5 ms·

No. Companies that matter are MS (they are still pushing DirectX), Apple (Metal or bust), Sony and Nintendo (each console has its API). Without full platform ow

by euos 9y ago

No. Companies that matter are MS (they are still pushing DirectX), Apple (Metal or bust), Sony and Nintendo (each console has its API). Without full platform owner support Vulcan will be a second class citizen with all kinds of performance and compatibility issues.

adamnemecek 9y ago
The Metal and Vulkan APIs are pretty similar. I can imagine a wrapper around the two that doesn't degrade the perf much. MS does support Vulkan AFAIK.
- bitwize 9y ago
  UWP and Xbox One apps must use DX. Microsoft appears to be gearing up to deprecate Win32 in the coming years.
  - earenndil 9y ago
    I doubt they will ever truely deprecate win32. Too many old applications that will never get updated to UWP but that people are still using, there will be too much backlash.
    - pjmlp 9y ago
      You cannot use Win16 any longer on 64bit systems. It might take yet another decade, but it will eventually happen.
      - jenscow 9y ago
        But 32-bit was an improvement, and something that developers actually desired.
        pjmlp 9y ago
        Many Windows developers that prefer .NET and C++ to crusty Win32, and the improved security thanks sandbox, also see UWP as an improvement.
        ocdtrekkie 9y ago
        UWP is a massive improvement, as it puts applications in secure sandboxes, a strategy that basically every other platform is already doing. Sure, Microsoft faces an uphill battle since backwards compatibility is the name of their game, and few consumer-facing OSes today have a continuous platform going back over two decades. But UWP is definitely better.
  - kllrnohj 9y ago
    How many gamers do you think are going to give up Steam and go to the Windows Store? Similarly, how many Xbox One developers are going to bother with UWP, either? Given UWP allows the use of Win32 because nobody would use it if it didn't, it seems pretty likely that if games start using Vulkan then UWP will end up with Vulkan, too. Microsoft Store needs games more than games need UWP.
    - pjmlp 9y ago
      UWP makes use of Win32 as implementation detail, all the Win32 APIs considered legacy are not supported. "This subset of APIs was chosen to support key scenarios for Windows Runtime apps that were not already covered by the Windows Runtime, HTML/CSS, or other supported languages or standards. The Windows App Certification Kit ensures that your app uses only this subset of the Win32 and COM API." https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/br205757.aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/br2057... > Similarly, how many Xbox One developers are going to bother with UWP, either? Probably zero, but they won't bother with Vulkan also. If they are targeting something else besides the XBox, they already have a portable game engine in place, or as typical in the games industry, contracts in place with companies specialized in doing game ports. Win32 is legacy, the Desktop Bridge sessions on channel 9 always show how easy it is to import apps into the store and slowly convert them into UWP ones. The next release of Windows will even add support for command line UWP apps, and Office 2016 is only available via the store on Windows 10. As for Steam vs Windows Store, not everyone is on Steam and the Store also allows for XBox games, which has a much bigger portfolio. Plus you are forgetting the scenario where Apple or Microsoft, might eventually just buy Valve.
      - andybak 9y ago
        Don't forget Valve is privately owned so it's not a simple acquisition target.
        pjmlp 9y ago
        I know that, there are many ways of buying a company.
Legion 9y ago
MoltenVK implements the Vulkan API on Metal: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/vulkan-is-coming-to-macos-ios-but-no-thanks-to-apple/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/vulkan-is-coming-to-... And as stated in that article, work is also being made to implement Vulkan on DirectX, allowing Vulkan apps to be distributed through the Windows Store (which requires DirectX). Nintendo Switch supports Vulkan. I expect we'll see Vulkan support quite strongly in the next generation of consoles (besides maybe Microsoft's)
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Nintendo Switch supports Vulkan as much as the PS 3 supported OpenGL ES. It is there, but it isn't the main 3D graphics API.
  - deaddodo 9y ago
    A cross-platform API will never be first-class on a console. The GPU in the Switch is a generic Tegra Maxwell with full OpenGL and DirectX (unusable, obviously) support, yet Nintendo still pushes NVN as the first class. PS4 has GNX, etc. Only Xbox has that chance since it has DirectX, but fat chance seeing that on OS X or Linux/*BSD
    - Impossible 9y ago
      If you want good performance on xbox you still have to use console specific APIs, in every engine I've worked with xbox is a special platform. I haven't done xbox development post dx12, but afaik xbox one still has console specific apis with dx12. Most PC games are not uwp (steam can't host uwp games), so extra work needs to be done to support both uwp and win32 as well as console specific direct3d.
AndrewUnmuted 9y ago
>> Without full platform owner support Vulcan (sic) will be a second class citizen with all kinds of performance and compatibility issues. Vulkan is owned by Khronos. Every single company you mention is a member of the Khronos group: https://www.khronos.org/members/list https://www.khronos.org/members/list Aside from the strong contingency Khronos Group carries, Vulkan's cross-platform support is in part due to its very good codebase, which enables easier integration.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Being a member does not mean anything, many companies just want a seat at the table.
- jacobolus 9y ago
  Sure. Microsoft was also a member of Khronos 15–20 years ago, when (according to an acquaintance who used to work for a GPU vendor) they did every underhanded thing they could to disrupt the OpenGL spec / committee, while simultaneously working on their end to make sure it wouldn’t be a competitive way to develop Windows software. Being a member (by itself) doesn’t mean anything. Without talking to anyone involved or knowing additional context, it’s impossible to know whether the companies on the committee are productive collaborators, passive onlookers, or active opponents of Vulkan.
  - boomboomsubban 9y ago
    >Sure. Microsoft was also a member of Khronos 15–20 years ago, when (according to an acquaintance who used to work for a GPU vendor) they did every underhanded thing they could to disrupt the OpenGL spec / committee, while simultaneously working on their end to make sure it wouldn’t be a competitive way to develop Windows software. You're talking about the pre-Khronos OpenGL Fahrenheit deal, which is largely public knowledge. Microsoft announced a joint project with SGI to support OpenGL on Windows, then put all their resources into DirectX while SGI spent two years building their section. The only unprovable part is that this was their goal all along, but the leaked combat plan against free software at the same time leaves little doubt.
bitmapbrother 9y ago
>No. Companies that matter are MS (they are still pushing DirectX), Apple (Metal or bust), Sony and Nintendo (each console has its API). Did you forget about Android? Vulkan was introduced in Android 7.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Yeah, 20% of market share and it isn't a required API. Only OpenGL ES 2.0 support is required. https://source.android.com/compatibility/android-cdd#7_1_display_and_graphics https://source.android.com/compatibility/android-cdd#7_1_dis... Section 7.1.4.2, "If device implementations support OpenGL ES 3.0 or 3.1, they: [SR] Are STRONGLY RECOMMENDED to include support for Vulkan 1.0 . If device implementations include a screen or video output, they: SHOULD include support for Vulkan 1.0. " Regarding specification language SHOULD is not the same as MUST, just nice to have.
  - bitmapbrother 9y ago
    I believe it's more like 30%. In a few years Vulkan should be on the majority of Android devices.
    - pjmlp 9y ago
      30% of Android N + O, yes I got it wrong. It doesn't change the fact that Vulkan is optional and still not worthy to be listed on Android dashboards. Not everyone is using S8 and Pixel phones. https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html

by euos 9y ago

adamnemecek 9y ago

The Metal and Vulkan APIs are pretty similar. I can imagine a wrapper around the two that doesn't degrade the perf much. MS does support Vulkan AFAIK.

bitwize 9y ago
UWP and Xbox One apps must use DX. Microsoft appears to be gearing up to deprecate Win32 in the coming years.
- earenndil 9y ago
  I doubt they will ever truely deprecate win32. Too many old applications that will never get updated to UWP but that people are still using, there will be too much backlash.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    You cannot use Win16 any longer on 64bit systems. It might take yet another decade, but it will eventually happen.
    - jenscow 9y ago
      But 32-bit was an improvement, and something that developers actually desired.
      - pjmlp 9y ago
        Many Windows developers that prefer .NET and C++ to crusty Win32, and the improved security thanks sandbox, also see UWP as an improvement.
      - ocdtrekkie 9y ago
        UWP is a massive improvement, as it puts applications in secure sandboxes, a strategy that basically every other platform is already doing. Sure, Microsoft faces an uphill battle since backwards compatibility is the name of their game, and few consumer-facing OSes today have a continuous platform going back over two decades. But UWP is definitely better.
- kllrnohj 9y ago
  How many gamers do you think are going to give up Steam and go to the Windows Store? Similarly, how many Xbox One developers are going to bother with UWP, either? Given UWP allows the use of Win32 because nobody would use it if it didn't, it seems pretty likely that if games start using Vulkan then UWP will end up with Vulkan, too. Microsoft Store needs games more than games need UWP.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    UWP makes use of Win32 as implementation detail, all the Win32 APIs considered legacy are not supported. "This subset of APIs was chosen to support key scenarios for Windows Runtime apps that were not already covered by the Windows Runtime, HTML/CSS, or other supported languages or standards. The Windows App Certification Kit ensures that your app uses only this subset of the Win32 and COM API." https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/br205757.aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/br2057... > Similarly, how many Xbox One developers are going to bother with UWP, either? Probably zero, but they won't bother with Vulkan also. If they are targeting something else besides the XBox, they already have a portable game engine in place, or as typical in the games industry, contracts in place with companies specialized in doing game ports. Win32 is legacy, the Desktop Bridge sessions on channel 9 always show how easy it is to import apps into the store and slowly convert them into UWP ones. The next release of Windows will even add support for command line UWP apps, and Office 2016 is only available via the store on Windows 10. As for Steam vs Windows Store, not everyone is on Steam and the Store also allows for XBox games, which has a much bigger portfolio. Plus you are forgetting the scenario where Apple or Microsoft, might eventually just buy Valve.
    - andybak 9y ago
      Don't forget Valve is privately owned so it's not a simple acquisition target.
      - pjmlp 9y ago
        I know that, there are many ways of buying a company.

Legion 9y ago

MoltenVK implements the Vulkan API on Metal: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/vulkan-is-coming-to-macos-ios-but-no-thanks-to-apple/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/vulkan-is-coming-to-... And as stated in that article, work is also being made to implement Vulkan on DirectX, allowing Vulkan apps to be distributed through the Windows Store (which requires DirectX). Nintendo Switch supports Vulkan. I expect we'll see Vulkan support quite strongly in the next generation of consoles (besides maybe Microsoft's)

pjmlp 9y ago
Nintendo Switch supports Vulkan as much as the PS 3 supported OpenGL ES. It is there, but it isn't the main 3D graphics API.
- deaddodo 9y ago
  A cross-platform API will never be first-class on a console. The GPU in the Switch is a generic Tegra Maxwell with full OpenGL and DirectX (unusable, obviously) support, yet Nintendo still pushes NVN as the first class. PS4 has GNX, etc. Only Xbox has that chance since it has DirectX, but fat chance seeing that on OS X or Linux/*BSD
  - Impossible 9y ago
    If you want good performance on xbox you still have to use console specific APIs, in every engine I've worked with xbox is a special platform. I haven't done xbox development post dx12, but afaik xbox one still has console specific apis with dx12. Most PC games are not uwp (steam can't host uwp games), so extra work needs to be done to support both uwp and win32 as well as console specific direct3d.

AndrewUnmuted 9y ago

>> Without full platform owner support Vulcan (sic) will be a second class citizen with all kinds of performance and compatibility issues. Vulkan is owned by Khronos. Every single company you mention is a member of the Khronos group: https://www.khronos.org/members/list https://www.khronos.org/members/list Aside from the strong contingency Khronos Group carries, Vulkan's cross-platform support is in part due to its very good codebase, which enables easier integration.

pjmlp 9y ago
Being a member does not mean anything, many companies just want a seat at the table.
jacobolus 9y ago
Sure. Microsoft was also a member of Khronos 15–20 years ago, when (according to an acquaintance who used to work for a GPU vendor) they did every underhanded thing they could to disrupt the OpenGL spec / committee, while simultaneously working on their end to make sure it wouldn’t be a competitive way to develop Windows software. Being a member (by itself) doesn’t mean anything. Without talking to anyone involved or knowing additional context, it’s impossible to know whether the companies on the committee are productive collaborators, passive onlookers, or active opponents of Vulkan.
- boomboomsubban 9y ago
  >Sure. Microsoft was also a member of Khronos 15–20 years ago, when (according to an acquaintance who used to work for a GPU vendor) they did every underhanded thing they could to disrupt the OpenGL spec / committee, while simultaneously working on their end to make sure it wouldn’t be a competitive way to develop Windows software. You're talking about the pre-Khronos OpenGL Fahrenheit deal, which is largely public knowledge. Microsoft announced a joint project with SGI to support OpenGL on Windows, then put all their resources into DirectX while SGI spent two years building their section. The only unprovable part is that this was their goal all along, but the leaked combat plan against free software at the same time leaves little doubt.

bitmapbrother 9y ago

>No. Companies that matter are MS (they are still pushing DirectX), Apple (Metal or bust), Sony and Nintendo (each console has its API). Did you forget about Android? Vulkan was introduced in Android 7.

pjmlp 9y ago
Yeah, 20% of market share and it isn't a required API. Only OpenGL ES 2.0 support is required. https://source.android.com/compatibility/android-cdd#7_1_display_and_graphics https://source.android.com/compatibility/android-cdd#7_1_dis... Section 7.1.4.2, "If device implementations support OpenGL ES 3.0 or 3.1, they: [SR] Are STRONGLY RECOMMENDED to include support for Vulkan 1.0 . If device implementations include a screen or video output, they: SHOULD include support for Vulkan 1.0. " Regarding specification language SHOULD is not the same as MUST, just nice to have.
- bitmapbrother 9y ago
  I believe it's more like 30%. In a few years Vulkan should be on the majority of Android devices.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    30% of Android N + O, yes I got it wrong. It doesn't change the fact that Vulkan is optional and still not worthy to be listed on Android dashboards. Not everyone is using S8 and Pixel phones. https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html