Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

OpenGL or Direct3D

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Brian Fleming

unread,
Jan 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/18/98
to

If I wanted to play around with 3D graphics, like writing a cute demo or a
simulation of a solar system or something, which graphics library would I be
better off learning, OpenGL, or Direct3D?

I was considering Direct3D for WIN95 because there are a lot of relatively
inexpensive video cards that have Direct3D hardware acceleration, and I've
seen them in action; They're lightning. The OpenGL support for Windows
SEEMS (I don't know) a little skimpy. Since I'm looking toward a career in
computer science, I perfer to learn stuff that may serve me in the future.


Any advice or information about this is immensely appreciated, as always.

- brian
--University of Illinois at Chicago

Chris Marriott

unread,
Jan 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/19/98
to

In article <69udc6$28l4$1...@piglet.cc.uic.edu>, Brian Fleming
<bfle...@eecs.uic.edu> writes

>If I wanted to play around with 3D graphics, like writing a cute demo or a
>simulation of a solar system or something, which graphics library would I be
>better off learning, OpenGL, or Direct3D?

I'd recommend OpenGL. It's an industry "open standard", and a knowledge
of it will be of benefit generally rather than just for Microsoft
platforms. Of course, *any* knowledge you gain in the graphics world is
pretty generally applicable - graphics algorithms are "universal" in
their application.

Chris

----------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Marriott, Microsoft Certified Solution Developer.
SkyMap Software, U.K. e-mail: ch...@skymap.com
Visit our web site at http://www.skymap.com

Dirk Djuga

unread,
Jan 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/19/98
to

Brian Fleming <bfle...@eecs.uic.edu> schrieb im Beitrag
<69udc6$28l4$1...@piglet.cc.uic.edu>...


> If I wanted to play around with 3D graphics, like writing a cute demo or
a
> simulation of a solar system or something, which graphics library would I
be
> better off learning, OpenGL, or Direct3D?
>

> I was considering Direct3D for WIN95 because there are a lot of
relatively
> inexpensive video cards that have Direct3D hardware acceleration, and
I've
> seen them in action; They're lightning. The OpenGL support for Windows
> SEEMS (I don't know) a little skimpy. Since I'm looking toward a career
in
> computer science, I perfer to learn stuff that may serve me in the
future.
>
>
> Any advice or information about this is immensely appreciated, as always.
>
> - brian
> --University of Illinois at Chicago

Hi Brian :o),

If you're planning to do 3D realtime games targeted for Windows
exclusively, you will be better off learning to use Direct3D. OpenGL is not
currently apted for gameplay.
If you want to generate a general 3D skill in a professional sense you
should dive into OpenGL. This is supported in Unix environments and there
are some derivative graphics libraries. Also it is a little more "general"
in it's architecture.

BTW: If rumour has it right, future implementations of OpenGL for Windows
will make use of the Direct3D HAL, which would take care of the hardware
support issue.

cU
--
Dirk Djuga mailto:di...@solaris.stuttgart.netsurf.de
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1658/

Jerome Jahnke

unread,
Jan 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/20/98
to

Brian Fleming wrote in message <69udc6$28l4$1...@piglet.cc.uic.edu>...


>If I wanted to play around with 3D graphics, like writing a cute demo or a
>simulation of a solar system or something, which graphics library would I
be
>better off learning, OpenGL, or Direct3D?


While the calls are different the principles behind 3D graphics are pretty
well conserved. So stuff you learn about using 3D graphics libs about it
for one lib will translate quite nicely to another. You will have to learn a
new set of calls, but this is the easy bit.

>I was considering Direct3D for WIN95 because there are a lot of relatively
>inexpensive video cards that have Direct3D hardware acceleration, and I've
>seen them in action; They're lightning. The OpenGL support for Windows
>SEEMS (I don't know) a little skimpy. Since I'm looking toward a career in
>computer science, I perfer to learn stuff that may serve me in the future.


If you are looking to go into academe you want to know the Open Standard
(which is OpenGL) instead of Direct3D. Eventually someone will map the GL
calls to the D3D HAL and speed won't be much of an issue. I currently use an
NT box with a GL card. I also do work at work on an SGI. So the code moves
quite nicely between the two machines. Although now that O2's are so cheap I
might just buy an SGI for my next home machine.

Jer,

Pavel V. Zaitesev

unread,
Jan 23, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/23/98
to

: <bfle...@eecs.uic.edu> writes
: >If I wanted to play around with 3D graphics, like writing a cute demo or a

: >simulation of a solar system or something, which graphics library would I be
: >better off learning, OpenGL, or Direct3D?
Go with open GL dude. DirectX is Microsoft only tech, so it is not
portable in between platforms. Besides, OpenGL is designed by graphics
gurus who been there done, that... VooDoo Rush and cards alike have
support for OpenGL, and Unix (Linux too) support OpenGL. So If you'd write
a demo in OpenGL stanart , it will be more or less portable.
Regards,
Pavel.

--
/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\
Hey... don't get mad, get even.
Phone Number is avail. at your request.
Linux:Windoze from Bill:BC++:WIN32API:OWL:ORACLE:XWin wins:g++:libc:TCP/IP
IRC ii:inetd:sendmail:joe:/etc/default/uugetty.ttyS3!!!
! PANIC !: Segment Fault

0 new messages