4 ms·

* Drop DirectX for Vulkan * Drop MSVC for Clang or GCC * Drop Edge for Firefox or Chromium because they love open-source, right?

by jhasse 8y ago

Someone1234 8y ago
Vulkan is just a 3D graphics and compute API, it cannot replace DirectX because it doesn't support most of the things DirectX does. Did you mean to say Direct3D? That's still leave you with input, sound, maths, and 2D missing.
- jhasse 8y ago
  Yes, I meant Direct3D.
Ornstein 8y ago
This is just ridiculous. The other points may/may not make sense but drop direct-x for vulkan? What? It'd have made more sense to make Direct-X open source than just dump it like it's useless. It's not like windows drivers for GPUs don't support vulkan. Direct-X has had a history of being the superior graphics API to OGL. Now, VULKAN evens things out a bit but just dumping so much of RnD for nothing doesn't make sense
- ekr 8y ago
  > Direct-X has had a history of being the superior graphics API to OGL. That view is fairly one-sided, to say the least. The history is presented in this StackExchange thread: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/60544/why-do-game-developers-prefer-windows https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/6054.... But to summarize: OpenGL was the standard before D3D was created. D3D has been a step behind OpenGL in features and performance up to about D3Dv7. Then the OpenGL ARB screwed up, with Microsoft among the members (some hypothesize that Microsoft were attempting to sabotage OpenGL).
WorldMaker 8y ago
Several key pieces of Edge are open source, such as Chakra Core, which is the JS engine (like Chromium's V8), and more are expected. The argument IE6 was that the web grew too stagnant with a single dominant web renderer. If we all agree that the Web is a better place with multiple competing web renderers, why wish the death of the Edge renderer when it and Firefox are all that are standing in the way (and barely by latest metrics) of forks from the KHTML/WebKit/Blink family dominating?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Spivak 8y ago
Compared to open-sourcing them? Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. * Direct3D being open-sourced would have removed the need for Vulkan. * Many compilers are good for the ecosystem. * Many browsers are good for the ecosystem.
disposablename 8y ago
Yes, let's have fewer choices for everything! That is sure to spur innovation!
- jhasse 8y ago
  There are a lot of situations where people don't have a choice but to use DirectX or MSVC. Same was true for Internet Explorer. It's only a choice if we have open standards so you can actually choose between different implementations.

* Drop DirectX for Vulkan * Drop MSVC for Clang or GCC * Drop Edge for Firefox or Chromium because they love open-source, right?

by jhasse 8y ago

* Drop DirectX for Vulkan * Drop MSVC for Clang or GCC * Drop Edge for Firefox or Chromium because they love open-source, right?

Someone1234 8y ago

Vulkan is just a 3D graphics and compute API, it cannot replace DirectX because it doesn't support most of the things DirectX does. Did you mean to say Direct3D? That's still leave you with input, sound, maths, and 2D missing.

jhasse 8y ago
Yes, I meant Direct3D.

Ornstein 8y ago

This is just ridiculous. The other points may/may not make sense but drop direct-x for vulkan? What? It'd have made more sense to make Direct-X open source than just dump it like it's useless. It's not like windows drivers for GPUs don't support vulkan. Direct-X has had a history of being the superior graphics API to OGL. Now, VULKAN evens things out a bit but just dumping so much of RnD for nothing doesn't make sense

ekr 8y ago
> Direct-X has had a history of being the superior graphics API to OGL. That view is fairly one-sided, to say the least. The history is presented in this StackExchange thread: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/60544/why-do-game-developers-prefer-windows https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/6054.... But to summarize: OpenGL was the standard before D3D was created. D3D has been a step behind OpenGL in features and performance up to about D3Dv7. Then the OpenGL ARB screwed up, with Microsoft among the members (some hypothesize that Microsoft were attempting to sabotage OpenGL).

WorldMaker 8y ago

Several key pieces of Edge are open source, such as Chakra Core, which is the JS engine (like Chromium's V8), and more are expected. The argument IE6 was that the web grew too stagnant with a single dominant web renderer. If we all agree that the Web is a better place with multiple competing web renderers, why wish the death of the Edge renderer when it and Firefox are all that are standing in the way (and barely by latest metrics) of forks from the KHTML/WebKit/Blink family dominating?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

Spivak 8y ago

Compared to open-sourcing them? Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. * Direct3D being open-sourced would have removed the need for Vulkan. * Many compilers are good for the ecosystem. * Many browsers are good for the ecosystem.

disposablename 8y ago

Yes, let's have fewer choices for everything! That is sure to spur innovation!

jhasse 8y ago
There are a lot of situations where people don't have a choice but to use DirectX or MSVC. Same was true for Internet Explorer. It's only a choice if we have open standards so you can actually choose between different implementations.