OPENGL EXTENSIONS VIEWER GDI GENERIC INSTALL
OPENGL EXTENSIONS VIEWER GDI GENERIC DRIVERS
OPENGL EXTENSIONS VIEWER GDI GENERIC DRIVER
OPENGL EXTENSIONS VIEWER GDI GENERIC WINDOWS

Scali wrote: I still think the claim of a GL->Direct3D driver is wrong (other than perhaps the software implementation using DirectX to draw I vaguely recall that MS initially had the idea of a GL->Direct3D wrapper, but ultimately abandoned it.

OPENGL EXTENSIONS VIEWER GDI GENERIC WINDOWS

It wouldn't explain why some hardware gets OpenGL support out of the box and others don't.Īnyway, on they also say that Windows Vista only has a GDI-based software implementation of OpenGL: But even if it were true, it's no different than a software renderer really: it's a hardware-agnostic default solution. I still think the claim of a GL->Direct3D driver is wrong (other than perhaps the software implementation using DirectX to draw its pixels, probably because of the new Aero DWM introduced in Vista). Yes, that's the runtime for the ICD, obviously Microsoft wrote that.Īnd yes, we all know that Microsoft also wrote a software implementation.

OPENGL EXTENSIONS VIEWER GDI GENERIC INSTALL

hence the reason to always install the vendor drivers.Īnd you pointing to opengl32.dll being written by Microsoft is a bit strange as well. However, other vendors do always include OpenGL, so it is unlikely that Microsoft is involved in these decisions.īut since GL is nothing more than a standard, it's M$ who probably tried to stunt it by providing a shite default implementation. In Intel's case it is known that OpenGL is not always included.

OPENGL EXTENSIONS VIEWER GDI GENERIC DRIVERS

The more specific stuff such as harddisk controllers, video drivers, audio drivers etc, are provided by the manufacturers themselves, there is not even a 'default' for most stuff (apart from a fallback 'SVGA' driver, which obviously is so basic that OpenGL is the least of your concerns, and that is not what we are discussing here).įor some reason (especially in the past), certain manufacturers choose to provide a stripped version of their driver, which does not include all components that you'd get when you'd download the full driver package from their own website. Microsoft only writes a few very basic drivers for extremely common and generic hardware (such as USB mice and keyboards, memory sticks and whatnot). Just think of all the hardware out there, and how huge Microsoft's driver department would have to be if they had to write the drivers for all the hardware that is supported out-of-the-box on a standard Windows installation. I think this is a common misconception: Microsoft writing drivers for hardware. hence the reason to always install the vendor drivers. but since GL is nothing more than a standard, it's M$ who probably tried to stunt it by providing a shite default implementation. I wouldn't go that far, afterall is existed and evolved a long time before M$ lifed Direct3D from that company. The OpenGL support under Win9x may be different/better than under 2k/XP. In the days of Quake II and the i740, Win98(SE) was likely the OS of choice. In both cases, I'd try older drivers, and perhaps an older OS. GPU Caps Viewer or GPU-Z should be able to tell you if any OpenGL driver support is detected at all.Įither OpenGL is missing altogether, or the later drivers are not compatible with Quake II for some reason.

I wouldn't be surprised if the drivers for XP didn't include OpenGL at all, probably because it was too slow, buggy and lacking features to be of any use. That would imply that indeed the i740 and its derivatives can run Quake II, and afaik OpenGL was the only acceleration supported in that game. 'Intel has shown that it isn't necessary to cut features or sacrifice quality in consumer-level 3-D.' 'The Intel740 3-D accelerator provides no-compromise performance for Quake II players,' said John Carmack, technical director and president of id software.

Opengl extensions viewer gdi generic