>> Hypothetical situation: As I see it, if Microsoft decided to make a
>> standards committee for Direct3D and other companies joined, it would
>> be just as much a standard for graphics as OpenGL is. None of the two
>> would be able to say they're *the* standard for graphics unless some
>> independent body decided that it was one or the other...
>
> Yes, if MS did that they would have a competing open standard.
> Though none of us would probably care much since the earth would
> have shifted off of its axis and hurtled into the sun. ;)
A similar situation happened in the early 90s. Many companies got together
and formed a PEX consortium to create a graphics standard for X Windows. As
a result, SGI redesigned IrisGL and OpenGL was born. Many companies joined
on the bandwagon -- ironically, even Microsoft was an ARB member.
The analogy is as follows:
THEN NOW
The consortium solution PEX OpenGL
The proprietary solution IrisGL Direct3D
Where this analogy falls apart is that PEX ("the consortium solution") was a
latecomer onto a 3D graphics scene already dominated by IrisGL ("the
proprietary solution"), compared to today, in which Direct3D ("the
proprietary solution") is the latecomer, with OpenGL ("the consortium
solution") the dominant player.
Sorry I keep taking us down memory lane, but I think it's important to look
at parallels with historical events.
Just call me...
-Old Man Martz
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
