PDA

View Full Version : Future of MS



Barjor
02-12-2002, 03:41 PM
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-835433.html

Managed API?..nah I don't like that

Invincible
02-12-2002, 04:12 PM
what exactly is meant by "managed memory"?

new graphics system! does that mean I might as well forget about learning DX?

Barjor
02-12-2002, 04:19 PM
Mangaed memory means that the OS stops you from doing bad things with pointers and don't allow you to allocate and free memory at your will. And this can be really good sometimes. But if they add garbage collection and managed memory to the API I get concerned that you would get problems with alot of code and loos power as a programmer. I might be wrong though. I don't know what they mean with new graphic sysyem but my guess would be that it have to do with some intelectual propert they recently bought from Sun(maker of OpenGL).

Invincible
02-12-2002, 04:42 PM
Open GL! bah!

Sun! They designed the Java Platform too! ergh...


As an aside: I feel like I'm in a permenant stasis because Developers like microsoft and sun keep revamping langauges. I can barely get started learning one language before they decide it's not good enough. Where am I supposed to start?

Barjor
02-12-2002, 04:58 PM
I agree..I feel exactly the same way. I am just getting a understanding of C++ Api and MFC and now that is getting pushed to the side for C# and .NET. Ok maybe not that dramatic but sometimes I get that fealing.

no-one
02-13-2002, 12:26 AM
garbage collection is exactly why java sucks, they take the power form you, its like haveing the Government cut your steak for you since you might hurt yourself with the knife.

Basically it comes down to this THEY OWN YOU, you depend on them because you can't do it yourself anymore and therefore your stuck to either waste money and resources trying to learn what you should know(and what will then will no longer be norm and not easily found) and be allowed to do, or to stick with them.

its basically about taking away your power and making you work only for them. its like with Government, and well everything else too.

bla bla bla, nobody cares anyway, why do i waste my time...

>Open GL! bah!

bah nothing, Direct-3D is not up to par and MS knows it, thats why they're trying to buy GL out.

Invincible
02-13-2002, 12:31 AM
Direct-3D is not up to par and MS knows it, thats why they're trying to buy GL out.

Then why are so many MMORPG and other game developers using exclusively DirectX?

:confused:

no-one
02-13-2002, 12:51 AM
>Then why are so many MMORPG and other game developers using exclusively DirectX?

ok, there are a few reasons, i've explaind this a bazillion times already.

1. MONEY + BS + Fraud/Contract Violations + Ignorance = Direct-X Usage

Money, we all know MS has it and uses it to their advantage very well i might add.(as is their right)

BS, the lied extensively about the capabilities of the two when Direct-3D was made.

the next ones multipart,

Fraud,first before Direct-3D MS had an agreement with SGI to implement and update GL and distribute it with ever release of windows. when Direct-3D emerged and Direct-3D and GL first began competing all was in software, hardware support was just beginning, so MS in all their fradulent evil genius provided a purposly buggy and slow software implemetation of GL breaking their agreement with SGI, to "show" it was inferior slow and incabable of matchin Direct-3D

Result, Video Card vendors see this and jumped on it believing that the test was true,

Result, Video Cards hav hardware Direct-X and no GL support

Result, GL looks like **** and everone SAYS DIRECT-3D RULES MS IS THE BEST!!!

Result, SGI gets ........ed and release their own implementation of GL for windows IT KICKS ASS, MS is show as evil and is forced to wright a half decent implementation (THAT IT HAS NEVER UPDATED ALSO BREAKING WITH THEIR AGREEMENT!), so eventually SGI gets so ........ed they give up on software GL for windows all together, and leave it to hardware, which just now is fully supporting GL,

Summary, due to MS's Trickery Direct-X got a huge headstart, even though OpenGL was Made LONG before.

Ignorance, MS's Disinformation people have done such a good job that many still believe that Direct-3D is faster and can do more, THIS IS ALSO BELONGS IN THE BS SECTION!(more MS BS
"OpenGL is really hard to learn" its vice versa GL is easy D-3D is hard), on an even implementation although the design goals were completely different(eg. GL(good looks then speed) D3D is just the opposite), OpenGL will still out perform Direct-X.

the tables are now turning and the truth is getting out, there are some big changes comming for GL(and i mean SOON) and there is no way Direct-X will be cabable of keeping up, people are switching overm Mixing the API's instead.

Invincible
02-13-2002, 01:42 AM
The further I delve into industry standards the more shocked and appalled I become. Thanks to $$ there will never be one one way of doing things.

In many ways, open GL seems like the answer. But it sounds so much like Java, it scares me. Code that works across multiple platforms is great, but every time a developer releases open source microsoft wants to buy it up. Why? Because it's true, they are anti-competitive. But what's wrong with that? There has to be an industry leader to set standards, and Microsoft has proven their ability for compatibility and adaptation an many occasions.

As a new developer, I don't want to have to worry about what the next developer may or may not release. I want one developer to keep things in uniform order. Now, because the developers of open GL have stirred up enough BS to scare microsoft, I may have to learn another API.

It doesn't really matter who was defrauded by who, that's just business. I'm sure all parties are to blame. Microsoft isn't the only devil out there. And I'm not saying I'm a microsoft fanboy either, but there have to be to be standards, and with everyone competing for the liscense to those standards it's never going to happen.

no-one
02-13-2002, 02:07 AM
excelent point, im sorry if i sound like an anti MS fanatic, but because recent developements and the more i read about them the more angry i get at what the have done and continue to do.

> But it sounds so much like Java, it scares me.

its nothing like Java, its not made by Sun either its SGI that made it, its extremely easy to use and updates are coming that should grant even more power to the developer.

give it a try, but in the end it is as i have stated before its whats right for you, and what your developing.

Invincible
02-13-2002, 02:40 AM
Well of course I intend to try it :D

Anyway, if the rumor is true and directX is out the window(s), then I guess I'd better learn it.

But that is all it is, a rumor. The article only said "a new graphics" system. It said nothing about Open GL. Besides, just because microsoft implements the technology, dosen't mean the libraries or any of the keywords will be left intact. Kinda like what they did to Java with C# :eek:

I'll admitt, they are ruthless. No one ever got ahead by being nice all the time. This is a market economy ;)

BTW ... developers, developers, developers, developers....

[rolls on the floor laughing]

I plan on attending the .NET release event in KC. It'll be my first microsoft event, and I'm very excited about it.

no-one
02-13-2002, 03:11 PM
>Anyway, if the rumor is true and directX is out the window(s),
then I guess I'd better learn it.

i don't know if i would say out the window exactly since MS has invested a little to much time and money to just let it die, i doubt they will let it fall that far behind.(if they can help it that is)

you should see some pick-ups in D3D fairly quickly after this happens.

Troll_King
02-13-2002, 06:39 PM
I'll tell you what managed languages are all about. You know Win9X? This is unmanaged. Compare that with WinNT. Which one is better.

SilentStrike
02-13-2002, 07:27 PM
OpenGL is portable in the sense that C++ is portable, in the source level. Programs need to be recompiled to work on different platforms. Java is binary compatible, after compiling it once, you should be able to run the code on any platform with a java virtual machine, which is responsible for executing the code.

Source level compatibility costs little in terms of run time speed, binary compatibilty is usually a lot more costly.

Invincible
02-13-2002, 11:08 PM
OpenGL is portable in the sense that C++ is portable, in the source level.
How portable is my question. I'm still trying to understand all this confusing mess of portability. I guess i'm not alone because it seems to be a big issue with everyone.

Now, I understand how Java works. I thought this was how GL worked to, but I see I was wrong. So, let's say I wrote and and compiled GL code in VC 6, how difficult would it be to convert it for other operating systems? Is directX portable at all? If so, which would be easier to convert?

Thanks in advance, invincible

Brian
02-14-2002, 01:50 AM
Direct X is only officially for windows. That's why it's a pain in the ass to get any games for Linux, because Windows is in bed with the game designers getting them to make in Direct X, and this is a **** to emulate.

Invincible
02-14-2002, 02:02 AM
Well, I guess I knew that... not sure why I even asked. Just making sure I guess. That does suck. That's probably why they're planning on a new graphics system. They seem to have just come to realization (.NET) that there's a whole other market out there for their software via alternative operating systems. Either that, or like I said earlier, they've been scared into it by companies like Sun and SGI (or perhaps the govt') who support multiple platforms. Which is the way it should be.

Justin W
02-14-2002, 04:17 AM
The main problem with Opengl is that there is not really any liberys that take care of everything else a game uses as nice as DX does.

[ ;) ]
*cough* *Allegro* (http://www.talula.demon.co.uk/allegro/) *cough* True cross-platform. Recompile without changing a single line of code. Stays up-to-date with whatever the newest technology is without an API change (though a semi-needed independent API change may be comming up in a year or so, but nothing major). AllegGL works like a charm.
[\ ;) ]

Invincible
02-14-2002, 07:45 AM
Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place, but the best game I could find (some weirdness called Mookie) written with the Allegro API had all the appeal of Atari as far as graphics are concerned. And it was supposedly written for windows under DirectX. 16-bit hobbyists? eh...

However, OpenGL has really caught my attention. Check this out:

Ambient Pshychosis at

http://www.gamedev.net/opengl/files.html

Govtcheez
02-14-2002, 07:48 AM
> Direct X is only officially for windows.

And why shouldn't it be? The engine for my GM car's not gonna fit in a Ford.

Doesn't matter, though, because:
> Of coarse for an amiture game programer, as well as someone who wants people with graphic cards that are not the newest, both off them offer more then enough fetures.

Exactly. Everyone complains about the capabilities of one or the other, when the vast majority of us (maybe even all of us) aren't doing things that are really going to challenge either API.

Invincible
02-14-2002, 07:51 AM
I'll drive the porchse you drive the pinto :p

no-one
02-14-2002, 03:21 PM
>
How portable is my question. I'm still trying to understand all this confusing mess of portability. I guess i'm not alone because it seems to be a big issue with everyone.

So, let's say I wrote and and compiled GL code in VC 6, how difficult would it be to convert it for other operating systems?
<

OpenGL code is 100% portable all you must change is the OS specific program code such as the windowing system input and the like, unless your using glut that is.

As far as i know pretty much what you have to do is recompile it for the specified platform.

>Is directX portable at all? If so, which would be easier to convert?

no, and OpenGL.

SilentStrike
02-14-2002, 03:32 PM
SDL, the open source and portable DirectX "alternative". It supports sound, has better window management than glut (can force a full screen), and has better input handling (support for joysticks, etc).

http://www.libsdl.org

Speaking of which, I recently found a small bug in the source code to one of the example programs in an SDL library, sent the author of the library (who works at Blizzard... the Blizzard), and he responded with this in email I recieved yesterday.



Subj:

Re: Trivial bug in chat.c in SDL_net library
Date:

Wed, 13 Feb 2002 1:24:16 PM Eastern Standard Time
From:

Sam Lantinga <slouken@devolution.com>
To:

RPGnMets@aol.com

Thanks! I've added your fix to CVS...



See ya,

-Sam Lantinga, Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment

Govtcheez
02-14-2002, 03:38 PM
Excellent, SS! Add that to your CV as "Troubleshooting for Blizzard"

SilentStrike
02-14-2002, 03:47 PM
Heh, well, its not actually affliated with Blizzard, its his own project, but he works at Blizzard as well.

Troll_King
02-14-2002, 05:47 PM
Without the managed environment you would not be able to have language interoperability in a pure OOP environment. No manifest tied to the IL .exe that enables other programs to share classes and methods. You would not have the benefit of .NET my services and you will be back in the days of having deployment snags such as having to register components manually. I can see how you might not need it for console applications and linux, otherwise managed code is the way to go.

DavidP
02-14-2002, 06:13 PM
go SDL!

easy to use....incredibly portable...lots of nice features...very fast...works incredibly well with OpenGL.

Justin W
02-15-2002, 10:35 AM
[Allegro has] all the appeal of Atari as far as graphics are concerned.

I'm unfamiliar with the game you cited, but Allegro is such a beautiful thing because it doesn't compete with anything. It doesn't even try to do graphics etc. Everything you see is a DirectX and OpenGL mixture (or others on other platforms). Allegro is a wrapper. It is designed to make things like graphics, sound, input, compressed data files, and 3D standard for the programmer. When new technology comes about, it is plugged into Allegro, and you don't have to learn yet another interface.

Ports of Allegro are not only spreading across platforms, but even across languages. Version 4.0 just recently was released, and it represents the first really polished version of the lib. It is "giftware", so it is impossible to say who uses it, but I'm sure some amateur programmers advertising their use of it will come out with something to impress you in the not too distant future.

In the mean time, check out the API, and decide if you like it better than knowing the eight different library APIs it encompasses. You can always mix and match Allegro with any of them if you desire. Or just learn them, it can be quite beneficial. However, when I want to develop something quickly - especially something cross platform, I'm going to be using Allegro.

The future of Allegro looks very bright, including gaming console and PDA ports. The idea is really similar to .NET, but you can use the language compiler you want and it compiles to machine code (which some of .NET will do as well).

Sorry for the lateness of this response, hadn't read the thread for a while. ;)

Justin W
02-15-2002, 10:40 AM
P.S. If there is a real weakness to Allegro, it is that the API is a tad dated in look. It relies on variables like mouse_x, which just isn't acceptable really. The next version of Allegro is going to address just that, and change the naming around a bit so that it can't get easily confused with other code. A simple current fix is to write your program in an OO fashion, but there aren't too many things to avoid really, so it is still pretty easy to come up with unique, small names.