PureBasic Forums - English

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by koehler.



OpenGL is dead? Quick! Someone tell iD and the rest of the world.

I don't know about anyone else, but I d/l'd the Ogre demo's from SourceForge, and all I can say is WOW.

Fred, I think if you are going to go with OpenGL for Linux, that you re-use that work and allow OpenGL to be used in Windows.
Even on my lowly G4 4200, the OpenGL demo's make DX look sick.

BTW, I think most BB users would find having Ogre 'build-in' to be quite attractive.

As far as having Fred compact the Ogre engine down to 1MB, please put down the crack pipe
There are a large number of people coding Ogre, and it really is rather impossible to expect to have Fred work on PureBasic x.xx, -and- recode Ogre to 1/2 its size, unless you want to forgo any new updates for the next year or so.

I fail to see how some people can take such an attitude with Fred, when he seems to be making a valiant effort to get PB users a good 3D environment. Yes, if Fred was charging $495 for PureBasic, and 3D was a main selling poiont, I could see the moaning.

For the spare change he is charging, and considering all the updates and personalized customer service he is giving, that is frankly unheard of, even with Blitz, I think some people should be ashamed of themselves.

I will be happy to give Fred my money shortly.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.

At least a comment which goes in the right direction . That's almost exactly how I see it. Thanks !

Fred - AlphaSND

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by TheBeck.

@fred
Thanks for all of your hard work.

@koehler
I agree 100%

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Kale.

i know this is way off topic but OMFG have you seen fr-019 on http://www.farb-rausch.de

--Kale

Getting used to PureBasic and falling in Love!

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by NIN.

I realized the first version of 3D in PB would NOT be enough to write a game, or do much at all with, but I also realize it must have taken a lot of work to get going, and it is quite an achievement. This release was a good way to test the commands, and I am sure future updates will greatly expand PB3D options.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by dmoc.

News from http://www.opengl.org...

New NVIDIA and ATI OpenGL extension specifications enhance OpenGL functionality
01/24/03 New OpenGL extensions from NVIDIA and ATI are now listed at the bottom of the OpenGL extension registry (http://oss.sgi.com/projects/ogl-sample/registry/). These extensions support floating-point textures, floating-point frame buffers, pixel data range, CineFX fragment programs, CineFX vertex programs with branching, half-precision floating-point formats, and more. These extensions make OpenGL functionally on par with DirectX 9.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by koehler.


Yep, OpenGL is not dead. I really look faorward to the possability of us being able to use Ogre in OpenGL in our code, so that we can be more portable.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by David.

And it's obviously fred will enhance and optimize the 3D engine in the near future, what I want nore is actually Half-Life BSP support, not Q3."

I think it's not that easy. Mark (the man behind Blitz Basic) did it for Blitz3D, but we could not use it cuz looks like there is some copyright stuff.. It's something about the VIS system.. don't know much about it.. but u may find more info in the old messages of the Blitz3D forum (http://www.blitzbasic.com)

Cya,
David.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by MrVainSCL.

Hi dmoc,
as i understand right... the extensions you talk about are software extensions (plugins), right? Exactly here is the problem i think... All modern graphic-cards i know dont have as in old days an OGL chipset on card... Today the graphic card drivers have to emulate the OGL stuff... ;( I know some people (even with very modern graphic cards) having or have had big problems with a lot OGL based stuff (like big known comercial games)... damn slow, not playable on there machines! The only way to get the stuff nearly smooth working, was to install newest drivers (Detonator) MS certificated!

I think we should support DX for Windows and OGL for other platforms, like Linux, Mac and co! Between... i think when Fred will support Orge for Windows/Linux and other OS in future... so i think the commands for any system will be the same to use ORGE, isnt it? It so, we only have to call the PureBasic commands and this commands are using on Windows DX based Orge and on other OS OGL based Orge... On this way, there shouldn´t be sooo much problems to part over..!?

I vote DX for windows and OGL for other systems


greetz
MrVainSCL! aka Thorsten

PIII450, 256MB Ram, 80GB HD + 6,4 GB, RivaTNT, DirectX9.0, SB AWE64, Win2000 + all Updates...

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by dmoc.

If Fred can make OGL/DX an option then everyone will be happy. For myself (and I suspect many others) OGL will be the preferred choice. I'm not a 100% certain (well maybe 99.99% but apart from specialist hardware I don't think there is such a thing as an OGL or DX "chipset". For sure they are designed with API compliancy a big consideration but it's at best a chicken-n-egg situation. More likely the gfx chips features are driven by the demands of applications and of course API's, usually, simply provide a much needed buffer to keep things manageable for both the application designers and chip designers.

I don't know where the idea comes from that OGL (or DX for that matter) is "emulated". It may be the case but as far as I am aware this concept only applied to 3rd party drivers specifically created support OGL/DX *on top of drivers* that only supported OGL or DX but not both. I think that situation only existed as long as manufacturers refused to support both. Maybe it is true that manufacturers today optimise driver for only one API but in my tests OGL has always been faster. But my main two arguments for OGL over DX is that OGL is multi-platform and not supceptible to the whims of MS marketing. I also took a look at both a couple of years ago when I first started to learn 3D programming and OGL was just so much "nicer" to code.

It would be both fun and educational to have competitions coding the same app/demo in OGL/DX. Maybe when Orge is a bit more developed (and assuming the choice of API is ours). In the mean time I'll continue to tinker with OGL and hopefully post some of the results. Before xmas I created a PB-OGL program to grab the desktop and turn it into a waving flag. Standard stuff but I wanted to see how fast PB was. I'll clean it up and post it soon, and maybe someone can do a DX one for comparison.

PS: Have you seen the OGL demo/s on the resource site?

PPS: "Extensions" are OGL's std mechanism for manufacturers to extend the API to make better use of their chips. Their use is pretty common and very necessary for example for things like handling compressed textures.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by THCM.

Hey MrVain,

i think you just missed the point in this discussion.... Fred is using an external OpenSource 3D-ENGINE, because you can't programm a fine Basic-Language and a complete 3D-Engine at the same time. If Fred wanted to include Low-Level DirectX or OpenGL commands, he had done it before. My point is: is anybody here capable coding a complete 3D-Engine with all Data-Structures, Collisions, CVS-Trees, etc. in Purebasic using DirectX or OpenGL? Even if Fred would help you with loading commands for Objects etc. it would be a pain in the ass. Why do you think that professional portable 3D-Engines cost so much money? Why are most of the 3D-Engines using the BSP code of ID-Software? Blitz and Darkbasic are using theses technologies, but you can't sell your software using property of ID-Software.

Why is John Carmack still using OpenGL? Just read his .plan updates...

In the past i coded a few 40k Intros on Amiga (Crazy and Neoplasia). Everything i did in 3D (in 40k) is handtuned assembler and optimized for this special case.

My opinion Fred is on the right way... the actual 3D-Engine is quite capable, but not too good integrated in Purebasic. I'm just waiting until Purebasic has everything integrated i need and then i start playing around with it. It's small and fast and i don't have to struggle with C++ or C#. I think it's the right Language if you need the speed of C and want to use inline assembly.

So MrVain if you think that Blitz or Darkbasic are better, then use it. I bought Darkbasic Pro after Purebasic, but totally disappointing.

Bye, yours sincerely

The Human Code Machine of Masters' Design Group
CBM rulez forever!



The Human Code Machine / Masters' Design Group

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by MrVainSCL.

Hi THCM,
I know that Fred using an open source engine called "ORGE". Due fact that ORGE is DX and OGL based (both supporting), i have had the idea to support the "DX based ORGE engine" for Windows systems and "OGL based ORGE engine" for linux and maybe future purebasic supported systems.

The Idea: Fred could use for DX and OGL based engine, the same commands... so you can port your source without any problems and if you run it on Windows, it will use DirectX and if you run it on Linux and co, it will support OGL... but maybe there would be an optional way, to select between OGL and DX engine (if you run it on windows)...?

I have often heared by some scene coders, that OGL is much more easy to code and so most people starting 3D with OGL instead of DX, due fact its most harder to code but DX is today in Windows dominated world a standart and why are so many demo groups are moving from OGL to DX? I think the only positiv point on OGL is, that it makes easy to port your 3D OGL stuff to other systems without writing all new. On the other side, i know two persons worked @ software company "Software 2000" (some germans may know this company) and this guys told/showed me another side of OGL and DX! The problem that so many 3D games supporting OGL instead of DX, is that the engines are based on OGL when the coders started with it... In today times it would need to much time and costs to much money to rewrote a complete (OGL used) engine to 100% DX!

Have you ever read the big discussion about mark´s planes about the new blitz which should based on OGL? A lot users dont wanted to see OGL... they wanted DX for Windows... (havent continued to read the disussion, due fact i only use PB now)

I never sayed nor thought that DarbBasic, BlitzBasic is better then PureBasic... The only think i must really say... In BlitzBasic are some more 3D/Network/UDP commands... But i know that Fred just started with 3D and for the beginning its a nice start! So lets things go on and let us wait for future versions!



greetz
MrVainSCL! aka Thorsten

PIII450, 256MB Ram, 80GB HD + 6,4 GB, RivaTNT, DirectX9.0, SB AWE64, Win2000 + all Updates...

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Danilo.

This discussion here is very boring and endlessly, but:

> I know that Fred using an open source engine called "ORGE".

Its called 'OGRE' - Object-oriented Graphics Rendering Engine

> The Idea: Fred could use for DX and OGL based engine, the same commands...

No new idea. I think Fred knows himself what he wants.

cya,
...Danilo
(registered PureBasic user)

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by koehler.


Danilo,

I think the point here is, the people using PB want to know more about what Fred is planning on doing. And, as supporters and customers, they have every right to ask, and if its too 'boring' for you to read, then you needn't reply.

For some of us, having OpenGL available -IS- a very big deal.
Does anyone care to stop and think why Blitz is going towards OpenGL now, and away from a perfectly good, nay, some would say awesome implementation in DX?

Asking Fred about which way he is going, or why, or requesting he take something into consideration is not in any way 'telling Fred what to do'.

In business, and that is what this is, its called customer service. Look at Dark Basic and see what happens when you don't have it, and Blitz Basic when you do.

Pure Basic is somewhere in the middle, although in many areas Fred far exceeds Blitz in his perpetual replies to people here.

Fred, if possible, could we get some sort of a "Grand Vision" sort of update?
Perhaps something along the lines of what you expect to accomplish/focus on for this quarter, is it Ogre, or Basic command enhancements, etc, etc.

Thank you.

--
1980 Applesoft Basic, '81 6502 Assembler, '82 Pascal, '96 C, '00 Blitz Basic
2003 Pure Basic - History does repeat itself.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.

If you browse this forums, you will see than I've answered a lot to many post, and if it's not a customer serviec, I don't know what it is. The stuff about OpenGL and DX is no sense to me as I have already said at the beginning of this post, OGRE support them both so it's (almost) no work for me to switch if needed. I have said no about it ? The fact is than actually the OGRE main developper use DX to develop, so it's the fastest/stable implementation for now.

Fred - AlphaSND