no... leaving older cards out is absurd. Quartz doesn't require Radeons and GeForce cards. It gives them a better experience, but it doesn't cut you out if you don't have one.
to make an OS that's *better* than Windows, with the intention of getting joe average to be able to say "this is better" and want to switch... and then adopt an "exclusive" mindset toward supported hardware is ludicrous.
sure, it would be *easy* to hard-code the display layer to only use OpenGL calls, and therefore cut out everything but the Radeons and GeForce cards.
Remember, the issue is NOT "this card supports OpenGL" but whether or not the card would be able to *render a full desktop UI with GL*.
The Rage128 series, and its counterparts (nVidia Vanta and Riva, S3 Savage) support GL... but all have the unfortunate problem of only supporting textures that are a power-of-two size.
Rage128 chipsets don't have any trouble running Quartz. They're incapable of running Quartz Extreme.
Did Apple require that you have a Radeon or GeForce to run Mac OS X? NO. that would be absolutely stupid... and it would be business suicide.
to build the Dagon display layer, you'll need to take it in steps... the first step will be to build a display ghostscript layer... make it do this first, then add the OpenGL engine. you'll have the core graphics layer, and then the driver for the vid card will enable OpenGL acceleration.
it's not easier... but it's BETTER. X11 and Windows GDI might not be the best frameworks from a technological standpoint, but their support for a wide range of video cards is superb. by using plug-in drivers, you can support different chipsets and squeeze all the performance you can from them. so why not build a better display layer, and design it to use plug-in drivers? you can provide decent support out-of-the-box for most things, and then let people build their own drivers for really wierd and rare things, like Voodoo.
I honestly don't give a shit if it's "really easy" to only support bleeding edge, but I do care if joe average realizes that he's going to have to *buy a new video card* or even BUY A NEW COMPUTER just to run an OS that he *doesnt really need*.
my suggestion is this
your top-tier cards (GeForce series, Radeons) get all the perks from their optimized drivers. OpenGL acceleration (Dagon Extreme), all that shit.
the next tier (Rage128, Vanta, Riva) get all the features, save for Dagon Extreme. video acceleration is enabled, and you get nice, smooth playback of movies, et cetera. these chipsets get tweaked drivers that squeeze everything that can be sucked from these still very viable cards (seeing as they're STILL PRODUCED)
the next tier down is when things start getting to the border of "underpowered"... the Rage 2s, Rage Pros, the Intel810, and other older or marginally powered chipsets. these guys get rather generic drivers that allows Dagon to run... that's about it. it won't be syrupy slow... but it won't be a speed demon either. video might be rather jerky and poor quality. third parties are free to make more optimized drivers, but don't expect that to help these cards out an awful lot.
below that is the "unsupported" category. these chipsets use a generic framebuffer driver which allows Dagon to run... and that's it. forget watching videos, all you've got is a framebuffer. slow world. people can build drivers for unsupported chipsets if they wish. make them open source, or closed commercial. if they're OSS, we'll include them in the next release. if not... well, we won't.
by giving support for a wider range, you're going to open the OS up to so many more people.
to say "we will only support cards that will run Dagon Extreme"... you've just said "don't even look at our OS". the people that have these cards, are more than likely gamers, and they're going to run Windows until you pry it from their skeletal fingers.
Jeff is a Mac user, and he's honestly thinking too much like one. Apple knows exactly what cards they need to support and can put a lot of effort into making things work well. they're also a hardware company, and if they can give you an incentive to buy a new computer... they will.
by saying you're going to develop an OS for PCs, right there you've opened pandora's box. you've committed to supporting a myriad of mainboard chipsets, sound cards, modems, network adaptors, video cards, et cetera.
by saying you want to build an OS that will give Windows users a real reason to leave it behind, you're saying that your OS will install on their hardware and just work. they WILL EXPECT IT TO DO SO.
they don't care if you have an ideal machine. they don't care if you think that they should have the newest video card. they're tired of windows, you've given them an option... a truly BETTER way out... oh, but wait. there's a catch. they'd better have an up-to-date computer or they're out in the cold.
they'll dismiss the product as being the ultimate resource hog, being poorly designed, poorly thought out, and badly built. ultimately... they won't use it.
I'm sorry, but I don't have an elitist view of what this project should be. I DO NOT WANT TO MAKE MAC OS X.
I DO NOT WANT TO MAKE MAC OS X
I DO NOT WANT TO MAKE MAC OS X
I want to make something that nearly anybody can install on their computer, and have something better than windows. I honestly would condem the project if it became an "elitist" OS the way I think he wants it to.
this was my idea, all I did was ask a couple of people what they thought of it. I had an idea to make a NeXT-like OS that would run on mid-range and low-end hardware so that anybody can run it.... and then add special features for high-end hardware so that people who have the newer stuff can take advantage of it. I love how it's suddenly turned into a Mac OS X clone for ultra-high performance workstations, and the idea is to say "fuck those poor saps who have older hardware".
GOD DAMN IT I WONDER WHY I FUCKING TRY SOMETIMES
[ September 27, 2003: Message edited by: Jimmy's Always On Topic ]
