OpenGL 3.0

[JSoftware]

OpenGL does support geometry shaders (at least nVidia published
an extension on it - ATi/AMD seems to think this is unnessecary).

Ah okay... I didn't know that. But i those threads, people still mention "Geometry Shaders" now and then. I think they expected it to be core functionality that worked on most of the proper gaming systems. So far, implementing OGL geo-shaders is not worth-while because quite alot of people can use them (ATI + Intel chips).

Doesn't ATI >X2xxx cards have the GL_EXT_geometry_shader4 extension? They support unified shaders which should have geometry shader capabilities

If I ever get the time to get back to graphics coding I would probably start looking at DirectX instead of OGL which I've used since I started doing 3D rendering. A quick glance at their interfaces tells me that it's awesome. Especially DX10 and DX11 which should even have inbuilt handling of multithreaded and therefore multicore capabilities

[chronozphere]

I read somewhere that ATI didn't consider it neccesary to write proper OpenGL geo-shader implementations for their drivers. :?

[User137]

Well, maybe it's time to move on. All i do is play games and make them so Windows is obvious choice, so DirectX. It was fun with OpenGL though.

[technomage]

Well dispite the bad press on OpenGL 3 API, if you want to write 3D apps for Linux and OSX you will just have to use it, cos M$ definately wont.

Personally I prefer OpenGL. I find it easier to work with than DirectX. After spending the last few months converting an Direct3D app to OpenGL I can safely save the code is allot easier to read now than it was, thus easier to maintain .

I find it disapointing that people tend to focus on the negative parts of stuff like this, but hey that's human nature isnt it. :?