Vulkan is owned by Khronos. Every single company you mention is a member of the Khronos group: https://www.khronos.org/members/list
Aside from the strong contingency Khronos Group carries, Vulkan's cross-platform support is in part due to its very good codebase, which enables easier integration.
Being a member (by itself) doesn’t mean anything. Without talking to anyone involved or knowing additional context, it’s impossible to know whether the companies on the committee are productive collaborators, passive onlookers, or active opponents of Vulkan.
You're talking about the pre-Khronos OpenGL Fahrenheit deal, which is largely public knowledge. Microsoft announced a joint project with SGI to support OpenGL on Windows, then put all their resources into DirectX while SGI spent two years building their section. The only unprovable part is that this was their goal all along, but the leaked combat plan against free software at the same time leaves little doubt.
Not trying to be rude, I'm sure your friend knew far more at the time than I ever have. Just seems better to base this on provable events so people don't see "my connected friend said..." and write it off as a conspiracy. Microsoft is trying to act as an ally to free software again, and people seem far too trusting of their motives.
And as stated in that article, work is also being made to implement Vulkan on DirectX, allowing Vulkan apps to be distributed through the Windows Store (which requires DirectX).
Nintendo Switch supports Vulkan. I expect we'll see Vulkan support quite strongly in the next generation of consoles (besides maybe Microsoft's)
It is there, but it isn't the main 3D graphics API.
PS4 has GNX, etc. Only Xbox has that chance since it has DirectX, but fat chance seeing that on OS X or Linux/*BSD
Did you forget about Android? Vulkan was introduced in Android 7.
Only OpenGL ES 2.0 support is required.
https://source.android.com/compatibility/android-cdd#7_1_dis...
Section 7.1.4.2,
"If device implementations support OpenGL ES 3.0 or 3.1, they:
[SR] Are STRONGLY RECOMMENDED to include support for Vulkan 1.0 .
SHOULD include support for Vulkan 1.0.Regarding specification language SHOULD is not the same as MUST, just nice to have.
It doesn't change the fact that Vulkan is optional and still not worthy to be listed on Android dashboards.
Not everyone is using S8 and Pixel phones.
MS does support Vulkan AFAIK.
Similarly, how many Xbox One developers are going to bother with UWP, either?
Given UWP allows the use of Win32 because nobody would use it if it didn't, it seems pretty likely that if games start using Vulkan then UWP will end up with Vulkan, too. Microsoft Store needs games more than games need UWP.
"This subset of APIs was chosen to support key scenarios for Windows Runtime apps that were not already covered by the Windows Runtime, HTML/CSS, or other supported languages or standards. The Windows App Certification Kit ensures that your app uses only this subset of the Win32 and COM API."
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/br2057...
> Similarly, how many Xbox One developers are going to bother with UWP, either?
Probably zero, but they won't bother with Vulkan also.
If they are targeting something else besides the XBox, they already have a portable game engine in place, or as typical in the games industry, contracts in place with companies specialized in doing game ports.
Win32 is legacy, the Desktop Bridge sessions on channel 9 always show how easy it is to import apps into the store and slowly convert them into UWP ones.
The next release of Windows will even add support for command line UWP apps, and Office 2016 is only available via the store on Windows 10.
As for Steam vs Windows Store, not everyone is on Steam and the Store also allows for XBox games, which has a much bigger portfolio.
Plus you are forgetting the scenario where Apple or Microsoft, might eventually just buy Valve.
If Microsoft buys Valve -- a move they're already rumored to be considering -- and shutters Steam, all of them.
It might take yet another decade, but it will eventually happen.
Sure, Microsoft faces an uphill battle since backwards compatibility is the name of their game, and few consumer-facing OSes today have a continuous platform going back over two decades.
But UWP is definitely better.