OpenGL to be deprecated in the next macOS release, could mean interesting things for Linux gaming

Quoting: Mountain ManWe might think they're making dumb decisions, but Apple didn't become the richest company in the world by being stupid.

I didn't say they're making decisions against *their own* best interests; it's that they keep making decisions that screw consumers, and get away with it.

Nevertheless, I don't think their current success is the result of genius decisions beyond our comprehension either. Remember that in the beginning they were even against the idea of 3rd party apps. *Lots of factors* played into the growth of the mobile internet craze; a number of corporations -- those with plenty of luck -- got swept into positions they probably couldn't even dream of, much less strategize their way into, 10-12 years ago.

I still don't see how the current 'forced upgrade' path for the Mac line can be sustainable -- but they probably don't care if it blows either.

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: PsychojauApple and Microsoft are insane. They want to think about their platforms as gaming consoles. When you port a graphical application on PS4, you have 2 APIs : 1 high level and one low level specifically made to optimize the rendering for a specific hardware. Here, they don't have this excuse. The hardware is never the same, so you need some kind of "adaptable" APIs. Vulkan is the logical, pragmatic solution.
They are trying to steal as much freedom as they can, imprisoning their users / developers to squeeze out as much cash flood as possible for themselves and only them *mwahahaha*... in the multi-platform era : They are insane and dangerous !
I hope Atari VCS will be a success (near 10000 donators ! ^^ ). I really do !

10.000 donators isnt enough.
atari vcs made 2,512,524 until now, i dont know how they will end, but ouya made 9 millions in their campaing and their console was an disaster.

why would you develop for an platform with 10.000 users when you can develop for an platform like ps4 with 70 millions of users?
ouya focused on indie developers, but sony added suport for indie games on ps4 and a touchpad killing all the ouya apeal, even the developers who tried couldnt afford to make games for ouya.
even if everyone who purchased an atari vcs purchase your game, that is not enough to justify an port of an game that sell millions on other platforms

Quoting: [email protected]They did say 'legacy apps' will run though. So they are likely going to ship some version of OpenGL.

Just seems like they are making their stand and saying that eventually, it'll be entirely removed.

I wonder when they decided OpenGL is legacy though. There are many modern implementations.

It seems you give your logic too much credit, to the point you prefer to ignore what is really happening these days (or years) on gaming.

The first thing is despite Sony having 70m of users with a PS4 at home, Linux keeps receiving more indie titles than PS4, you surely heard some indie games doing well on the sony platform but its not the case of every indie released there.
Even the fact that Cosmic Star Heroine had not hit PS4 or Vita, shows that the indie road isnt as easy or free of obstacles as you think, and Linux while it has a much smaller playerbase its an OS that let Devs to develop with freedom and actually this Linux playerbase put more attention on indies than the PS4 ones which cares mostly about AAA stuff.

Second, Apple hiring devs for some exclusive ports? LOL, I just cant read that without laughing, Apple is the most lazy company in the world, Apple is all about revenue by doing little effort. Its not that company of 15 years ago that developed not only software but hardware, now its a computer built company which take the best parts of the market, put it in a case with an apple with light and then just wait Apple drones to buy the most newest thing.
When Switch were announced I was guessing about why Apple didnt step first before nintendo, they already had the market, they just had to figure out the connection between the TV and the Ipad, the ipad already had the CPU/GPU power to run some AAA games (with dumbed down graphics as Switch does)but they didnt do it... Because giving support for AAA companies to develop games for your platform needs resources, and Metal is not enough and its Ios exclusive, so since APPLE is quite lazy, they preferred to stay in their comfort zone and keep receiving the profits from people who buy a 600$ Ipad to play angry birds.

Quoting: Mountain ManI've heard it said that the personal computer being an open platform was purely an accident partly because IBM didn't recognize the importance of controlling the software market, and partly because Bill Gates screwed them when he pulled out of OS/2 and released Windows 95 a short time later. Numerous companies have been attempting to "fix" that miscalculation ever since because an open platform is a threat to any company that wants to control their customers' spending habits, which is pretty much every tech company in existence today.

Yes and if IBM 'acting smart' in that time, I don't think Linux will be flourish and will disregard as 'socialism niche' thing (as Windows fans said, before 10 was launched).

Quoting: GustyGhostOpen(ish)) platforms are a fluke of history. If the tech giants could go back and do it all over again, their platforms would be full-on lock down and lock in from day one.

Which is now currently happen with mobile devices/smartphone. Even majority of Android phones, rooting is so painful.

With PC platform, if Win OS is out-of-dated, I can install any Linux distros to replaced it.

On Android phones for example, I can flash it latest Android but only for certain devices (mainly Qualcomm and Exynos) no thanks to 'cocktail license'. Some manufacturer interpreting 'cocktail license' whatever they like and manipulated it according to them.

I'm not looking for argument, just want to state the fact happens currently. I do hope future on mobile devices will be better. Hopefully :'(

p/s: If you people (GoL readers) notice I always said about "GPL-Violator ARM Chipmaker" without naming who tf is them. Actually, I do not want me (anybody here) to get sued by them. But let me link XDA-Developers article here. You'll know the clue.

Quoting: GustyGhost

Quoting: tonRWarning: tonR harping about Linux/FOSS mobile devices again!

Well, nuff said. Mobile devices/Smartphone is right here and right now. It's no longer "the future". Apple shows they willing to throw away (not so) "open platform" Mac for (totally) "close platform" iOS. So, it is time for Linux/FOSS community to seriously R&D-ing on mobile devices. If not, our (not so distant) future generations might never know what is meaning of open platform.

And no, Android is NOT our viable future. I don't think "cocktail license" OS should become our future platform.

Open(ish)) platforms are a fluke of history. If the tech giants could go back and do it all over again, their platforms would be full-on lock down and lock in from day one.

I think you are mistaken. Open platforms became widespread despite tech giants determinedly creating locked-down ones from day one. Only a few such tech giants ever had sufficient monopoly muscle or clever enough ideas to allow their locked-down platforms to compete with open ones. For instance, the tech field is littered with dead Unixes once owned by proprietary tech giants who fought fiercely and stubbornly against the rise of open.
Personally, I think Apple is a bit of a fluke, and now that Steve Jobs is gone, now that it is managed by normal managers, it will eventually lose momentum; without monopoly power a walled garden run by ordinary managers will in the end be unable to compete with more open platforms run by ordinary managers.

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: GustyGhost

Quoting: tonRWarning: tonR harping about Linux/FOSS mobile devices again!

Well, nuff said. Mobile devices/Smartphone is right here and right now. It's no longer "the future". Apple shows they willing to throw away (not so) "open platform" Mac for (totally) "close platform" iOS. So, it is time for Linux/FOSS community to seriously R&D-ing on mobile devices. If not, our (not so distant) future generations might never know what is meaning of open platform.

And no, Android is NOT our viable future. I don't think "cocktail license" OS should become our future platform.

Open(ish)) platforms are a fluke of history. If the tech giants could go back and do it all over again, their platforms would be full-on lock down and lock in from day one.

I think you are mistaken. Open platforms became widespread despite tech giants determinedly creating locked-down ones from day one. Only a few such tech giants ever had sufficient monopoly muscle or clever enough ideas to allow their locked-down platforms to compete with open ones. For instance, the tech field is littered with dead Unixes once owned by proprietary tech giants who fought fiercely and stubbornly against the rise of open.
Personally, I think Apple is a bit of a fluke, and now that Steve Jobs is gone, now that it is managed by normal managers, it will eventually lose momentum; without monopoly power a walled garden run by ordinary managers will in the end be unable to compete with more open platforms run by ordinary managers.

You are clearly more optimistic than I. The biggest fluke I can point to being the IBM open PC architecture. We* are all using it today in some form because IBM made a regrettable (to them) design decision. A design decision which has taken its place as a warning to all tech companies thereafter: "Hold a tight grip on your platform or risk losing it". What incentive is there today to release highly interoperable hardware on an unlicensed open specification? Just look at phones and tablets . As much as it pains me to say, truly open specifications like that will never happen again without strong arm licensing like copyleft >> rooting for RISC-V but it is doubtful to dethrone all the established walled garden competition "safe" in the hands of megacorps.

*Desktop users, going by our GoL stats.

Quoting: wvstolzingI didn't say they're making decisions against *their own* best interests; it's that they keep making decisions that screw consumers, and get away with it.

Which brings us back to what I said about most Mac users either not knowing or not caring about what changes are being made under the hood as long they can still open Safari and iTunes.

Off-topic
I just finished wandering around pro- 'fruit' websites that i know. Here are 'the fruiters' reactions on deprecated of OpenGL...

(I'm super heavy modified it for many obvious reasons)

Negative
- iOS on Mac, who want that.
- Most workspace software use OpenGL, the developers will simply abandoned instead developing Metal version.
- OpenGL up to date but 'the fruit' always stuck it at 4.1 for obvious reasons. Fruit style!
- 'The Fruit' destroying will of developers by destroying cross platform API
- Mojave... that's a reason for that name?
- OpenGL used beyond gaming. STEM sector heavily rely on OpenGL.

Positive + salty
- Great, you don't want my money devs.
- iOS!! iOS!! iOS!! Lazy devs!!
- iOS!! iOS!! iOS!! Metal is future!! OpenGL and DX need to terminated!!
- iOS!! iOS!! iOS!! Close source everything from GPU to CPU so devs won't come here!!
- Metal is superior. MS should use it. DX is obseleted!
- Feral is ours! Aspyr is ours! We don't need small time arrogant devs!
- If Metal sucks blame devs. if Metal good praise 'the fruit'.
- Walled garden is more secure.

Well don't take my word for it. Search for yourselves people and read it with open mind.

One thing everyone seems to be missing, which is also a good/bad thing; Apple have said nothing at all about when openGL will be removed - it could be in the next major version, or never.

Likely they will clarify that later once everything has shaken down and they've seen the damage scope.

If things go the bad way, I hope that moltenVK and moltenGL see an uptick in use.

If things go the good way, I still hope for the above.

Quoting: GustyGhost

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: GustyGhost

Quoting: tonRWarning: tonR harping about Linux/FOSS mobile devices again!

Well, nuff said. Mobile devices/Smartphone is right here and right now. It's no longer "the future". Apple shows they willing to throw away (not so) "open platform" Mac for (totally) "close platform" iOS. So, it is time for Linux/FOSS community to seriously R&D-ing on mobile devices. If not, our (not so distant) future generations might never know what is meaning of open platform.

And no, Android is NOT our viable future. I don't think "cocktail license" OS should become our future platform.

Open(ish)) platforms are a fluke of history. If the tech giants could go back and do it all over again, their platforms would be full-on lock down and lock in from day one.

I think you are mistaken. Open platforms became widespread despite tech giants determinedly creating locked-down ones from day one. Only a few such tech giants ever had sufficient monopoly muscle or clever enough ideas to allow their locked-down platforms to compete with open ones. For instance, the tech field is littered with dead Unixes once owned by proprietary tech giants who fought fiercely and stubbornly against the rise of open.
Personally, I think Apple is a bit of a fluke, and now that Steve Jobs is gone, now that it is managed by normal managers, it will eventually lose momentum; without monopoly power a walled garden run by ordinary managers will in the end be unable to compete with more open platforms run by ordinary managers.

You are clearly more optimistic than I. The biggest fluke I can point to being the IBM open PC architecture. We* are all using it today in some form because IBM made a regrettable (to them) design decision. A design decision which has taken its place as a warning to all tech companies thereafter: "Hold a tight grip on your platform or risk losing it". [/url][/i]

Well, except that if it hadn't been open we might well not all be using it. Many competitors used the IBM architecture because they could, but if they couldn't they would presumably have done something else. At the least the field would have stayed more fragmented for longer, but maybe Commodore would have won, or Apple, or HP, or someone else we never heard of because in the real world they just made clones. Not sure a failed platform would have been better for IBM than a successful platform they lost control over.

Don't get me wrong, I won't claim that completely open platforms are always destined to conquer. But I will say that there are strong pressures towards fairly open platforms, strong enough to be decisive unless a particular case has really strong counter pressures, like monopoly power backed up with significant network effects. So if you take Android, it's maybe not open enough for my tastes . . . but it is open enough for many companies to make use of it without consulting its originator--and if it were not, it would not be dominant.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 6 June 2018 at 7:37 am UTC

Quoting: orochi_kyoSecond, Apple hiring devs for some exclusive ports? LOL, I just cant read that without laughing, Apple is the most lazy company in the world, Apple is all about revenue by doing little effort. Its not that company of 15 years ago that developed not only software but hardware, now its a computer built company which take the best parts of the market, put it in a case with an apple with light and then just wait Apple drones to buy the most newest thing.
When Switch were announced I was guessing about why Apple didnt step first before nintendo, they already had the market, they just had to figure out the connection between the TV and the Ipad, the ipad already had the CPU/GPU power to run some AAA games (with dumbed down graphics as Switch does)but they didnt do it... Because giving support for AAA companies to develop games for your platform needs resources, and Metal is not enough and its Ios exclusive, so since APPLE is quite lazy, they preferred to stay in their comfort zone and keep receiving the profits from people who buy a 600$ Ipad to play angry birds.

Uhm, I don't like Apple much either but that's just wrong. The A10 is a an ARM Core designed by Apple and it's completely new IP and honestly, it's pretty good.

The whole LLVM-Tooling is mostly driven by... Apple. And they integrate it with CMake etc. (eg. with the creation of compilation DBs), despite them not primarily using CMake.

They still develop CUPS.

Their RDP implementation is amongst the best.

They do have *quite* some new dveleopments in that regard, and they still sit ontop of great technology like the only big OS which sports a semantic GUI library...

I cannot see however that they'd be porting games. Simply because that's not their vision of the use of Macs.