I think people who write managed code with managed extentions C++ are a little more seasoned than
some who write primarly in VB, C#, or J#. Based on managed C++ code samples, you can tell it's more uglier and more error prone to develop .NET applications with.
Anyway... how about:
J2SE v6.0 or J2EE v5.0 vs .NET v2.0
Java vs .NET... the classic debate.
I think people who write managed code with managed extentions C++ are a little more seasoned than some who write primarly in VB, C#, or J#. Based on managed C++ code samples, you can tell it's more uglier and more error prone to develop .NET applications with.
I would actually prefer to develop the GUI aspect in Avalon using procedural code, rather than XAML. Sure XAML has many benefits, but I'm not ready to muck with an markup language like that. I think that Visual Studio code named Orcas might have an option of automatically producing either XAML or procedural code for the form design?
Mike Dimmick wrote:Dammit! An architect on the appropriate team - who presented at WinHEC - promised me that they would put out official clarification this week. Unfortunately I promised I wouldn't post the content of his email so I can't really say too much more.
Except to say, read the second sentence of the original post carefully:
"If an OpenGL ICD is run - the desktop compositor will switch off - significantly degrading the user experience."
I'm not sure on what basis the OP claims that there will be 'significant degradation' nor that "OpenGL performance will be significantly reduced - perhaps as much as 50%" when using the OpenGL to Direct3D translator that will be used when no ICD is available or the ICD does not support the selected pixel format. For 3D accelerated games like Doom 3, which is all that most people here probably care about, I anticipate that if an ICD is provided, it will be used - no translation to Direct3D.
The translator is still an improvement over Windows XP - if no ICD is installed, software rendering occurs on XP. On Vista it will use the OGL/D3D translator. The translator should be faster than software rendering.
I see... but What about being able to install newer versions of OpenGL? I read that Vista will only support v1.4, and upgrading isn't possible? OpenGL v2.0 is out now, and offers alot more.
This issue is the main headline on the offical OpenGL site. I hope Microsoft and driver vendors work this out. If not, I may just stay with Windows XP for a while longer or move to Linux. Microsoft does support their previous OS for many years after a new release, So XP isn't going anywhere soon. Infact, just recently Microsoft said it will continue to support Windows 2000 until 2010, so yea.
"Microsoft's current plan for OpenGL on Windows Vista is to layer OpenGL over Direct3D in order to use OpenGL with a composited desktop to obtain the Aeroglass experience. This means that OpenGL performance will be significantly reduced - perhaps as much as 50%. It would be technically straightforward to provide an OpenGL ICD within the full Aeroglass experience without compromising the stability or the security of the operating system. Layering OpenGL over Direct3D is a policy more than a technical decision."
Is this another anti-competitive attempt by Microsoft to impose DirectX on developers by crippling OpenGL, which is the standard on MacOS and Linux? Sure DirectX has been the preferred API for Windows and Xbox, but still... this makes me quite angry. I hope lawsuits can arise from this!
Happy Birthday to Windows 95!!
Miss those old days!