-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Steve Hosgood schrieb: > I was deliberately thinking that you **don't** want to use OpenGL for > that sort of thing. The GPU has enough work to do rendering the view out > of the windows, it would be a waste of its time rendering instruments > for the fascia - they're always going to be displayed "straight on" with > flat lighting. It's just a simple animation job for a normal window.
That's why the future of the 2D desktops will be rendered by the 3D hardware (Windows Vista, the OpenGL based X-Server, ...). A while ago 2D desktops would profit from the graphic accelerator graphic cards. They had chips that could draw very fast lines, etc. pp. But today we've got 3D accelerators that can do even more. They are even programmable. So the new OSes use that functionality for a fast visual feedback. So it doesn't make sense to pass the rendering of some instruments back to the OS. It will just give it back to the graphics adapter - with the aditional overhead of going through the OS. The only alternative to reduce the load on the GPU is to draw it with the CPU "by hand" (note: this is really CPU intensive!). But if the CPU idles too long (what I really doubt) we could easily increase the FDM resolution, AI traffic, ... CU, Christian -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32) iD8DBQFDkC5JlhWtxOxWNFcRArQ2AJ0Y9W2z2ZlrQ3615T3LVUGOv3T10QCgq1Ac Lv9HbthiUs1IqdPu6uq5ZNo= =rjDA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
