If this was done, wouldn't that mean that application developers would have to target the code for it and that the OpenGL apps not work with such drivers? Also, apps that use such graphics wouldn't work with OpenGL drivers, right?
Originally Posted by allquixotic
When you allow people to download it, from countries where the patent is valid, on a non 'try it out to see if it works'-way.
Originally Posted by Yfrwlf
They can still sue you!
From what I hear, the better handling of OGL ES is also due in part to the lack of stodgy legacy vendors that seem to have a lot of influence on the normal OpenGL process.
Originally Posted by elanthis
Weren't many of the ideas in OGL ES originally slated (in some form) for OpenGL 3.0, but then that plan shot down by vendor complaints (thus the semi-scandal when OGL 3.0 was released)?
The country they were in would have to be the one to carry out the suing, so the goal is to live in (or at least host information in) countries which don't allow, at the very least, stupid math/art/programming patents.
Originally Posted by plonoma
There was one vendor in particular that shot about everything down.
Originally Posted by snogglethorpe
That vendor has left Khronos and it's name is Microsoft (no kidding !!!).
This is why Khronos had such a crappy history.
And after the release of OpenGL 3.0 Microsoft left the group.
An from then khronos could release some decent versions.
But they should really find a system where they can drop old stuff.
e.g. using context creation calls with major version number in so you can change stuff without breaking old stuff and the drivers can support both.
Microsoft left in 2003 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenGL_...e_Review_Board ), that was even before OpenGL 2.0...
Tags for this Thread