6 ms·
Apple also still refuse to support Vulkan natively. They are one of the worst lock-in offenders today.
by shmerl 7y ago
Apple also still refuse to support Vulkan natively. They are one of the worst lock-in offenders today.
- pjmlp 7y agoUnreal, Unity, Adobe, Disney, OTOY, Fusion, Cinema4D, ... are pretty fine with it.
- shmerl 7y agoWhat's fine with wasting effort on pointless duplication? You made this false claim many times in the past, but it's as false as it was before. And your support of lock-in practices is strange to begin with.
- pjmlp 7y agoGo learn about the industry business practices to start with, an advice you keep ignoring. Some people never get tired to fight windmills.
- shmerl 7y agoYou repeating the same thing won't change the fact that lock-in is a foul practice that simply taxes developers for the benefit of those who want to hamper competition. Only shills support such approaches. You perfectly well know it yourself.
- pjmlp 7y agoSomehow it makes you feel good to call me and others that enjoy the productivity of better tooling shills. Do you think it matters at all to us with actual experience passing by the soap box?
- shmerl 7y agoEnjoying lock-in - that's a new one. Instead, I enjoy breaking it (for example by using dxvk).
- pjmlp 7y agoWhat you call lock in, we in the industry call productivity of being able to use SDKs not stuck in 80's UNIX world, full of endless extensions. Instead of shouting from a soap box that no one cares to listen to, get Khronos to actually provide a 21st SDK tooling. Then Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo (Vulkan is 2nd class on the Switch), Apple, Hollywood and all their partners might care. Until then, the wind takes it all.
- shmerl 7y agoYou know what lock-in is, so no point in pretending you don't understand what its problems are. It's not about productivity, it's about anti-competitive jerks who use development tools to hamper competition. Of course those who push lock-in like to present it as a positive thing and hide its real nature, but it's just a smokescreen which is easy to see through. Once in a while, they just can't help it, and express their real views: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_lock-in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_... Anyway, I don't think explaining this to you in particular is useful. You know it all well, but pretend it's a good thing. Which is very shill-like. Unlike you, even developers of such lock-in stuff admit, it's a bad thing for the industry. Those who are interested, can find comments by Dan Baker (from Oxide Games) for example, who is a former developer of DirectX.
- pjmlp 7y agoJerks, shills, .... Plenty of nice words for someone that advocates APIs that are portable only on paper, as the best features are all hidden away on OEM specific extensions, leading to multiple incompatible code paths. Psst, lets not reveal the Achilles heel from the soap box. As for Dan Baker, enjoy. "Benefits of DirectX 12 on Ashes of Singularity" https://youtu.be/9cvmDjVYSNk https://youtu.be/9cvmDjVYSNk