Microsoft Claims IP Rights on Portions of OpenGL 369
An anonymous reader writes "Minutes of the latest OpenGL ARB meeting reveal that Microsoft is claiming IP over the vertex and fragment extensions, both critical for exposing the capabilities of modern graphics hardware. The minutes also include an update on the progress of OpenGL 2.0." The question is, what does this mean for Linux -- how will Microsoft exercise their "rights"?
They have every right to do whatever they want (Score:5, Informative)
Check it out here:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/01/16/18242
Bash bash bash (Score:3, Informative)
It's an ARB requirement (Score:5, Informative)
Too little to go on... (Score:5, Informative)
Apple Wouldn't Stand for it.. (Score:2, Informative)
OpenGL on OSX (Score:3, Informative)
and MacOSx.
Check this out http://www.apple.com/opengl/ [apple.com]
It's sort of fundamental to the way OSX does 3D.
It's exactly this sort of crap that made me jump ship and buy a Mac in the first place. Of course Apple have been flexing their muscles a little too much lately too.
Re:How about the Emotion Engine on PC? (Score:4, Informative)
Pretty much all consumer-level hardware comes with both DirectX and OpenGL drivers, thanks mostly to id Software. Until recently, almost all professional-level hardware only came with OpenGL support. SGI are still in there, the Linux 3D scene is improving daily, and Apple are throwing ever more weight behind OpenGL too. 3D is hardly an MS-only game (at least until MS eliminates all other OS competitors completely).
In fact, Sony is a very minor player. They have their own weirdo hardware (which is incompatible with all non-PS2 software), but what would they do with it? Stick it on a PCI card with OpenGL & DirectX drivers, just like nVidia, ATI, Matrox, 3dlabs etc etc? Invent their own peculiar API that no-one supports? What exactly are they supposed to do that isn't already being done by everyone else?
Microsoft and 3D Graphics: A Case Study (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's not what it'll do to Linux... (Score:4, Informative)
Dude that's John Romero. The chanting you hear when you enter the final level is "To win the game, you must destroy me, John Romero" played backwards at half speed.
This is U.S. Patent # 6,417,858 (Score:3, Informative)
Old news too (Score:2, Informative)
Huh ? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It's an ARB requirement (Score:3, Informative)
However it is nice to note that for the moment, as the parent poster correctly pointed out, they are simply pointing out a potential IP conflict, and no precise licence terms have even been discussed. I've no doubt at all that they'll throw their weight around as they know how to do so well, but there are other people concerned that have as much to loose as Linux, so they'll have a difficult time making it stick.
Re:How about the Emotion Engine on PC? (Score:3, Informative)
Games are fine, and you're right about the balance of power there. But believe it or not, there does exist a larger world out there, and OpenGL is all of it. DirectX is not making much headway there.
Besides, you're also ignoring the not-insignificant Macintosh games market, not to mention the substantial PS2 and GameCube (and even occasional Xbox) games. MS is far from dominant there.