Newb Question: Direct 3d and OpenGL - How are they diffrent?

[LeStoffer]

I can't agree at all. OpenGL has almost always been providing the new features before DirectX. It's just that you don't see the hype as when a new version of DirectX is relased. OpenGL continually evolves often in small steps, there are still new functionality released with new drivers for older card like the Radeon 8500. We also already have DX9 functionlity in OpenGL, like the ARB_fragment_program.

Thats all well and true, but my point is that DirectX defines the larger steps in a way that the hardware vendors just cannot bypass. I understand what you're getting at, but as you point out OpenGL evolves mostly in small steps that simply doesn't provide the kind of OEM checklist that defines next-generation must-have features that a new DirectX version does. I also find OpenGL much more flexible towards bleeding edge feature via the GL extensions, but some of them just never takes off.

The classic example of where DirectX should be ahead of OpenGL is shaders, which really is only partially true, vertex/fragment shader extensions where provided with shipping drivers for both the Radeon 8500 and GF3, the problem only being that there were no crossvendor standard.

True. We even have OpenGL_NV30 before either DX9 or NV30, but does it define anything that the state of the business at large is judged against?

 

[quattro]

me thinks great portions of this discussion should be implemented in B3D glossary it is a perfect example of a thing we all understand so well, we don't even think about it anymore. yet to a vast majority of people it is science fiction star trek technobabble.
derek, care to submit some entries, like clamping and W buffer?