or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Support for OpenGL 3.0 added in beta build of Mac OS X 10.6.3
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Support for OpenGL 3.0 added in beta build of Mac OS X 10.6.3

post #1 of 70
Thread Starter 
An early beta of the latest maintenance and security update to Apple's Snow Leopard operating system has added significant support for the OpenGL 3.0 graphical application programming interface.

As noted by HardMac, partial support for OpenGL 3.0 was discovered in the first external build of Mac OS X 10.6.3. The update, which also includes crash fixes and targets over 90 components, was released last week.

Though graphics cards in Mac systems have had support for OpenGL 3.0, the cross-platform API did not previously have native support within Snow Leopard. With the latest build of Mac OS X 10.6, 95 percent of the features of OpenGL 3.0 were found to be supported. Only "Shading language version 1.30" was unsupported. In addition, most functions specific to OpenGL 3.0 are not yet present.

Previous versions of OpenGL -- 1.5, 2.0 and 2.1 -- all have 100 percent compatibility. Support for OpenGL 3.1 is said to be at 12 percent, while OpenGL 3.2 is at 33 percent.

Apple has reportedly not yet documented anything on potential OpenGL 3.0 support in Mac OS X 10.6.3. Build 10D522, released last week, was a 665.7MB file that included 221 code corrections to 92 distinct system components. Nearly 60 individual pieces of crash-prone code were said to have been addressed, though four known issues remain with the latest beta.

When it launched in August, Snow Leopard came with GPU optimization built in to the operating system. Apple has supported OpenGL for years, and also introduced OpenCL, both of which aim to take on Microsoft's DirectX API.

Support for OpenGL 2.1 was added in 2007 to Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard for its 3D interface. This provided a dramatic increase in OpenGL performance, and also allowed applications to activate hardware acceleration as requested.

post #2 of 70
very nice, I am happy about that
read this earlier today concerning why we should use OpenGL
http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/01/Why-...nd-not-DirectX
Phillip Gibb

Blogger | Java Programmer | Filmmaker
a journey in Filmmaking and Social Media
[ Digital Business Card | SynapticLight | Twitter ]
Reply
Phillip Gibb

Blogger | Java Programmer | Filmmaker
a journey in Filmmaking and Social Media
[ Digital Business Card | SynapticLight | Twitter ]
Reply
post #3 of 70
I do recall stating somewhere that OpenGL 3.x is soon to arrive. Apple has been heavily active in shaping the OpenGL 3.1 and OpenGL 3.2 specs.
post #4 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by synapticlight View Post

very nice, I am happy about that
read this earlier today concerning why we should use OpenGL
http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/01/Why-...nd-not-DirectX

An interesting read. I wasn't aware of the ID Software open letter. Open Standards will hopefully always exist. I'm not surprised that MS tried (and continues to try) to lock folks into a proprietary standard. It's the bread and butter of Microsoft.

After you wallow in pig shit long enough, you don't even notice the smell...
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #5 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

I do recall stating somewhere that OpenGL 3.x is soon to arrive. Apple has been heavily active in shaping the OpenGL 3.1 and OpenGL 3.2 specs.

BRAVO MDRIFTMEYER! BRAVO! Thank you SO MUCH for stating somewhere that OpenGL 3.x is soon to arrive. THANK YOU! You are the best!!!! I'm sending you flowers through the mail. Please accept them as a token of my gratitude.

PS THANK YOU!
post #6 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

An interesting read. I wasn't aware of the ID Software open letter. Open Standards will hopefully always exist. I'm not surprised that MS tried (and continues to try) to lock folks into a proprietary standard. It's the bread and butter of Microsoft.

and apple doesnt lock you in to its will and its hardware? its no different.

hopefully apple will get some more games coming over with its increased support for openGL.
post #7 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zep View Post

and apple doesnt lock you in to its will and its hardware? its no different.

hopefully apple will get some more games coming over with its increased support for openGL.

You mean that same hardware that runs Linux and Windows or OS X? You mean the same hardware that I can buy (or choose not to)? The same hardware that uses Open Standards that will work with OS X, Linux, or Windows?

Try harder next time. Your comparison is severely lacking.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #8 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

An interesting read. I wasn't aware of the ID Software open letter. Open Standards will hopefully always exist. I'm not surprised that MS tried (and continues to try) to lock folks into a proprietary standard. It's the bread and butter of Microsoft....


No way supporting Microsoft, but Apple does the same thing using OS X and their hardware.


Just try installing OS X on non-Apple hardware and see how far you get selling them.



Microsoft is a software company that sells some hardware.

Apple is a hardware company that sells some software.


Despite their different business models, they both play in the proprietary arena.

Apple is about as open with their hardware as a clam with lockjaw.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #9 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

You mean that same hardware that runs Linux and Windows or OS X? You mean the same hardware that I can buy (or choose not to)? The same hardware that uses Open Standards that will work with OS X, Linux, or Windows?

Try harder next time. Your comparison is severely lacking.

Agree, that was a POOR comparison....
post #10 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

You mean that same hardware that runs Linux and Windows or OS X? You mean the same hardware that I can buy (or choose not to)? The same hardware that uses Open Standards that will work with OS X, Linux, or Windows?

Try harder next time. Your comparison is severely lacking.

you mean the same hardware that is specially formed for a mac? you mean the same hardware that has checks in place so only OSX can install on it?

try harder next time. your comparison is awfully wrong.
post #11 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zep View Post

you mean the same hardware that is specially formed for a mac? you mean the same hardware that has checks in place so only OSX can install on it?

try harder next time. your comparison is awfully wrong.

You do realize you can install any other OS you like other than OS X right? Do you even use a Mac?

Do you cry fowl when you buy a Chevrolet, only to find that most Saab parts won't work in it?

Really, was that the best comparison you could come up with?

You do know the difference between hardware and a standard right?
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #12 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zep View Post

you mean the same hardware that is specially formed for a mac? you mean the same hardware that has checks in place so only OSX can install on it?

try harder next time. your comparison is awfully wrong.

only os X? eh? was sure I had windows on mine (note to self delete ms virus)
post #13 of 70
I just got a Bonjour and Remote Desktop update. Whatever that means.
post #14 of 70
OMG THANK YOU MDRIFTMEYER!!!! Thank you, thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!
post #15 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zep View Post

you mean the same hardware that is specially formed for a mac? you mean the same hardware that has checks in place so only OSX can install on it?

try harder next time. your comparison is awfully wrong.

You must be using different hardware. My mac has vista dual booted on it with no issues. There is no hardware lockout.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #16 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

You must be using different hardware. My mac has vista dual booted on it with no issues. There is no hardware lockout.

bad explination on my part.

what i meant to say was i can only install OSX on apple branded hardware, not on same components i can purchase off newegg. thats the lockout i meant.
post #17 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zep View Post

bad explination on my part.

what i meant to say was i can only install OSX on apple branded hardware, not on same components i can purchase off newegg. thats the lockout i meant.

And? Apple is a hardware manufacturer. They are no different than your Microwave, your Blu-Ray player, your Car Stereo, or your Router. They all come with proprietary software as they are bundled with the hardware. None of these vendors would be required to allow you to use their software in another vendors hardware.

You seem to think Apple and Microsoft are the same. Might I point out that Microsoft doesn't build any PC hardware. It is necessary to the MS business model that their OS software runs on as wide a variety of hardware as possible.

Apple's computers are hardware with software that comes bundled with that hardware. It isn't necessary for them to support any other hardware than their own. Don't like it, don't buy it.

Buy a Dell, and you can't legally transfer the Windows OS from that OEM license to your home built PC.

Just because you can do a thing doesn't make it legal.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #18 of 70
I call BS. OpenGL 4 isn't even out yet, and besides, if they did something like this, someone might try making a game for OS X.
post #19 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shunnabunich View Post

I call BS. OpenGL 4 isn't even out yet, and besides, if they did something like this, someone might try making a game for OS X.

Who mentioned OpenGL 4? The article says OpenGL 3.0.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #20 of 70
This is quite a distortion of the reality.

With Apple using open standards, any competitor can use the same tools that Apple uses to create competing products that consumers are free to use. Any one can use UNIX, HTML5, Open GL, Webkit, H.264, AAC and create a product that directly competes with Apple. In fact I think there are two called Android and Palm WebOS that do exactly that.

There is little option for using Microsoft's tools to build products that compete directly against Windows.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

No way supporting Microsoft, but Apple does the same thing using OS X and their hardware.
Microsoft is a software company that sells some hardware.
Apple is a hardware company that sells some software.
Despite their different business models, they both play in the proprietary arena.
Apple is about as open with their hardware as a clam with lockjaw.
post #21 of 70
Here's hoping that Apple can get OpenGL 3.0 support done and dusted soon.

I think that the shading support that is currently lacking is a major portion of the work however, and that could be quite some work. Never mind the functions that the article says are missing. Maybe it won't make it for the next point update, but certainly should for the one after that.

Khronos seem to have OpenGL back on track in terms of development after a long hiatus, and that bodes well for Apple and their systems.
post #22 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

An early beta of the latest maintenance and security update to Apple's Snow Leopard operating system has added significant support for the OpenGL 3.0 graphical application programming interface.

As noted by HardMac, partial support for OpenGL 3.0 was discovered in the first external build of Mac OS X 10.6.3. The update, which also includes crash fixes and targets over 90 components, was released last week.

Though graphics cards in Mac systems have had support for OpenGL 3.0, the cross-platform API did not previously have native support within Snow Leopard. With the latest build of Mac OS X 10.6, 95 percent of the features of OpenGL 3.0 were found to be supported. Only "Shading language version 1.30" was unsupported. In addition, most functions specific to OpenGL 3.0 are not yet present.

Previous versions of OpenGL -- 1.5, 2.0 and 2.1 -- all have 100 percent compatibility. Support for OpenGL 3.1 is said to be at 12 percent, while OpenGL 3.2 is at 33 percent.

Apple has reportedly not yet documented anything on potential OpenGL 3.0 support in Mac OS X 10.6.3. Build 10D522, released last week, was a 665.7MB file that included 221 code corrections to 92 distinct system components. Nearly 60 individual pieces of crash-prone code were said to have been addressed, though four known issues remain with the latest beta.

When it launched in August, Snow Leopard came with GPU optimization built in to the operating system. Apple has supported OpenGL for years, and also introduced OpenCL, both of which aim to take on Microsoft's DirectX API.

Support for OpenGL 2.1 was added in 2007 to Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard for its 3D interface. This provided a dramatic increase in OpenGL performance, and also allowed applications to activate hardware acceleration as requested.


Glad to see Apple is catching up to the standard of Open GL.

Even though Open GL 3.0 was released July 2008 and 3.1 was released May 2009 and 3.2 was released in August and then updated in December 2009.

If Apple shows off iPhone OS 4.0 early and releases a new iPhone in April (maybe April Fools day, Apple sbirthday?)

Then WWDC 10 may show us a preview of Mac OS 10.7? Where further discussion of this may take place.
Apple!

Think Different
Reply
Apple!

Think Different
Reply
post #23 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Who mentioned OpenGL 4? The article says OpenGL 3.0.

Forgot my [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags. The implication is that Apple, despising the use of OS X for mere games as they do, would rather continue lagging behind the state of the art (after all, how many of those new features do they need to draw windows on the screen?), and supporting 3.1 and/or 3.2 would be getting too close for comfort. My apologies if I was too subtle.
post #24 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by MobileMe View Post

Glad to see Apple is catching up to the standard of Open GL.

Even though Open GL 3.0 was released July 2008 and 3.1 was released May 2009 and 3.2 was released in August and then updated in December 2009.

I hadn't realized they'd gotten so far behind. I wonder what prompted them to get on the ball? I know they initially hated the idea of the iPhone being a game machine. I wonder if they now see the appeal such things have to the general user community?
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #25 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shunnabunich View Post

Forgot my [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags. The implication is that Apple, despising the use of OS X for mere games as they do, would rather continue lagging behind the state of the art (after all, how many of those new features do they need to draw windows on the screen?), and supporting 3.1 and/or 3.2 would be getting too close for comfort. My apologies if I was too subtle.

Could be they just weren't ready to inject 3.0 into a new OS (10.6) on a short time table. Now that 10.6 is out, they're playing catch up.

Out of curiosity, are there any 3.0 games that require 3.0 in order to function properly?
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #26 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

I hadn't realized they'd gotten so far behind. I wonder what prompted them to get on the ball? I know they initially hated the idea of the iPhone being a game machine. I wonder if they now see the appeal such things have to the general user community?

I think you hit it on the nose right there. Plus remember the recent job postings about Apple looking for an in-house game developer.
Apple!

Think Different
Reply
Apple!

Think Different
Reply
post #27 of 70
Simply because a standard is upgraded does not necessarily mean its ready for primtime in the OS. Or that the OS is ready for the new standard.

What gave you the idea that Apple did not want gaming on the iPhone? One of the main highlights of the original iPhone SDK presentation was gaming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

I hadn't realized they'd gotten so far behind. I wonder what prompted them to get on the ball? I know they initially hated the idea of the iPhone being a game machine. I wonder if they now see the appeal such things have to the general user community?
post #28 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Simply because a standard is upgraded does not necessarily mean its ready for primtime in the OS. Or that the OS is ready for the new standard.

What gave you the idea that Apple did not want gaming on the iPhone? One of the main highlights of the original iPhone SDK presentation was gaming.

I have no idea why (other than the obvious basic appeal of a handheld gaming platform), but they seem to be OK with gaming on the iPhone/iPod touch platform. It's puzzling, because they've traditionally stonewalled game development on the Mac.
post #29 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

And? Apple is a hardware manufacturer. They are no different than your Microwave, your Blu-Ray player, your Car Stereo, or your Router. They all come with proprietary software as they are bundled with the hardware. None of these vendors would be required to allow you to use their software in another vendors hardware.

You seem to think Apple and Microsoft are the same. Might I point out that Microsoft doesn't build any PC hardware. It is necessary to the MS business model that their OS software runs on as wide a variety of hardware as possible.

Apple's computers are hardware with software that comes bundled with that hardware. It isn't necessary for them to support any other hardware than their own. Don't like it, don't buy it.

Buy a Dell, and you can't legally transfer the Windows OS from that OEM license to your home built PC.

Just because you can do a thing doesn't make it legal.

Ditto
post #30 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Simply because a standard is upgraded does not necessarily mean its ready for primtime in the OS. Or that the OS is ready for the new standard.

What gave you the idea that Apple did not want gaming on the iPhone? One of the main highlights of the original iPhone SDK presentation was gaming.

See here: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ne_gaming.html

It was widely rumored that the bigwigs were somewhat disappointed that the iPhone was turning into a very popular gaming platform. I have to wonder if that same philosophy doesn't carry over to the Mac itself. Hopefully those days are over.

I think most people enjoy a good game every now and then. Having to reboot into some other OS to play your favorites is a bit irritating.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #31 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

BRAVO MDRIFTMEYER! BRAVO! Thank you SO MUCH for stating somewhere that OpenGL 3.x is soon to arrive. THANK YOU! You are the best!!!! I'm sending you flowers through the mail. Please accept them as a token of my gratitude.

PS THANK YOU!

This is the happiest I think I've ever seen you. A stunning turn of events.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #32 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

See here: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ne_gaming.html

It was widely rumored that the bigwigs were somewhat disappointed that the iPhone was turning into a very popular gaming platform. I have to wonder if that same philosophy doesn't carry over to the Mac itself. Hopefully those days are over.

I think most people enjoy a good game every now and then. Having to reboot into some other OS to play your favorites is a bit irritating.

Given that they felt that way about the Mac long before the iPhone was developed, I'd say it carried over from the Mac. And while I share the sentiment that gaming should be made viable on the Mac, I don't see Apple sharing it in the foreseeable future. If anything, I'd say this 3.x stuff is maintenance, just to keep from getting too woefully behind the times. They would need to ramp their efforts way up on both the OS and hardware sides to make OS X attractive to game developers, and when they're opposed to games in the first place, that doesn't inspire a lot of hope in me.
post #33 of 70
Good to see Apple is making progress on upgrading to later versions of OpenGL. It has been said before and elsewhere, but the narrow focus of Mac OS X 10.6.0 on an under-the-hood OS upgrade for the future is good software development practice. Dealing with too many balls in the air at once can lead to trouble. Small steps and feedback is the way to do it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continu...vement_Process

Nullis in verba -- "on the word of no one"

 

 

 

Reply

Nullis in verba -- "on the word of no one"

 

 

 

Reply
post #34 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by MobileMe View Post

Glad to see Apple is catching up to the standard of Open GL.

Even though Open GL 3.0 was released July 2008 and 3.1 was released May 2009 and 3.2 was released in August and then updated in December 2009.

If Apple shows off iPhone OS 4.0 early and releases a new iPhone in April (maybe April Fools day, Apple sbirthday?)

Then WWDC 10 may show us a preview of Mac OS 10.7? Where further discussion of this may take place.

Apple's on the steering committees for OpenGL. Read the contributions list. Seeing as Nvidia and AMD just added OpenGL 3.1 no more than 4 months prior and just added OpenGL 3.2, at most, two months prior, Apple will have OpenGL 3.2 very shortly.

Apple has to nail down their own OpenGL specs they want to expose within Cocoa while testing against the implementations of the hardware GPU vendors.
post #35 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

See here: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ne_gaming.html

It was widely rumored that the bigwigs were somewhat disappointed that the iPhone was turning into a very popular gaming platform. I have to wonder if that same philosophy doesn't carry over to the Mac itself. Hopefully those days are over.

It good they changed their mind on games. They help with brain stimulation, creativity, problem solving, reaction time, etc.
[center] "Hey look, it's in the center. I am SO cool!"[/center]
Reply
[center] "Hey look, it's in the center. I am SO cool!"[/center]
Reply
post #36 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

I hadn't realized they'd gotten so far behind. I wonder what prompted them to get on the ball? I know they initially hated the idea of the iPhone being a game machine. I wonder if they now see the appeal such things have to the general user community?

If so, then it's about damned time.
PC Gamer, Musician, Mac Geek. | Jerion.us
Reply
PC Gamer, Musician, Mac Geek. | Jerion.us
Reply
post #37 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. K View Post

If so, then it's about damned time.

I'm hoping more companies follow Blizzards example and utilize OpenGL. Blizzard has been hugely successful. I've seen a few other games that are actively 'porting' to Mac. Seems their job would have been much easier if they started with OpenGL to begin with.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #38 of 70
Steve Jobs: brilliant at UI, not so good at underlying stuff

Snow Leopard: very minor UI updates, lots of under-the-hood

Rumored Tablet: supposedly taking up most of Steve's time, as is iPhone

Conclusion: Steve had little to do with Snowy.
post #39 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Apple's on the steering committees for OpenGL. Read the contributions list. Seeing as Nvidia and AMD just added OpenGL 3.1 no more than 4 months prior and just added OpenGL 3.2, at most, two months prior, Apple will have OpenGL 3.2 very shortly.

Apple has to nail down their own OpenGL specs they want to expose within Cocoa while testing against the implementations of the hardware GPU vendors.

I think it's still fair to say that Apple is slow in implementing the latest OpenGL standards.

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/16080
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/16323

nVidia released official OpenGL 3.0 drivers for Windows and Linux in December 2008 and ATI released theirs in January 2009. So every other major OS has had OpenGL 3.0 for at least a year now. Apple does make important contributions to OpenGL, but it'd be great if they helped popularize the standard in a timely manner.

Some of the enhancements in OpenGL 3.2 in particular were spearheaded by Mac game porting companies on the OpenGL working group to help make porting games over from DirectX easier. If we want to see more native OS X games, it'd be great if Apple moves quickly to adopt what Mac porting companies worked hard to get ratified. Of course, while gaming, Apple and the iPhone seem to go hand in hand, gaming, Apple, and OS X don't really have a storied relationship.
post #40 of 70
I LOVE YOU MDRIFTMEYER! OMGADEEZ! <3 You are the BEST!!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Support for OpenGL 3.0 added in beta build of Mac OS X 10.6.3