Jean-Sébastien Guay wrote:
Hi Robert,
I don't expect to win your over, but I sure want to correct things as
see as off target so that others in the community don't get the wrong
impression about stuff like OpenGL, etc.
I'm still not convinced that OpenGL itself can be considered a
"standard", but that's mostly semantics. opengl.org has "industry
standard" in the page title, but that term is mostly marketing and
doesn't mean much. MS could say Windows is the "industry standard" OS
because it's widely used. It doesn't make it an actual standard.
But anyways, if it's a standard then more power to them! They should put
"The standard for high performance graphics" instead of "industry
standard" IMHO, but that's still just semantics.
I hate it when I start arguing semantics and it appears that I'm going
against something I'm actually quite fond of and use everyday. Sorry for
going off the mark (once again).
J-S
I guess the rest of us spectators are just confused about what OpenGL
would have to do to become a standard using your metrics. Where is the
bar set and why are they not reaching it?
-Paul
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
