Ask your favourite developers to use OpenGL instead. Even xp users get the latest version of OpenGL.
I honestly think DirectX is a great API. And let's be honest, by the time this is release in "Holiday 2015", it'll be at least until mid 2016 before anything comes out that uses it. Combine that with the rule about every other MS OS being good, and we should have a fairly decent Windows 9 to run these games on.
All you need is a good GL wrapper. If writing your own is painful, just use someone else's. But it's important to be able to write your own, because if you can't, then that's what weakens you.
A secondary reason to avoid DX is because gaming on windows has a high chance of being dead within the next decade. If that seems laughable, think of how laughable it would've sounded for anyone to say that about CDs for music in 2001.
I was under the impression that DX11 (and DX10 before it) actually do a decent job of exposing basically everything that's widely supported, and in a manner that can be made to work tolerably efficiently across a range of different hardware. But I was told this by some guy from MS so maybe I shouldn't have expected him to say anything else.
Assuming it's the case, perhaps I'm just cheating by not thinking of the leftovers as useful - not because the behaviour is useless, I mean, just because if you're targeting PC, you just have to accept that the underlying hardware could be anything. OpenGL extensions could provide you with more, but support can be a bit hit or miss. Reminds me too much of MS-DOS.
But I could have been misinformed, or my supposition is simply outdated, and the article suggests that could well have been the case, in which case my conclusion would be partly bogus too.
can't you just as well say that By restricting your worldview to OpenGl's predefined notion of what it should be, you'll never know the true extent of what you can do as a graphics programmer ? I probably don't have enough experience with it, but to me it seemds in the end both DirectX11 and latest OpenGL pretty much have equal capabilities apart from some details? Not like DirectX7 for instance, which obviously is capable of less.
http://aras-p.info/blog/2014/03/28/cross-platform-shaders-in...
(I've never worked on a cross-platform project where HLSL vs GLSL seemed to be a big deal.)
I have seen exactly zero good OpenGL wrappers. The stateful API makes it pretty much impossible to wrap in a way that would actually make it better.
I have also wasted a lot of time trying to implement some kind of a GL wrapper. I got something done that was fairly comfortable to use for my own needs but nowhere close to being an universal wrapper of any kind.
Have you got a decent GL wrapper to recommend?
As an OpenGL developer, not a day goes past without me wishing that the API was sensible like the DirectX API and not the state machine mess that it currently is.
I'm pretty sure any OpenGL programmer worth their salt will agree. Only some beginners with no practical experience think that OpenGL is a better API because it requires less boilerplate code to draw a triangle.
Only as long as nVidia and ATI keep releasing drivers for you. At some point XP will be abandoned.
Windows comes with an OpenGL implementation but it's an ancient version.
They are the running joke from graphics programmers.