"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:401f6e11@news.povray.org...
> Dan P <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> > You are reading my statements wrong. I never said I
> > preferred DirectX because it was an abstraction layer anywhere
>
>   If in a DirectX vs. OpenGL discussion you stress that "all I have said
> is that DirectX is a hardware abstraction layer" you are making an
> implication. Granted, you are not directly claiming anything about
> OpenGL, but there's no other way of understanding it than that you are.

No, Warp, I was responding to Thornsten saying everything I say is wrong.
Not that I have this burning, insecure need to be right, but I'm not Jesus
so don't punch me in the face. I listed out the few assertions I made that
weren't opinion and DirectX being an abstraction layer was one of many.

> > No kidding OpenGL is also an abstraction layer -- that's a given and
> > to assume I don't know that is pretty insulting.
>
>   I did not claim that you don't know what OpenGL is. I said that by
> accentuating something about DirectX you are indirectly making the
> claim that DirectX is better than OpenGL because of that thing.

Then you misunderstood. "Seek first to understand," is what Steven Covey
rights. Don't just go off on me until you understand what I'm saying. I am
saying that DirectX is a  hardware abstraction layer and, thus, is not just
for games. For example, I used Vegas Audio which uses DirectSound -- part of
DirectX. The fact that Thornsten says it is only for games shows his
ignorance about DirectX, but notice I didn't flame him because I have too
much tact.

>   If I'm not completely wrong, the main issue here was why use DirectX
> which is Windows-only when you can use OpenGL which is cross-platform.
> If you prefer DirectX you should presents arguments in its favor, and
> "it's a hardware abstraction layer" is certainly not one.

It wasn't. See next paragraph:

> > I was responding to
> > Thronsten's claim that everything I say is false by listing the only
> > assertions I made
>
>   I assume that Thorsten made the same assumption as I did: By presenting
> a pro-DirectX argument you are indirectly claiming that OpenGL lacks that
> feature.

No I'm not.

> > Don't assume what I say, read what I say.
>
>   It's the writer who is responsible of making his point clear to the
> reader. If you write your point unclearly and in a way which can cause
> confusion, it's your fault. Be careful about how you write things if
> you want to avoid misunderstandings.

If you don't understand, ask. Don't just go off and flame. Do you really
want me to pick apart what people can misunderstand about your messages?

> > You won't find many people who have hated Microsoft as much as I in the
> > past. I have progressed to hating all corporations -- something
opensource
> > folks LIKE MYSELF should respect -- and have decided to exploit
technologies
> > based on which would be best for my target audience. That's my decision
to
> > make -- it doesn't make me stupid, it is a choice, and I never stated
> > otherwise. I want to make a patch editor that uses everything that the
> > newest video cards has to offer and I am targetting Windows. I haven't
said
> > that doing otherwise is a bad idea -- in fact, I said that I'm happy
that
> > people /were/ doing that so that there were alternatives to my software.
>
>   What it seems to me is that you made a suggestion to the community,
> the community gave you feedback and you didn't like the feedback and
> got angry.

Oh, I got angry about somebody saying, "Everything this guy says is wrong,
don't listen to him." Imagine that. I'm not pro anything. I have no emotion
about hardware and software. I do have a bit of emotion when a certain prima
donna has to stroke his ego at my expense.

>   You should be aware that if you make a suggestion like "hey, let's make
> a very useful windows-only program for POV-Ray" you will most certainly
> get answers of the type "why should it be windows-only?". That's only
> normal and does not mean the community is despising your idea. It only
> means that since POV-Ray is a multi-platform software enjoyed by a wide
> variety of people using many different platforms, it's always nice to
> get third-party utility programs which also work on those several
> platforms.

__READ__ my post. I didn't even mention POV-Ray. POV-Ray was just going to
be one of the output formats. Yes, yes, it's on a POV-Ray group, but guess
what -- POV-Ray is just one of the tools we all use.

>   If the reason why you are making it windows-only is questionable (for
> example of the type "I will use DirectX because I like it more") people
> are going to complain. That's also normal and should not be taken as a
> personal offence. People are not saying "DirectX sucks" or "you are
stupid"
> by this, they are only complaining to the fact that you are limiting the
> portability of your program and thus depriving other platform users from
> the program for no good reason.

I didn't SAY I liked DirectX. DirectX is an ugly API. I just wanted to push
my hardware as far as possible and I can't generally do that with OpenGL.
And, I DID say I don't like SGI. Never said a thing about DirectX. I don't
in fact like SGI. That doesn't mean I like Microsoft. It's simple, simple
logic -- just because A is an apple doesn't mean B has to be an orange.

And, to your second point, "Do not take anything he says for fact; hardly
anything is. There is no point to argue on such a level and thus no reason
to respond to him. Do not take anything he says for fact; hardly anything
is. There is no point to argue on such a level and thus no reason to respond
to him." - Thornsten. Pretty hard to take that the right way. Talk about
your inferences!

Finally, I had said I was thrilled there was a cross-platform patch editor
out there because now I can make a platform-specific version without guilt.
I'm not depriving anybody: I'm looking for a niche. And, frankly, I don't
really care about depriving people of anything, particularly when they
wouldn't have what they would have been deprived of hadn't I written the
software in the first place. This isn't some evangelical journey I'm on to
get everybody to hug each other. I'm out to make a great piece of software
if my skills allow it.

>   If you make such suggestion you should be aware of the response the
> community will give you. Getting angry from the feedback is not wise.

This is something that analytical-types tend to misunderstand. I don't have
to be angry to make an assertion. Just remember: before you judge, seek
first to understand. Don't assume a person is unknowledgable and plonk them.
If you don't care, just don't respond. And, if you are feeling insecure
about yourself and you need people to think you're smart, don't do it at the
expense of others. You should have learned that in high school, whether you
were the bully or the victim. Really, I'm only miffed at Thornsten here,
whom I feel must have issues. Yes, Thornsten, I am impressed that you are
one of the four who worked on 3.5, but you're not god; nobody is, and
everybody deserves a level of respect. If you can't get that respect without
putting others down in your group, you should take a hard look in the
mirror.

Now, if you want to respond to this, fine, but this is all I really have the
energy or time to say on this issue.

Post a reply to this message