Balloon 3D

sig siguctua at
Tue Jun 5 14:19:33 UTC 2007

In my opinition - OpenGL is a Graphics Library at first place, while
DirectX is just a library which lets programmer to speak _directly_
with hardware (i think that's why is was called so).
>From this point, OpenGL will be always superior. Because it does not
depends on any hardware and have a good abstraction level for generic
graphics rendering. It's simple to imagine a plotter device , which
understands OpenGL commands, but hard to imagine plotter drawing using
DirectX. :)

So, while OpenGL is always focusing on generic
interfaces/implementations for all possible platforms/hardware,
DirectX is focused on supporting a cutting-edge features of some video
cards. And from this point - OpenGL is better choice for creating apps

Its good that we having 2 different graphics libraries competing each
other, but bad for hardware manufacturers - they need to support both
of them in their products, and its always tempting to support only one
of them.

On 02/06/07, mmille10 at <mmille10 at> wrote:
> DirectX started out inferior to OpenGL. I remember the days when DirectX first came out. Cards that fully supported OpenGL were high end and very expensive, several hundred dollars each. The DirectX cards were cheaper, more affordable to average consumers, but supported fewer features. I remember somebody (maybe ID Software?) came out with a library called MiniGL that could run accelerated 3D graphics using a subset of OpenGL on the more expensive DirectX cards. I have very little experience with developing for DirectX, OpenGL, etc. So I can't make an assessment about the superiority of the current versions.
> ---Mark
> mmille10 at

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list