3 ms·

Ok so where is the reason Apple can't add Vulkan support to Mac OS?

by kcb 5y ago

jmull 5y ago
I don't understand why they would. They don't control the API - not what is in it, the direction it is going, nor when it is updated. That means they can't integrate it tightly with their OSs. Not from a tech standpoint and not from a release standpoint. Supporting it in MacOS would mean just having a team working for Khronos, implementing Vulkan on top of MacOS's actual graphics API, Metal, and releasing when they could. It would seem much better if some other group -- one with an actual stake or interest in it -- would take this on. Not sure who that would be because there doesn't seem to be a good enough reason for any group to do it. Most game engines probably want to go directly on top of Metal -- they already provide an abstraction layer and probably don't want to have an intermediate one. GPU makers, even at the best of times, have never been interested, and, of course, they can look forward to zero Mac business in the near future, so that isn't going to change. Not sure who else there possibly is.
- kcb 5y ago
  They would because it would mean more software support. Proper support for Vulkan would not be an abstraction layer. Metal is not the language of the hardware, GPUs operate on assembly like instructions. These are not publicly documented or AFAIK exposed on Mac OS so only Apple would be capable of creating a proper Vulkan driver. > They don't control the API - not what is in it, the direction it is going, nor when it is updated. That means they can't integrate it tightly with their OSs. Not from a tech standpoint and not from a release standpoint. What if I told you I can transfer a file between my Mac and PC using software built into Mac OS from a standard controlled by Microsoft. > Supporting it in MacOS would mean just having a team working for Khronos, implementing Vulkan on top of MacOS's actual graphics API, Metal, and releasing when they could. This is like saying because Mac and Safari support HTML 5 its like the dev team is working for W3C. Khronos group is a standards organization not generally the implementer. > Not sure who that would be because there doesn't seem to be a good enough reason for any group to do it. https://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK https://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK Plenty of "native" Mac games can't be bothered to utilize Metal directly and just use this instead. This generally results in less than optimal performance or efficiency. > GPU makers, even at the best of times, have never been interested, and, of course, they can look forward to zero Mac business in the near future, so that isn't going to change. GPU makers are plenty interested because it sells GPUs and it is exactly how its done on Windows. Back when Nvidia worked on Mac OS they implemented CUDA and OpenGL on Mac.
  - jmull 5y ago
    > They would because it would mean more software support. Evidently, Apple doesn't think it's worth it. Who else would be in a better position to judge? > Proper support for Vulkan would not be an abstraction layer. Metal is not the language of the hardware, GPUs operate on assembly like instructions Sure, but the point of Metal for Apple is to have an abstraction layer so they are free to change things underneath it as needed. A first-class Vulkan implementation would be a largely redundant, and sometimes conflicting abstraction (and a conflict Apple doesn't control). That's a lot of additional complexity. > What if I told you I can transfer a file between my Mac and PC using software built into Mac OS from a standard controlled by Microsoft. I guess you mean SMB? That has not exactly been a straight a smooth road on MacOS. I would guess Apple's experience supporting it helped them realize the value of controlling the foundational APIs of their OS. But even more so with web APIs. > GPU makers are plenty interested because it sells GPUs My point is the GPU makers have not yet been inspired to implement Vulkan for MacOS, and now that they face a near future where MacOS will be not be a market for them due to Apple silicon,

Ok so where is the reason Apple can't add Vulkan support to Mac OS?

by kcb 5y ago

Ok so where is the reason Apple can't add Vulkan support to Mac OS?

I don't understand why they would. They don't control the API - not what is in it, the direction it is going, nor when it is updated. That means they can't integrate it tightly with their OSs. Not from a tech standpoint and not from a release standpoint. Supporting it in MacOS would mean just having a team working for Khronos, implementing Vulkan on top of MacOS's actual graphics API, Metal, and releasing when they could. It would seem much better if some other group -- one with an actual stake or interest in it -- would take this on. Not sure who that would be because there doesn't seem to be a good enough reason for any group to do it. Most game engines probably want to go directly on top of Metal -- they already provide an abstraction layer and probably don't want to have an intermediate one. GPU makers, even at the best of times, have never been interested, and, of course, they can look forward to zero Mac business in the near future, so that isn't going to change. Not sure who else there possibly is.

kcb 5y ago
They would because it would mean more software support. Proper support for Vulkan would not be an abstraction layer. Metal is not the language of the hardware, GPUs operate on assembly like instructions. These are not publicly documented or AFAIK exposed on Mac OS so only Apple would be capable of creating a proper Vulkan driver. > They don't control the API - not what is in it, the direction it is going, nor when it is updated. That means they can't integrate it tightly with their OSs. Not from a tech standpoint and not from a release standpoint. What if I told you I can transfer a file between my Mac and PC using software built into Mac OS from a standard controlled by Microsoft. > Supporting it in MacOS would mean just having a team working for Khronos, implementing Vulkan on top of MacOS's actual graphics API, Metal, and releasing when they could. This is like saying because Mac and Safari support HTML 5 its like the dev team is working for W3C. Khronos group is a standards organization not generally the implementer. > Not sure who that would be because there doesn't seem to be a good enough reason for any group to do it. https://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK https://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK Plenty of "native" Mac games can't be bothered to utilize Metal directly and just use this instead. This generally results in less than optimal performance or efficiency. > GPU makers, even at the best of times, have never been interested, and, of course, they can look forward to zero Mac business in the near future, so that isn't going to change. GPU makers are plenty interested because it sells GPUs and it is exactly how its done on Windows. Back when Nvidia worked on Mac OS they implemented CUDA and OpenGL on Mac.
- jmull 5y ago
  > They would because it would mean more software support. Evidently, Apple doesn't think it's worth it. Who else would be in a better position to judge? > Proper support for Vulkan would not be an abstraction layer. Metal is not the language of the hardware, GPUs operate on assembly like instructions Sure, but the point of Metal for Apple is to have an abstraction layer so they are free to change things underneath it as needed. A first-class Vulkan implementation would be a largely redundant, and sometimes conflicting abstraction (and a conflict Apple doesn't control). That's a lot of additional complexity. > What if I told you I can transfer a file between my Mac and PC using software built into Mac OS from a standard controlled by Microsoft. I guess you mean SMB? That has not exactly been a straight a smooth road on MacOS. I would guess Apple's experience supporting it helped them realize the value of controlling the foundational APIs of their OS. But even more so with web APIs. > GPU makers are plenty interested because it sells GPUs My point is the GPU makers have not yet been inspired to implement Vulkan for MacOS, and now that they face a near future where MacOS will be not be a market for them due to Apple silicon,