OpenGL 1.4 Spec Finalized

Sesse writes: "SGI announced yesterday that the OpenGL 1.4 specification was agreed upon by the ARB. Trying to minimize the gap between D3D8 and OpenGL, the standard adds a lot of functionality already common (being exposed as extensions in many drivers today), but more importantly brings a standard specification for vertex shaders. This should be good news for anybody doing cross-platform eyecandy :-)" This announcement is related to, but broader than, the one mentioned earlier about bringing OpenGL to mobile devices.

Comments

Re:Didn't Microsoft just do something with this?

[Anonymous Coward]

According to this article [heise.de] Microsoft claims to hold some rights on important functions of the new specification.

Re:bad news for Linux?

[Creepy]

um, it doesn't work that way.

First, M$ doesn't give a rip about OpenGL 1.4, and will probably leave nVidia or some other company to do the work of writing to the spec.

Second, Mesa is a free implementation of OpenGL APIs (OpenGL compatible library). I'm sure Mesa's author(s) have already started moving to 1.4.

Third, writing a new Linux library doesn't address the fact that 90%+ of games are written for Windows using DirectX. Creating a new API won't help this unless you do the same thing as OpenGL is doing, which is write cross-platform for Windows, as well as Linux (and maybe other OS's).

Fourth, patents exist on just about anything you can do with computer graphics (CG). OpenGL ARB members share their patents in an effort to make a unified standard and make it affordable for consumers. Microsoft owns some of these patents, mainly through purchased companies, which is why OpenGL Architecture Review Board (ARB) is worried that they could push high licensing fees rather than share patents. It is in Microsoft's best interest to charge money for these patents, especially unreasonable amounts of it, because it makes DirectX the only affordable option and locks you into Microsoft software and x86 hardware.

Re:Carmack dumping OpenGL - Not

[Brown]

I'm not sure if this is an attempt at humour or what, but just in case people take it seriously:

John Carmack has never suggested changing to using DirectX, and has always supported ports to other systems.
(According to his .plans going back to last year sometime, Opengl is still used entirely and will be in future)

There will probably not be a retail box version of linux Doom3, but a binary port will be releasd as usual, as for the Mac.

Re:"Intellectual property" issues??

[MAXOMENOS]

This should be interesting. Mesa3D is licensed under the MIT license; this is one of the open source licenses that Microsoft claims to love. Let's see how much they love it now, eh?

"At a glance" - and the IP issues

[tlambert]

Here is the "at a glance" from the web site:

New OpenGL 1.4 Core Features at-a-Glance

• Depth textures and shadow textures, enabling real-time shadows and related image-based rendering techniques
• Vertex programming framework, setting the stage for user-defined geometry, lighting and shading programs and enabling high-level general-purpose shading languages
• Automatic texture mipmap generation, providing rapid updates and high-quality texture filtering for dynamic textures
• Numerous smaller enhancements including:
• Multiple draw arrays, for higher geometry throughput
• Window raster position, for precise 2D and image rendering
• User-defined fog coordinate, for advanced fog effects
• User-defined secondary color, point parameters, texture level-of-detail bias, texture crossbar, and new frame buffer blending modes and stenciling functions for more flexible shading and rendering effects

So, yes, it includes the disputed Vertex shading that Microsoft claims is under patent not publically licensed, as it was before it acquired the patent from SGI.

Since SGI got the GPL religion, for them to have agreed to the inclusion of the technology in the specification implies that they think the patent is not enforcible, and that their license is still valid.

It would be nice if SGI would state a position on this and clear up the fud, wouldn't it?

-- Terry