4 ms·
I think Vulkan was meant to be included under the banner of "OpenGL" in the parent post. It seems to me the point is that Apple is doubling down on its propriet
by chc 9y ago
I think Vulkan was meant to be included under the banner of "OpenGL" in the parent post. It seems to me the point is that Apple is doubling down on its proprietary API rather than going with the standard.
- coldtea 9y agoWell, MS doesn't go with the standard either, and they have 90% of the desktop market. So why stick to something that will at best be a second rate citizen on Windows too?
- hinkley 9y agoAnd Microsoft is on major version 11 of their proprietary graphics API. Ever have things been this way. It shouldn't be a surprise when they continue to be.
- my123 9y agoThe 11th major version, but version 12 actually. (DirectX 4 was skipped)
- threeseed 9y agoOf course Apple is doubling down on Metal. So much of the future of their platform depends on it e.g. ARKit, CoreML. And so having that rest on top of a core technology that (a) they don't control and (b) isn't optimised for their hardware is a mistake. The better option is to provide a Vulkan/OpenGL shim instead.
- chc 9y agoThis seems like an argument against any standards at all and for NIH as a guiding principle. Using the logic presented here, you could just as validly say that WebKit shouldn't support HTML and CSS since they're not proprietary and not optimized for Apple's hardware and a lot of stuff rests on top of WebKit. Surely you don't actually think that, but I can't figure out how you can not think that but still think that "it's an open standard" is a knock against Vulkan.
- pjmlp 9y agoWhich is exactly what happens with all those HTML, CSS and JavaScript extensions. Some get adopted, some dropped and others stay browser specific.