So I've just bought a laptop (Samsung "Black Magic", read my blog for a couple more details) and it has Vista Home Premium. Needless to say, I didn't have a choice (XP would've been my first).
Anyway, I thought I'd get myself better acquainted with Vista and started reading the wiki article on it (as well as the various changes articles) and came across this disturbing snippet:
I almost cried. Then I realised that it's probably not as bad as I think. Then I decided to ask you guysAccording to a Microsoft blog, there are three choices for OpenGL implementation on Vista. An application can use the default implementation, which translates OpenGL calls into the Direct3D API and is frozen at OpenGL version 1.4, or an application can use an Installable Client Driver (ICD), which comes in two flavors: legacy and Vista-compatible. A legacy ICD, the kind already provided by independent hardware vendors targeting Windows XP, will disable the Desktop Window Manager, noticeably degrading user experience under Windows Aero. A Vista-compatible ICD takes advantage of a new API, and will be fully compatible with the Desktop Window Manager. At least two primary vendors, ATI and NVIDIA, are expected to provide full Vista-compatible ICDs in the near future. However, hardware overlay is not supported, because it is considered as an obsolete feature in Vista. ATI and NVIDIA strongly recommend using compositing desktop/FBOs for same functionality.
My number one question is regarding the first "choice" - are there any performance losses? I'm assuming this translation happens at runtime?
Argh maybe I'm fretting over nothing. I just don't want to end up having to port my engine to some Microsoft-raped system of doing things or end up having it only run on Vista. If all else fails I could port it to Linux...
EDIT: It's only just occured to me to google "opengl vista"... sorry. Remove me mods? Well, not me, this post. 'Cause I like coming here... and stuff.. oh, nevermind.