4 ms·
Step 1: Microsoft has a proprietary alternative to an open standard, people complain. Step 2: Microsoft begins adopting the open standard, people complain.
by jsheard 2y ago
Step 1: Microsoft has a proprietary alternative to an open standard, people complain.
Step 2: Microsoft begins adopting the open standard, people complain.
- majorchord 2y agoI think they're referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
- jsheard 2y agoI know that's what they're referring to. If you're concerned about Microsoft gaining undue influence over Vulkan/SPIR-V then rest assured they already effectively controlled the desktop graphics landscape, however they define DirectX becomes the template for hardware vendors to follow, and Vulkan then has to follow their lead. The pattern is especially obvious with big new features like raytracing, which was added to DirectX first and then some time later added to Vulkan with an API which almost exactly mirrors how DirectX abstracts it. There are even Vulkan extensions which exist specifically to make emulating DirectX semantics easier.
- chucke1992 2y agoThat's understandable. Control over standards has the immense value. Just like look at Nvidia's CUDA.
- pjmlp 2y agoCUDA success has much to thank Intel and AMD for never providing anything with OpenCL that could be a proper alternative in developer experience, graphical debugging, libraries and stable drivers. Even OpenCL 2.x C++ standard was largely ignored or badly supported by their toolchains.
- talldayo 2y agocough cough Remind me who owns the OpenCL trademark, again? Intel and AMD weren't the ones that abandoned it. Speaking in no uncertain terms, there was a sole stakeholder that can be held responsible for letting the project die and preventing the proliferation of Open GPGPU standards. A company that has everything to gain from killing Open standards in the cradle and replacing them with proprietary alternatives. Someone with a well-known grudge against Khronos who's willing to throw an oversized wrench into the plans as long as it hurts their opponents.
- google234123 2y agoWould you be willing to share the deal with Apple/Khronos relations?
- troupo 2y agoApple didn't like OpenGL, rightfully, and came up with their own Metal which they released two years before first version of Vulkan was released. Now people pretend that Apple is bad because it never adopted Vulkan and never implemented the "good modern OpenGL" (which never really existed).
- jsheard 2y agoIt runs deeper than that, during the development of WebGPU it came to light that Apple was vetoing the use of any Khronos IP whatsoever, due to a private legal dispute between them. That led to WebGPU having to re-invent the wheel with a brand new shader language because Apples lawyers wouldn't sign off on using GLSL or SPIR-V under any circumstances. The actual details of the dispute never came out, so we don't know if it has been resolved or not.
- binary132 2y agoApple, refusing to use open standards, and instead demanding everyone else do things their way? Say it’s not so!
- plorkyeran 2y agoYes, obviously. It is an incredibly tiresome comment which is brought up every single time that Microsoft adopts any sort of open standard and it's never done with any particular insight into if this is one of the times that it'll be relevant.
- saurik 2y agoHas it ever not ended up being relevant? Like, I would agree that it is kind of redundant--and thereby maybe doesn't need to be said--but if there are people who actually think "maybe this time will be different", arguably the comment should be pinned to the top of the thread as a reminder?