5 ms·
> Vulkan would likely not really have helped macOS gaming in any form Why not? With fully conformant Vulkan you could have run all the games that work in Wine
by shmerl 2y ago
> Vulkan would likely not really have helped macOS gaming in any form
Why not? With fully conformant Vulkan you could have run all the games that work in Wine without being hit by limitations of MoltenVK that affect performance and compatibility, same as you can run them on Linux now. So Vulkan could totally be very crucial for making gaming on macOS not being some second class experience.
Apple simply demonstrate they don't care about gaming and gamers. They only care about "approved by Apple way of gaming" which is totally not the same thing but which Apple always does for everything anyway, shoving in users' faces "we know better than you what you need".
That's why I will always say that gamers should avoid using Apple.
- astrange 2y agoYou can't "just support Vulkan", it's too low level. To benefit, the implementation would have to target the GPU specifically since Apple GPUs are different from discrete GPUs.
- shmerl 2y agoWell, Asahi / Mesa developers demonstrated that they can "just support Vulkan" on Apple's hardware as the linked post explains. So Apple never had any excuse for not doing it. Their reasons for sabotaging Vulkan support were always political, not technical.
- robertoandred 2y agoSabotaging? Metal came before Vulkan.
- shmerl 2y agoHow does that stop Apple from supporting Vulkan on their system? It is pure political sabotaging. And you can't pull any excuses like "it requires effort". Apple have pools of cash to do the right thing for users and developers. They simply very intentionally oppose it due to their dinosaur lock-in mentality.
- astrange 2y agoA blog post is different from a real compliant commercial implementation. Other reasons you couldn't do it include eg someone with a patent on it won't license it to you.
- shmerl 2y agoMesa's implementation will get a compliance certification once it's ready. I don't see why they would have problems with that - other Vulkan drivers got compliance from Khronos once they passed needed tests. Patent FUDs are nonsense - no one else has such issues and many drivers already exist and work fine. The real reasons are not good at all (i.e. Apple's obsession with lock-in) and have no excuse.
- greenduck1 2y ago> A blog post is different from a real compliant commercial implementation. honeykrisp is already a "real conformant" implementation and is listed on Khronos's website already. https://www.khronos.org/conformance/adopters/conformant-products/vulkan#submission_780 https://www.khronos.org/conformance/adopters/conformant-prod...
- astrange 2y agoYou left out a word.
- 58028641 2y agohttps://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK https://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK proves that it is possible, but it is limited by having to go through Metal.
- astrange 2y agoAnything's possible, but it wouldn't be performant. MoltenVK is just about as good as an untuned native Vulkan client would be.
- flohofwoe 2y agoIf Apple would add native Vulkan support to macOS, it would most likely also go through a Metal "emulation layer" (just like their GL implementation, or the D3D12 implementation in the Game Porting Toolkit).
- talldayo 2y agoBecause everyone knows from MoltenVK, Metal-based API implementations are just so efficient.