I probably have no business piping up here, but the mere sufficiency of using old versions may not be as valuable as the future-proof-ness of using new versions.  For educational and open-source settings, and especially if its a new project being created from scratch, I think its nice to be able to work within a context that wholly avoids deprecated functionality.  The number of people for whom modern OpenGL functionality is thought of as an "extension" will be monotonically decreasing, no?


On Feb 7, 2012, at 2:24 PM, Ian Mallett wrote:

It's a classic debate--newness or backwards compatibility.  However, in this case, it's much simpler:

I hate OpenGL 3 and 4.  They're not an improvement over OpenGL 2, and moreover they do away with nice things (e.g., glVertex, matrices, etc.).  About the only thing they do that's good is make some extensions into core functionality.  There's something to be said for that, but often it's nothing that's precluded just by using those extensions in the first place.

I find that OpenGL 2 is perfectly sufficient.  It has all the extensions I want for advanced functionality, and it's portable to all devices that are powerful enough to warrant actually doing GPU computing in the first place.

Finally, I don't support Intel integrated crap.  They have dodgy implementations of graphics APIs at best.  In my experience, brand new chipsets don't even have support for OpenGL features that were core functionality a decade ago.  Lastly on hardware: AMD's GPUs have incorrect GLSL compilers, and NVIDIA's aren't strict enough, though both have been improving over time.

Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
PyOpenGL Homepage
PyOpenGL-Users mailing list