quake 2 practically garauntees there's a major flock of OpenGL games
>on the way. Remember the Doom phenomenon? Bullfrog was about the
only
>company that *didn't* make a doom clone. My crystal ball says it's
>going to happen again with OpenGL.
Ever stop to think the beauty is not because of openGL, but good
programming? And the fact that the D3D wrapper shows D3D can do as
well? Or that the hardware gives the nice textures etc? The fact of
the matter is that many developers are learning, using, and shipping
D3D titles, so unless OpenGL gets a big lead (unlikely at this point)
in technology/usability/features then most development houses will
want to leverage programmers knowledge of D3D and reuse D3D code. I
agree OpenGL is nicer to program, especially for a high end card with
hardware everything, but the consumer battle is going towards D3D,
especially since many, many tool vendors are adding D3D support, and
driver support for a total OpenGL driver (not the limited Quake subset
for a few cards) is very rare on consumer cards.
Chris Lomont
Chris Lomont
Daniel Phillips wrote in message <650fpr$2t1$4...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>
>I guess that depends on what your values are. From my own point of
view,
>there are more important things than $40 billion. For example, would
you
>rather have $40 billion and brain cancer, or have $40 thousand and be
>healthy? Similarly, there are other relevant consideration, some of
them
>a bit more subtle. If I were Billy G, I'd know when to quit being an
>asshole.
I doubt it. You aren't Billy G and still don't know when to quit being
an &^*^*^*
Just couldn't resist...
Chris Lomont
Chris Lomont
Michael John Pohoreski wrote in message
<650a8g$9qr$1...@morgoth.sfu.ca>...
>"Chris Lomont" <clo...@omni.cc.purdue.edu> writes:
>
>>Perhaps he realizes D3D has evolved very rapidly from 'sucks' to
much,
>>much better than it started, and with several new releases slated,
it
>>might surpass OpenGL 1.1 in many aspects, since OpenGL hasn't
changed
>>very much at all for several years. Since D3D can change rapidly to
>>meet market demands, while OpenGL is controlled by the ARB and is
thus
>>slow to evolve, perhaps soon D3D will be the platform of choice for
>>all?
>Now which API do I want to use (for game development):
> - one that has a bad design thus requiring hacks to fix it every
year, or
> - one that doesn't need continually updating (a testimony to its
good design)
I agree OpenGL is nicer and easier to write for. This is changing
quickly, however. The question remains, however, do you actually want
to sell your game? Unless you have enough clout to get chip
manufacturers to do custom drivers for your game (only iD has been
able to do this), or stick to the quake subset, which changes from
release to release, you will be writing a game with no market. Have
fun....
>Tough choice.
Exactly.
>Thank god we _all_ have a _choice_, since I'll be using the
>better designed one (even if it isnt the most popular.)
And you'll have a nice game, but be unable to sell it. If you jumped
on the OpenGL bandwagon last year, and hoped to ship your OpenGL only
app this Christmas, you'd be screwed right now. But this has been
explained many times in this newsgroup already, so hopefully you're
aware of this.
Personally, I'd code the game as API neutral as possible (which can be
done with good design), and develop a D3D interface to test, and add a
GL one if the market changes. But to bet on a technology that has
failed this season is asking for trouble. Might as well make a
Talisman game and hope drivers are available......
Chris Lomont
Chris Lomont
Daniel Phillips wrote in message <650lkg$b7c$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>spri...@matrix.eden.com says...
>>
>>Why would Gates want to do anything sleazy ? He's the richest guy
in the
>>world FFS.
>
>>David Springer
>
>At one time, Adolf Hitler was the most powerful man in the world.
Why
>would he want to do anything sleazy? Oops! I guess I lose this
debate!
>;-)
Interesting how many times you tell this group you have killfile'd
Springer and then reply to his posts.....
Better get a better killfile, huh?
Chris Lomont
Daniel Phillips
ru...@algorithm.demon.co.uk says...
>
>So? This is about games programming. The games playing customers
>generally do not run Linux.
>---
>Russ
"Generally?" Aren't some folks playing Quake on Linux? Last night I
played Warcraft on a Mac. Not my machine - what you'd call a "naive
user" - a musician. Cross-platform is the Next Big Thing for games. I
know it's been a deliberate policy at EA for years (maybe not in the
Bullfrog division though!).
Russ Williams
Paul Miller wrote in message <3474D57C...@fxtech.com>...
>Russ Williams wrote:
>
>> Oh no! Only 90% of the whole computer market!
>
>It's been said before and I'll say it again. Why fight to have 1% of a
>huge market full of crappy games which you are trying to compete with
>when you can have almost 100% of other markets where games do not exist
>and are in demand?
Because you're overestimating demand, and 1% of the PC or PSX or
N64 or Saturn market is worth more than 100% of just about *any* other
market.
>> Ooh. Linux. BIG market share there. Lot's of 'Joe Public's buying
games...
>
>You'd be surprised.
Yeah, right. Linux is *not* a consumer OS.
>> i) BeOS / Rhapsody / Linux will some day take a noticable market share.
>
>Linux is already getting a noticeable market share. Where have you been?
Linux is only noticable because it's proponents are particularly vocal.
>> ii) They will support hardware acceleration of 3d
>
>Linux already does at least.
AIUI, that would be Glide only...
>> iii) The rest of the code is 100% portable
>
>Not too hard when not using MS proprietary APIs. 99% of the code in the
>game I am working on is portable.
Uh huh. Portable to what? No major market has practical OpenGL support.
The PC is almost there with the glQuake/alpha/beta drivers. Nice to see that
you want to support those 20 million PSX owners, though...
Maybe if you wrote modular code, you wouldn't be so hung up about needing
portable APIs.
>> iv) Portability is more important than performance
>
>Where did you get this idea? Used "C" lately?
Portability over performance was implied since OpenGL is next to useless
on most machines. The only fully compliant implementation I've seen on PC
(that works with glQuake) is MS' software driver (although I'm sure SGIs is
just as good). Real good performance.
I use C a lot. What's your point?
>> I'll let the list speak for itself...
>
>Sorry, but it doesn't say much.
OK, whatever...
---
Russ
Burnnn
On Sun, 16 Nov 1997 23:02:00 GMT, foremaila...@my.signature
(Sander v.R.) wrote:
>>The fact remains OpenGL was around years before D3D, but after a few
>>years after D3D's release, there are many more D3D games on the
>>market?
>
>Yeah but in the games industry quality is actually more important than
>quantity, so microsoft hasn't got a chance ;-)
>How many good 3d games use d3d?
Of the top of my head :
Forsaken
G-Police
Jedi Knight
Interstate 76
Mechwarrior 2
Moto Racer
Nuclear Strike
Shadows of the Empire
Terracide
Tomb Raider 2
Care for more clueless? Go read a game mag or something.
----------
Burnnn
Michael John Pohoreski
<xy...@plugh.com> (Daniel Phillips) writes:
> Cross-platform is the Next Big Thing for games. I
> know it's been a deliberate policy at EA for years (maybe not in the
> Bullfrog division though!).
Allmost all games coming through EA available on PC-CD are
available on PSX and Sega (well at least for 'EA Canada' developers)
Cross-platform is allready here. Its called the "'quick' PC-Console port."
Russ Williams
Daniel Phillips wrote in message <6533pd$el0$2...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>ru...@algorithm.demon.co.uk says...
>>
>>Daniel Phillips wrote in message <652qkd$4p9$1...@usenet.kornet.nm.kr>...
>>>
>>>Last night I played Warcraft on a Mac. Not my machine - what you'd call
>>>games.
>>
>>Yup. Portability is cool. It doesn't need Java or OpenGL, though, just
some
>>thought with the design to hide platform-specific code.
>
>For a 3D game, what portability options have you got besides
>OpenGL? I mean, other than writing your own 3D api c/w hardware
>support for each platform?
Actually, that's your *only* option. OpenGL isn't available on PSX/Saturn
(even the SGI-based N64 doesn't use it). It's not as difficult as it seems,
since (after a little setup) all 3d APIs basically exist as a way to draw
polygons... Porting from one hardware interface to another is fairly
easy.
>For communications, what portability options have you got besides Java?
>Darn few, and certainly nothing that compares with the ease of use.
>Pardon me for looking down the road a few months here - I know Java's
>got various teething problems today, but they're being worked on by
>hoards of development teams as we speak. Is anything else even on the
>drawing board?
From what I've heard, Java's wonderful comm portability is just a standard
{Berkeley | Windows} sockets interface. If that's wrong, then feel free to
correct me, but if it's true, then Java's comms are no easier and no more
portable than C...
---
Russ
Vic
Matt Craighead wrote:
> I have had to deal with some people who use Linux exclusively and
> actually insult me when I report a bug in a Windows version of a cross-
> platform game... (this was in multiplayer, so it was in real-time)
<snip>
> Oh, and it wasn't that he had a slow computer. He just hated all
> graphics.
OK. So you talked to a moron. That doesn't make all Linux users morons.
Linux rox. Microsloth sux. :)
--
--> http://www.cam.org/~tudor <--
Matt Craighead
(Daniel Phillips) wrote:
> "Windows" sockets? Used by the Java runtime libraries for Windows, of
> course, but a Java API? I don't think that would meet the goal of
> platform independence.
A lot of Winsock is just a simple port of standard BSD sockets. I don't
know about Mac, but that definitely means you should have little trouble
porting between Windows and Unix.