OpenGL 2.0

[Scott_Arm]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/10/opengl_2/

OpenGL2 formally launched today? Don't see anything on www.opengl.org

 

[Scott_Arm]

ooops

Missed this, right on the front page ....

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14987

 

[THE JEW (RaVeN)]

Question(s):

Does this release of OpenGL bring it up to the specs put forth by DirectX 9(any version of 9)? If no, what are the differences. If yes, does it exceed DirectX 9 (any version) in any capabilities? Thanks in advance.

 

[Scali]

The features listed in the press-release (high-level programmable shaders, multiple rendertargets, non-power-of-two textures, two-sided stencil and pointsprites) have all been in Direct3D for about 2 years or even longer.
Perhaps the OpenGL implementation of these features is slightly different though, I don't know.
It doesn't seem like OpenGL 2.0 is revolutionary though, it seems it's mostly catching up with DirectX 9.0, or perhaps getting a bit ahead.

But there is nothing remotely like the (revolutionary) ideas we've seen so far for DirectX Next/Windows Graphics Foundation/whatever it's going to be called, so it's not going to be very future-proof I suppose.

 

[Popnfresh]

I believe the major reason for the OpenGL 2.0 branding is for software vendors.

The features in the press release have been available for some time in OpenGL (some before Direct3D, some after). These required using ARB or other extensions however and its difficult to put "Requires Videocard with ARB_vertex_shader, ARB_fragment_program, ... " on a box and expect the average person to understand (most wouldn't even know how to check) but its easy to put "Requires DirectX 9 videocard" on a box.

So, with OpenGL 2.0 you can just put "requires OpenGL 2.0 videocard" on your box of software, ATI can put "Supports OpenGL 2.0" on its box of hardware and everyone is happy.