OpenGL under threat?

Hey cadsters,
Here is some news that has come out of Siggraph 2005. I have cut/pasted
this from the OpenGL.org discussion boards. It sounds like CAD graphics
might take a performance hit with the Aeroglass implementation in Vista and
that we could do our bit by voicing objections through Solidworks on behalf
of 250,000 users.
regards
neil


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft's current plan for OpenGL on Windows Vista is to layer OpenGL over
Direct3D in order to use OpenGL with a composited desktop to obtain the
Aeroglass experience. If an OpenGL ICD is run - the desktop compositor will
switch off - significantly degrading the user experience.

In practice this means for OpenGL under Aeroglass:
a.. OpenGL performance will be significantly reduced - perhaps as much as
50%

b.. OpenGL on Windows will be fixed at a vanilla version of OpenGL 1.4

c.. No extensions will be possible to expose future hardware innovations
It would be technically straightforward to provide an OpenGL ICD within the
full Aeroglass experience without compromising the stability or the security
of the operating system. Layering OpenGL over Direct3D is a policy more than
a technical decision

What can you do?
1.. Write to your preferred ISV, hardware developer or OEM and tell them
to bring this up with Microsoft (e.g. 3Dlabs, ATI, Intel, Matrox, NVIDIA,
HP, Dell)
2.. Bring this issue up on other developer and tech-related web sites. If
you have a personal blog or podcast, talk about the issue there. Windows
Vista might end up being a great product, but not if OpenGL is crippled
3.. Post your comments to this message board (please no Microsoft
bashing - Just make it clear that Windows needs to stay a great platform for
the OpenGL API and offer any suggestions)

 

For us dummies, what is Aeroglass and Vista?

 

Vista should be the new windows OS which is due to come out on 2006 (until a
few weeks ago was named with the code name "longhorn").
As for Aeroglass - I too, would like to know what it is.

 

sorry guys, Vista is the official name for the successor to XP. Aeroglass is
the new GUI which has transparent and animated 3d window effects - handles
things differently sort of like scalable textures. AFAIK not much of it has
been made public yet - it is missing from beta 1 -but here is a link to a
short rather blurry video showing windows visible through another and
shrinking http://www.winsupersite.com/files/winhec2005_glass_demo.wmv check
out the rest of that site for more general info about Vista
http://www.winsupersite.com/vista/
neil

 

....maybe I should have posted this in SW group and asked SW to comment...

 

Neil,

Just more proof that Microsoft cares "NOTHING AT ALL, WHATSOEVER, ETC. ETC"
about technical computing, which comprises 10% or less of the market. The
fact that Solidworks, Pro-E (and other formerly UNIX CAD systems), are able
to run decently under Windows is nothing more than a fortuitous "ACCIDENT".
It was never intended, nor was it designed to be, anything other than a
business/consumer O.S. Their marketing and devolpment people have determined
that the majority (non-technical) of users will be served by these things,
and that's the way it will be.

Even If every CAD user on the planet were to rise up in revolt, the numbers
would be insignificant compared to the world wide MS user base as a whole.
It wouldn't affect their sales enough for them to even notice.

It's time for the various CAD companies to start looking at an alternate
O.S. The old Unix based systems U.G., Pro-E, Catia, even VX, can probably
port back to a Unix/Linux variant pretty easily. I know Pro-E can as it uses
very few MS components. Solidworks will probably have to re-write their
entire code base.

This is just the beginning folks, It's going to be a real mess.

You heard it here first.


Mark

 

Well in some ways it's just incorporating latest technology much like
Realview was in SW. Can't stop progress - however MS appears to be paving
the way to make OpenGL redundant/obsolescent with this move - effectively
knobbing the other std. Monopolistic behaviour from Redmond or not practical
to maintain 2 types with the new structure - I don't know - seems card
manufacturers think its just a policy decision.
It won't be just CAD though it's the gaming world as well. The way I
understand things is that DirectX will be updated and renamed WGF and
everything will run under that umbrella. I believe this means with Vista if
you run SW it will look like 'windows classic style' but still with Realview
and the display will be somewhat slower unless you have a recent card where
you can afford to lose a bit of performance. Expect to have to use a 256mb
card for full Vista/Aero effects anyway. I suppose SW ultimately will have
little choice but to rewrite their code for WGF....
neil

 

Successor to XP? For what? XP just came out as far as I am concerned
and hasn't matured. I am still running W9x on one box and 2000 on
another. The Mac is looking better all the time.

 

Neil,

Think you kinda missed the point there Neil.

MS "is not" a good platform for technical computing for exactly the reasons
you point out.

They force you to comply within a framework that is constantly changing in
ways that can be detremental to your product, and certainly to your
development process. The best you can ever hope for is a half baked kluge.
This is not OK, there are other options

Solidworks has problems producing a stable product even in a reasonably
stable, mature environment. I've kept track of time wasted because of
bugs/workarounds. It avearages about 50K per year in billable hours where I
work. We never had nearly that at my last job where we ran Pro-E on SGI unix
machines. So now we can look forward to a brand new buggy, bloated, OS,
"AND" decreased performance. Man,,, I can hardly wait. It's amazing to me
how deep some people can take it up the butt, and be OK with it

So, who will pay for the problems and lost productivity of this transition
?? You will, not me. I don't want spinning translucent 3D icons and windows.
I want to get some fuckin work done to pay the bills.

The way I see it, the first mainstream CAD app. that comes out with a stable
port to Linux, or even Apple OSX, will garner a good portion of the market.
Just wait till the mess their cookin up really starts to stink.


Mark

 

I read the Slashdot discussion and it sounded like any video card that
had its own driver would trump the built-in MS freebee.

Even without any video problems, what has become increasingly clear is
that stability, security & productivity for high end-Solids CAD
computing at #1, 2 & 3. Microsoft give lip service to this.

One form or another of Unix is virtually an open source system, and I
could even see high-end CAD rallying around one particular form of
Unix, and maybe even giving the OS disks out with SolidWorks, so they
keep all their customers with the best form of Unix.

Sticking with the OS of "the masses", and gumming up the productivity
of what is a suite of software costing 2-5 times the hardware and OS
cost is just plain uneconomic. We are debating whether to continue to
support $300 MS OS, and then put up with its inevitable crap.

Unix server class hardware is amongst the most reliable and most well
defended systems out there. It is about time 'class' CAD programs
started migrating.

Bo

 

Well I don't think I have Mark. I am just bringing you the news. I think you
are over-reacting to the possibilities of a 'mess' but I agree it may be a
set back for SW. A lot of programs will be in the same situation.To my
knowledge this the first time shadows of restrictive practices in the
graphics arena have emerged.
The point of this matter to me is whether or not the MS move is fair on
those companies already committed to OpenGL and that seemingly the supported
version is a basic 1.4 when they were busy heading to 2.0. It could be that
Redmond could be forced to carry OpenGL forward if enough people object.
In the end I don't think anyone sitting using SW is really that concerned
about what is behind what they look at. OpenGL is one system and DirectX is
another. I actually don't know enough about the technical details of what is
planned to comment - it may well be that WGF is superior.... I can't comment
either on what SW might do to manage a migration or how much work there
might be in the change if indeed they make one. If they follow an idea I had
to restructure the program for multi core this could actually be a blessing
in disguise...
MS may not be all there is in computing but it is what has made mid-range
CAD affordable along with Intel boxes. There is no reason to suppose another
OS will not have substantial overhauls in the future either. I would be much
more concerned with the basis quality of SW and sp than worrying about the
OS being buggy or change to the display.
Whether you like it or not Vista is coming - there will be a time not too
far away when XP won't be supported any more. If you still expect to be in
business in 6 years with a dinosaur system when everyone else is running
hardware 10x faster than you in spite of 3d fluff well good luck. The price
of progress is change, and change means new stuff.
BTW it is a competitive world so I won't be paying anything to help
you...also I have already stopped my subs in anticipation. sorry to leave
you the dishes... ;o)

neil

 

This may very well be an admission that there is a threat from *nix.

 

Hmmm, Top noted "there is a threat from *nix."

Being engineering oriented, I would like to suggest that for high end
personal computing software makers and end users, that the Unix option
would be "an asset to be used to advantage".

The liability of hi-end CAD developers working with Microsoft making
the only OS your software works with when that company (Microsoft) has
lots of other priorities and its own products to protect, and then opts
out of what it previously stated it would produce, is a noose around
the neck of your entire lifeline of YOUR HARD BUILT COMPANY.

Microsoft told CAD vendors that "Windows will Work for CAD", but in the
end their system has had lots of problems.

Meanwhile, who has come to the front with the most easily used, most
stable, most secure, most easy to maintain mainstream higher-end OS?
Apple with its BSD/Unix implementation.

Microsoft squandered its lead, and now Unix has shown it can succeed at
hi-end workstations, servers, & even $499 entry level boxes as
demonstrated by Apple.

If you want to see how Microsoft's Windows should work (forget color
and style themes, etc), just spend $499-$599 on a MiniMac and see for
yourself. Apple has shown it is possible to have hi power, and a low
hardware price for casual users, and also good workstations, laptops,
and even highly regarded servers.

If SolidWorks were to migrate, Excel would be an option on Mac OSX! So
there. Unix, SolidWorks, and Excel.

Bo

 

Neil,

I think the OpenGL vs DirectX is minor compared to other issues. 3D CAD in
general, and parametric 3D CAD especially, is inherently unstable at best.
Way too much stuff going on in the background that the user is totally
unaware of. They just want (and expect) it to work.

Trying to keep an application, of this complexity, running at all, (let
alone well), in an environment that is constantly changing is impossible
IMO. Kinda like trying to be comfortable in your house when you have a crazy
wife the re-arranges the furniture every day.

Linux is open source so it can be whatever you want it to be. Hardware will
not be 10X faster in six, or even ten years. There are physical limits to
90nm format silicon, and most chip makers are still reeling from the expense
of implementing it. Something new and ground breaking may turn up but I
doubt it. (economics)

Personally, I think the MS only policy is a noose around SW neck. All that's
left is to pull it tight, and kick out the stool.

Later

Mark

PS, no problem. I have an automatic dishwasher (17yr old daughter)

 

're-arranges the furniture every day' - yes a common malfunction not unlike
dead birds on the door step.
'17yr old daughter' - horror product- loud screeching sounds when you push
the wrong button...
;o)

 

So you have a cat too. Ours tends to either drop them in your lap, or stash
em under the couch (phew,,,)

Actually she's a real good kid, I feel blessed. Starts college in a couple
of weeks.


Mark

 

lucky you...some of my household bots need de-sexing.. not saying which...
:O)

 

I've been following this nonsense from MS for some time now... I'll
preface what I'll say with "just my opinion blah,blah..."

This "Aerocrap" is just another way in which MS sees something it
likes, can't own it, so tries to be rid of it. If anyone thinks that
MS is going to play nice with the OpenGL people, you are sorely
mistaken. Look at what happened with Sun and Java. All this shit
brings me full circle back to the most fundamental computing question
there is: isn't the OPERATING SYSTEM supposed to be just that, the
layer above the BIOS and NOT AN APPLICATION! I wish I could make giant
red letters to say this again, Windows SHOULD NOT BE AN APPLICATION.
It should be the smallest, most robust piece of software that you
never see. Read the "specs" about the "new" operating system. You'll
be able to sort all your digital pictures by camera type... or the
shoes you were wearing in which pictures... here's a question; it's
2005. Can you yet PRINT A FUCKING DIRECTORY LISTING ON YOUR PRINTER?
The answer is no (not without going to a "Command Box" and doing it
through a command line). Or use a third party app. Does this make
sense to anyone? In my opinion, no one, no one should ever have to see
or do anything with the operating system. But now we'll get
transparent windows, and a new file system (which BTW, they pulled
from the beta's); wait and see what kind of horror's come from this...


Billy and his boys WILL TAKE OVER ANYTHING THAT USES A PROCESSOR. I
am not a conspiracy nut, but MS is trying like hell to get "everything
connected". Bullshit. The operating system *should* be unidentifiable.
By this I mean something like command line DOS (or Unix). Applications
are written that run in conjunction with the OS. This line has been
blurred to the point where we will NEVER RECOVER. I'll even go so far
to say this; there should have been a test years ago, like getting a
drivers license. If you couldn't do simple operations on a DOS box,
you couldn't buy or own a computer! LOL! All the dumb shits in the
world had to "have a computer'... for what? How many people do you
know that have more powerful systems at home than you do at work, so
they can chat on AIM and download porn. It makes me ill. And now the
"duals" are out with 64bit systems, and we (engineers) have to get
sidled with the shit... Man, this stuff infuriates me.

If Solidworks made a Unix (Linux) version, I would be the first to
take my Windows software out to a field and use it for skeet... then
collect all the little bits and burn them... and then scatter the
ashes to the four winds so that it couldn't re-assemble like something
from a Stephen King book...

Rant over... for now...

Mike Tripoli

 

I FEEL YOUR PAIN.

BEN

 

Mark you noted, "I think the MS only policy is a noose around SW neck."
I have heard that from software company executives who have to deal
with MS code.

UNIX is so stable that NO ONE thinks twice about running a high end
application on Unix or a server farm on UNIX.

So why is it UNIX is not good enough for engineering uses and Solids
CAD???

No good reason, except it is NOT Microsoft.

Bo