That would be SGI, not Apple.

OpenGL was developed by SGI (a very long time ago) and eventually moved to Khronos.

OpenCL was developed by Apple, and recently proposed to Khronos.

My main concern here is that Direct3D doesn't exist anywhere but Windows. OpenGL is still the only good way to program 3D graphics on myriad platforms, including the one that just got 5% PC market share in North America, yet there's no denying that it's some distance behind D3D10 in terms of giving a sane programming model with no extension and vendor hell. 3 does little to change my mind, despite Timothy's nice dissection.The need for a clean object model and a strong push to deliver it has been around for years now, ever since D3D9 showed up.As someone who rarely cares to touch Windows any more unless forced into it, I'm a little upset. I was hoping 3 would let me get enthusiastic about tools dev on Linux :(

I read the C as a G. >.

I think people is too flamable.

Ok. It is not as nice as we wanted. It is not so clean. And what? Any middle or big size application will not be issuing GL commands all over its code, but have a thin layer over the API. Make this layer as clean as you want, because that is what you will be using it all the time.

I think OpenGL will prevail because, as already stated by many people, it is the only option for many platforms. And it will evolve more.

j.

But it took 2 years to maintain status quo, only upgrading a few extensions to core and adding a few new extensions, and the most interesting one (http://www.opengl.org/registry/specs/EXT/direct_state_access.txt) might not be supported by AMD, making it useles...

It's nice that they added deprecation, but what are the chances that they will actually remove the functions later when they didn't manage to remove them now? There are no timeline telling us when to expect them to disappear, which means we can't schedule when we need to have removed them. And that means the old code bases will stay the way they are, and the argument to delay/not removing them because of said code bases will stay as valid as it is today.

Sure, those who really need to be cross-platform will continue using OpenGL, after all there is no other viable alternative. But what developer will choose OpenGL over DirectX?
Unless there is a requirement for cross-platform or a huge hatred for MS, there really isn't much reason to choose OpenGL with driver problems, lack of supported features and an apparent lack of direction.

That doesn't really bode well for the future of OpenGL.

Actually, deprecated functions this version should be gone in the next version. That's why some people call for a short time before the 3.1 spec is released, to speed up that process and right some wrongs.

should!

Michael Gold (http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=243193&fpart=7) said this morning:
who is trusting the ARB after this?

in the same post he also states:
so whats up with that? they give us the option of a lean and mean API with the option for better performing drivers in the lite mode, but we are not supposed to use it?

this man was one of the main editors of the long peaks api...

NVIDIA put up beta OpenGL 3.0 drivers tonight - this was announced at the SIGGRAPH BOF.

Apologists...

Above post is proof they are there even in the worst of disgraces.