ok ... OK.   Start a new thread.
I started this one days ago, and let's end it already.

Period.

Post a reply to this message

Dan P <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> I thought somebody said pushing megabytes of data through STDOUT was a bad
> idea, but I might have misread.

  You did. I said writing megabytes of data to stderr is a bad idea
because stderr is unbuffered.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Dan P <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> I'm not making a game with DirectX -- I'm making a patch editor that will
> hopefully come to fruition some day. DirectX is generally used for games,
> yet it is actually just an abstraction layer that lets me exploit the
> hardware capabilites of my equipment. That's why the called it DirectX -
> Direct for direct to hardware, X to mean all the different hardware (X is a
> variable). I also think that it will be easier to distribute and install the
> editor using DirectX over OpenGL.

  You should perhaps get some information about OpenGL instead of basing
your opinions in prejudgements and assumptions. Writing text like the
one above is only causing more knowledgeable people to die from laughter.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Dan P <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> > Remember that there is more than gaming.  And DirectX, from a programmer's
> > perspective is an impossible API.  It just changes 90% with each version.

> Evolution.

  Nope. It means that MS is unbelievably bad at designing APIs.

  And by the way, have you ever compared Direct3D code to equivalent
OpenGL code?

-- 
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Dan P <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> Facts I have stated:

> 1. SGI owns the trademark to OpenGL.

  You seem to imply that Microsoft does not own trademarks to DirectX.

> 2. DirectX is a hardware abstraction layer that lets me exploit the
> capabilities of my hardware for speed.

  You seem to imply that OpenGL is not a hardware abstraction layer.

> 3. DirectX isn't only for games.

  Quite clearly you are missing the point of the original reply.

> 4. .NET is a wonderful thing.

  And how is this related to anything?
  That statement just sounds like you are victim of hype.

-- 
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Dan P <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> I fully support Thorsten in this claim. Now, Thorsten is going to teach you
> all why I don't have a technical background by debunking what I have said:

  You are missing the point. By what you have said you are indirectly
implying things (such as that DirectX is not trademarked, OpenGL is not
an abstraction layer to use hardware, etc).

  If you say (in practice) "I prefer DirectX because it's an abstraction
layer to use hardware" you are practically saying "OpenGL is not an
abstraction layer to use hardware and does not allow me to use it".
This of course is a laughable claim.
  Understand now?

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

In article <401c0f53$1@news.povray.org>,
 "Dan P" <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote:

> Okay, I'm admittedly at fault here because I used an antiquated phrase to
> start that footnote and I can see where some people might not understand
> what "Don't give me not guff" might mean.

Oh, I understood that perfectly. However, you're making what IMO is such 
a bad decision that I felt I had to warn you anyway...if someone points 
a gun at their foot, I'm going to tell them point it elsewhere, whether 
or not they say they know what they're doing.


> DirectX is the future, not OpenGL, based on two things: 1. Microsoft is
> realizing that their gaming business very important and they tend to do well
> on things they find important (think IDEs), and 2. I have been in SGI and I
> have reason not to have confidence in that company based on personal,
> anecdotal experience.

DirectX is certainly not the future. Gaming is unimportant overall, and 
has very unusual needs that aren't helpful to most 3D applications. It's 
you're decision, but must warn you that I see it as an extremely bad 
one. At least make sure you abstract the code so you can easily drop in 
an OpenGL replacement...

-- 
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg>
http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message

Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in
news:cjameshuff-3EE179.12061601022004@news.povray.org: 


> 
> DirectX is certainly not the future. Gaming is unimportant overall,
> and has very unusual needs that aren't helpful to most 3D
> applications. It's you're decision, but must warn you that I see it as
> an extremely bad one. At least make sure you abstract the code so you
> can easily drop in an OpenGL replacement...
> 

Another point.

DirectX = Windows only
Open GL = Windows/Mac/Linux/Unix/...

Keep in mind that Windows is not the platform of choice for most graphics 
professionals.


-- 
Tom
_________________________________
The Internet Movie Project
http://www.imp.org/

Post a reply to this message

I've decided to ultimately answer this thread by writing the software.
This is my last reply on this opinion thread.

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:401cced2@news.povray.org...
> Dan P <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> > I fully support Thorsten in this claim. Now, Thorsten is going to teach
you
> > all why I don't have a technical background by debunking what I have
said:
>
>   You are missing the point. By what you have said you are indirectly
> implying things (such as that DirectX is not trademarked, OpenGL is not
> an abstraction layer to use hardware, etc).
>
>   If you say (in practice) "I prefer DirectX because it's an abstraction
> layer to use hardware" you are practically saying "OpenGL is not an
> abstraction layer to use hardware and does not allow me to use it".
> This of course is a laughable claim.
>   Understand now?

Okay, wait a second. I'm breaking my silence on this because I just happen
to be in the mood to. You are reading my statements wrong. I never said I
preferred DirectX because it was an abstraction layer anywhere -- look at
the posts and /read/ what they /actually/ say and not what you /want/ them
to say. No kidding OpenGL is also an abstraction layer -- that's a given and
to assume I don't know that is pretty insulting. I was responding to
Thronsten's claim that everything I say is false by listing the only
assertions I made, all of which are demonstrably true. In fact, I haven't
said anything false at all. Don't assume what I say, read what I say. You're
judging me based on emotion and making assumptions about how I feel.

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.

In short, I would like to respectfully ask you to treat me with respect if
you expect respect back from me. And get a dictionary and look up the word
"tact".

Post a reply to this message