On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Brian Paul wrote:
>
> It's also my experience with many implementations of OpenGL that drivers
> lean toward quality in this scenario.
I think that's true, but I think that's partly because of the fact that
most OpenGL implementations are geared toward things like CAD design etc,
where the difference between a 60fps and a 20fps (or sometimes even 5fps!)
framerate simply doesn't matter.
I personally believe that that market is a niche market that quite frankly
doesn't matter from a technology standpoint any more (*). It's no longer
driving technology, and hasn't been for a few years now. It's just
coasting along, and the _real_ technology driver today is clearly
interactive 3D end-user applications (in other words: games and eyecandy).
So you shouldn't look at what other OpenGL implementations do - it's not
that interesting. You should look at what Windows drivers do. And they
_all_ have user-settable preferences for things like texture quality etc.
Simply because they need to. Never mind the differences between DirectX
and OpenGL.
Linus
(*) Don't get me wrong. CAD etc matters a lot to a number of users, and
I'm not saying that it is unimportant in itself. I _am_ saying that it is
unimportant from a technical development viewpoint, simply because it's
not where innovation and performance matters any more.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Visual Studio.NET
comprehensive development tool, built to increase your
productivity. Try a free online hosted session at:
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?micr0003en
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
