7 Replies Latest reply on Dec 20, 2010 2:46 PM by Mars_999

    Bug fixing in OpenGL implementation

    nesister
      Rant >:|

      Well ...

      It's been two months and three catalyst releases since my report of three bugs, provided with simple test case code:

      http://forums.amd.com/devforum/messageview.cfm?catid=392&threadid=140991&enterthread=y

      http://forums.amd.com/devforum/messageview.cfm?catid=392&threadid=140992&enterthread=y

      http://forums.amd.com/devforum/messageview.cfm?catid=392&threadid=140968&enterthread=y

      Developers on on this forum seems to be very responsive, i had a quick answer in each of my posts. But come on, how do you expect people to use AMD/ATI hardware with opengl when it takes more than 2 months to fix showstopper bugs like this or this ? How do you expect GAMES to be developped with opengl if one of the major hardware vendor can't provide a working opengl (>= 3.2) implementation (even if you claim opengl 4.1 compliance in catalyst 10.12 ...) ?

      I know, opengl games on windows count for about 1% so why bother. Not even talking about linux or other commercialy unsignificant O.S ... But hey,  there's a lot of people working with (at least) linux/opengl that you should care about. In universities , doing research and coming up with interesting algorithms. Other are just developers, trying to develop games with something else than directX, because portability matters and because they know windows is not the only OS to play games ... All those people stick to and recomends nvidia cards, because it works the way it should(tm).

      Crap, I like AMD hardware, it pisses me off to be unable to use it for my researches because of that.