Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Khronos Releases OpenGL ES Graphics Standard

Posted by timothy on from the how-many-times-can-you-say dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The Khronos Group announced today that it has ratified the OpenGL ES 1.0 royalty-free open standard for advanced 2D and 3D graphics in embedded systems including mobile and handheld devices, and that the API specification is now available for free download. OpenGL ES defines subset profiles of OpenGL; OpenGL and OpenGL ES are royalty-free, open standard APIs that enable authoring and playback of dynamic media on a wide variety of platforms and devices. OpenGL ES 1.0 is said to run in software implementations as small as 50Kbytes, and can enable hardware graphics pipeline acceleration on both fixed point and floating point systems."

19 comments

  1. Interesting Specs by mcdrewski42 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The embedded space varies widely, ranging from 400Mhz PDAs with 64MB RAM to 50MHz mobile phones with 1 MB RAM.

    It constantly surprises me how powerful the systems are that are defined as 'embedded'. After all, the minimum spec for DOOM is a
    386 processor operating at a minimum of 33MHz and for Quake it's an Intel Pentium(R) 75 MHz processor or better.

    That's now in 'embedded systems' sizing easily.

    --
    /* affect != effect */ void affect(int *thing,int effect) { *thing += effect; }
    1. Re:Interesting Specs by dgp · · Score: 1

      PDAs are amazing powerful. So much so that "embedded" standards, in my opinion, serve to confuse and muddle a software system more than anything else.

      If you look at J2ME, the MIDP profile is somewhat useful on phones from the 90s that had next to zero ram and UI options. Phones arent like that any more and all the other J2ME profiles such at CLDC and "PersonalJava" are running on platforms that, I believe, are capable of running a full Java implementation, even the swing UI. Why not provide the real J2SE if the PDA is capable of it?

      I'd like to see the full OpenGL implemented, or at least OpenGL with some sections taken out.

    2. Re:Interesting Specs by Com2Kid · · Score: 1
      • If you look at J2ME, the MIDP profile is somewhat useful on phones from the 90s that had next to zero ram and UI options. Phones arent like that any more and all the other J2ME profiles such at CLDC and "PersonalJava" are running on platforms that, I believe, are capable of running a full Java implementation, even the swing UI. Why not provide the real J2SE if the PDA is capable of


      I still have troubles getting decent performance out of Java on my 700mhz PC. . . .

      --
      Need help treating your acne? Come here!
    3. Re:Interesting Specs by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You could build a so-called embedded system which featured a 3 GHz Pentium IV if you liked. The important part of embedded ain't the hardware, it's the OS, where it's stored, how it's loaded, and most importantly, how it's used. If it provides functionality behind the scenes, it's embedded.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. I have nothing to say by bersl2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    but we can't have more trolls on this post (2) than actual posts (1), now can we?

    Other than that, open standards are good. (Score: 0, Redundant)

  3. Well, um... by Jouni · · Score: 2, Informative
    "I'd like to see the full OpenGL implemented, or at least OpenGL with some sections taken out."

    OpenGL ES is just that; OpenGL with some sections taken out and a few additions to make software-only rendering and math go faster.

    It's nice to point out that we had Quake, etc. on machines with lesser capabilities, however those never were able to get sufficient performance through general use APIs. They weren't ported to OpenGL before we had hardware acceleration on the PC.

    With OpenGL ES, however, it's now completely feasible to make a Quake equivalent for the faster PDAs without custom rendering code. This will happen well before we have mobile 3D hardware acceleration. Bring on the Bluetooth Deathmatch! :-)

    Jouni

    --
    Jouni Mannonen | Game Designer, Consultant
  4. Not bad... by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... but it'd be nice if they covered input, sound, and networking like DirectX does. Arguably that'd make porting games to Linux much easier. Plus, it'd give developers an alternative to DirectX that's more portable.

    Just a thought, but I don't expect to get a lot of attention for it because I'm hinting that MS did something right.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
    1. Re:Not bad... by mcdrewski42 · · Score: 3, Informative

      OpenGL is, as the name suggests, a Graphics Language, not a sound, network, input, pay-to-play platform.

      Yes, MS did something right for games developers but OpenGL is a different kettle of Trolls.

      --
      /* affect != effect */ void affect(int *thing,int effect) { *thing += effect; }
    2. Re:Not bad... by halfnerd · · Score: 2, Informative

      isn't it Library, not Language?

      at least it seems to me that the original language for opengl was/is (there are numerous ports these days) c/c++.

      Just my two cents.

    3. Re:Not bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, SDL covers similar ground, and SDL is already on windows, linux, embedded linux (zaurus) and AFAIK experimentally on WinCE.

      Personally, I think SDL is a bit limited in some ways, particularly for multimedia-data-stream-synchronisation, but at least it's not a load of COM-asshat stuff.

    4. Re:Not bad... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Even when M$ was doing something right (DirectX) they were doing it wrong -- They created Direct3D. It would have made much more sense to simply use and extend OpenGL. As I have pointed out before, Microsoft had a pure-software OpenGL implementation (which they used solely for screensavers far as I can tell) way back in the NT 3.x days, at least in 3.51 if not earlier. So obviously they had played with OpenGL. However then 3DFX came along and like idiots, instead of doing OpenGL from the first, they came up with that GLIDE crap, which isn't really substantially easier than OpenGL from what I understand, and certainly is not as full-featured.

      So with the already-existing fragmentation of 3D APIs, Microsoft had an excuse to define their own standard rather than just go OpenGL. Meanwhile, 3DFX ended up having to make MiniGL (an OpenGL subset) so people could play GLquake. We have iD to thank for OpenGL not completely dying out on the PC. Round of applause, please.

      If 3DFX had never come up with their own goofy API then Microsoft probably wouldn't have either, and we'd all be using OpenGL for 3D graphics, not just the Unix-derived systems. (Read: Mac OS X.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. Who is Khronos? by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    For that matter, who is the standards body that defines OpenGL? Ia this REALLY an open standard, or is this a commercial entity trying to look like a standards organization? The fact that Sun is on the boat is good, but I'm not 100% interested in committing to this yet.

    Can someone clarify for me?

    1. Re:Who is Khronos? by KewlPC · · Score: 2, Informative

      While the name OpenGL is owned by SGI (since OpenGL was invented at SGI), OpenGL itself is managed by the OpenGL ARB (Architecture Resource Board).

      From OpenGL.org:
      The OpenGL Architecture Review Board (ARB), an independent consortium formed in 1992, governs the OpenGL specification. Composed of members from many of the industry's leading graphics vendors, the ARB defines conformance tests and approves OpenGL enhancements. Currently the board includes representatives from 3DLabs, ATI, Compaq, Evans & Sutherland, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Intel, NVidia, Microsoft, and SGI.

      I remember reading somewhere that Microsoft has recently pulled out of the OpenGL ARB.

  6. Should be matched with software by mnmn · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Now its all fine and dandy to have Fujitsu and GeforceFX GO chips on embedded devices and their OpenGL API, but there must be a smooth way to use pre-existing software with this API. Most software would expect a complete OpenGL 1.1 to 1.4 implementation running on standard OSes like (uC)Linux, NetBSD and (someone correct me on this) QNX, Symbian and the rest. Such an OpenGL implementation should be released for most of the embedded 3d chips for all these OSes, possibly as extensions of Mesa under the free OSes, before it can be used at all. We cant expect to see many applications made for custom OSes running on custom cpu/3d chips using a custom OpenGL (ES)implementation. The importance of pre-existing software base for any platform is paramount.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  7. OpenML by Trevelyan · · Score: 1

    Thats what openML (Open Media Language) is for.
    Its on the same site.

    I have to be honest I not read too much about openML, but we have had openGL and openAL for some time. So its not a far jump to openML.
    Although I dont see any note of openAL, maybe they reinvented the wheel here

  8. How relevant is OpenGL nowadays? by JessLeah · · Score: 1

    Microsoft's ActiveX seems to have a stranglehold on the 3D world. I wonder how relevant most SlashDot readers consider a technology that isn't being used in any new FPS games? Mod me down as a troll, but you know it's true. (And I hate this trend as much as you do. I love OpenGL!)

    --
    Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
    1. Re:How relevant is OpenGL nowadays? by invid · · Score: 1

      I think you mean DirectX--but that's OK, I don't fault you for a lack of knowledge of Microsoft technology. In fact, it's a good thing. I envy you. Unfortunately, I am compelled by my employers to make ActiveX controls.

      --
      The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.