HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: akin@sgi.com (Allen Akin)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
Subject: Re: Availability of OpenGL
Date: 12 Oct 1992 17:43:01 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: tuolumne.asd.sgi.com
Keywords: release dates

In article <1992Oct10.162652.13842@cc.gatech.edu> wlw@cc.gatech.edu writes:
| 
|     I was wondering when OpenGL is expected to be release to the
|   public. Is it already available for the SGI platform? I would also
|   like any information on Nth Graphics' release date for the Sun
|   platform.
|     If it is not available yet, is there anyway of signing up as a test
|   site, to obtain pre-release versions? There are a lot of people at
|   our lab that want to start developing code with OpenGL yesterday...

In addition to using the existing mixed-mode programming facilities of
IRIX as Jeff Weinstein suggests, you might want to have someone in GVU
obtain a university license for OpenGL.  The license is available for
$500 and includes source code.  You can review the spec and other
documentation, and with a small amount of student slave labor you could
bring up the sample implementation and use it as a base for coding.

Optimized versions of OpenGL will begin appearing in the first half of
1993.  For Nth Graphics information, try contacting them at
npgl@nth.com.

Allen
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
From: normanb@citi.umich.edu (David R. Richardson)
Subject: Re: OpenGl vs PEX
Reply-To: normanb@citi.umich.edu
Organization: IFS Project, University of Michigan
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:52:49 GMT

In article
<1992Oct8.034714.4500@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au>,
pete@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Peter Alexander Merel)
writes:
|> There's Shographics' pextk - that seems to
|> compare well, and it's free too.


Can you say anything more about this?  Is it a Tcl/Tk (Ousterhout's toolkit)
implementation of PEX?


-- 
david richardson		Institutional File System Project
normanb@citi.umich.edu		The University of Michigan
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
From: jsw@microunity.com (Jeff Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Availability of OpenGL
Keywords: release dates
Organization: MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc.
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 00:44:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.162652.13842@cc.gatech.edu> wlw@cc.gatech.edu writes:
>
>    I was wondering when OpenGL is expected to be release to the public. Is it
>  already available for the SGI platform? I would also like any information
>  on Nth Graphics' release date for the Sun platform.
>    If it is not available yet, is there anyway of signing up as a test site, to
>  obtain pre-release versions? There are a lot of people at our lab that want to
>  start developing code with OpenGL yesterday...

  At SIGGRAPH most vendors, including SGI said they expected to release their
products in the first half of 1993.  Nth graphics may have indicated late 92,
my memory is a bit fuzzy on that one...

  I would suggest that if you want to start developing OpenGL today you use
the mixed mode capabilities of the GL in IRIX 4.0.x.  With mixed mode you
only use GL for rendering, just like OpenGL, so you use X for windowing and
events.

	--Jeff

-- 
Jeff Weinstein - X Protocol Police
MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc.
jsw@microunity.com
Any opinions expressed above are mine.
From: akin@sgi.com (Allen Akin)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
Subject: Re: (FAQ?) Where to get opengl spec/conformance test
Date: 16 Oct 1992 17:44:05 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: tuolumne.asd.sgi.com

In article <1992Oct16.053054.25519@netcom.com> jlevine@netcom.com (James Levine) writes:
| 
| How does one get his hands on the opengl specification and conformance test
| requirements?  Is it published anywhere?

The specification is intended for OpenGL implementors.  Currently it
must be licensed from SGI.  There are alternatives for those with more
casual interest in OpenGL:

	If you haven't already done so, grab a copy of the manual
	pages.  They'll probably tell you most of what you want to
	know.  Use anonymous ftp to sgi.sgi.com; cd to the directory
	sgi/OpenGL; and get the files {gl,glu,glx}.shar.Z.  These files
	are compressed Shell archives of the PostScript versions of the
	manual pages.

	The OpenGL books from Addison-Wesley are scheduled to appear in
	December and February.  They'll provide a better conceptual
	framework than the manual pages, and a good deal more tutorial
	information.  Contact Bill Glazier (bglazier@asd.sgi.com) for
	discount coupons.

Allen
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl,comp.sys.sgi
From: bglazier@buffalo.asd.sgi.com (Bill Glazier)
Subject: Re: University source license to OpenGL
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:44:37 GMT


 
|> | Could someone from SGI please clarify SGI's policy with regard
|> | to University licenses for OpenGL ?
|> | 
|> | 
|> | In particular, we'd like to know:
|> | 
|> |   *  are the licenses available outside USA
|> 
|> Don't know, I'll check.

Yes, they are.


|> 
|> |   *  terms of the license (non-disclosure of source, etc)
|> 
|> It's my understanding that you're allowed to use OpenGL for
|> noncommercial purposes on as many systems as you choose, but not to
|> redistribute the source.

There's lots of legalese in the contract, but Allen is essentially correct.

|> 
|> I'll ask Bill Glazier to post a more informative (and official) reply.
|> 
|> |   *  how much $$ and what do you actually get
|> 
|> US$500.  The package includes:
|> 
|> 	OpenGL Specification.
|> 		This specifies the API and all semantics for the
|> 		core of OpenGL.
|> 	GLX Specification.
|> 		GLX is the set of routines used to integrate OpenGL
|> 		and the X Window System.
|> 	OpenGL Utilities (GLU) Specification.  
|> 		The GLU includes matrix utility routines, polygon
|> 		tessellation, quadrics, and NURBS curves and surfaces.
|> 	OpenGL API Source Code (C Bindings).
|> 	GL/X Source Code.
|> 	GLU Source Code.
|> 	Manual Pages.
|> 		In troff source form.  If you'd like to preview these,
|> 		they're available by anonymous ftp from sgi.com, in
|> 		the directory sgi/OpenGL, in the files
|> 		{gl,glu,glx}.shar.Z.  These are compressed Shell
|> 		archives of PostScript for the manual pages.
|> 	Conformance Test Suite Source Code.
|> 		The conformance tests can be used to determine if
|> 		an implementation of OpenGL supports the semantics
|> 		required by the specification.
|> 	FORTRAN and Ada Bindings for OpenGL, GLX, and GLU.
|> 	Demonstration Programs.
|> 	OpenGL Reference Implementation Source Code.
|> 		This is a rewriting of the Specification in ANSI C
|> 		to help explain the more difficult semantics.  Executable,
|> 		but quite slow.
|> 	OpenGL Sample Implementation Source Code.
|> 		This is an ANSI C implementation intended for use as
|> 		a porting base.  It runs inside the X11 Sample Server,
|> 		using DDX routines for output.  It's designed to be
|> 		optimized for a wide range of graphics adapters.
|> 	OpenGL Porting and Optimization Guide.
|> 		Notes on how to use the Sample Implementation.
|> 
|> |   *  who to contact to get one
|> 
|> I'll forward your question to Bill, but for reference here's his address
|> and phone number:
|> 
|> 	Bill Glazier
|> 	Silicon Graphics, Inc.
|> 	2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.
|> 	Mountain View, CA  94039-7311
|> 
|> 	415-390-1617

That's me.  I will fax to all interested parties a formal description of the
program and the University licensing contract.

email:

bglazier@asd.sgi.com
From: faustus@ygdrasil.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
Subject: Re: (FAQ?) Where to get opengl spec/conformance test
Date: 16 Oct 1992 18:22:05 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: ygdrasil.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <1bmv15INN9il@fido.asd.sgi.com> akin@sgi.com (Allen Akin) writes:
> The specification is intended for OpenGL implementors.  Currently it
> must be licensed from SGI.

Does this mean that if I want to implement a library that conforms to
the OpenGL specification, I have to pay SGI a license fee?  This
sounds a lot like Apple's attempts to enforce "look and feel"
restrictions.  What if I want to spend a few years of my life writing
a public-domain OpenGL implementation that is not based on the SGI
implementation, but conforms exactly to the interface and
functionality specification?  Will SGI sue me?

	Wayne
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
From: pete@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Peter Alexander Merel)
Subject: Re: OpenGl vs PEX
Organization: AOTC - CSSC
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 03:47:14 GMT

stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini) writes:

>Currently PEX is free (MIT-X11R5-SI version) and OpenGl costs money.
>Does anyone remember the contest between Sun-NEWS and XWindows a few years
>back?  Many people thought NEWS to be technologically superior, but its
>costs probably kept off most machines.

>P.S. Then you get what you pay for with MIT PEX-SI :-)

There's Shographics' pextk - that seems to compare well, and it's free too.

-- 
Internet: pete@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au   UUCP: {uunet,mcvax}!munnari!cssc-syd!pete
Snail: 1/18-20 Orion Road, Lane Cove NSW 2066 Australia    Phone: +61 2 911 3130
Theftright Peter A. Merel (T) 1992. Rights to all replies, followups, originals,
sources and anything else I can get my hands on reserved.
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
From: mcsavaney_d@apollo.hp.com (#David McSavaney)
Subject: Re: OpenGl vs PEX
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 19:10:13 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Oct6.221904.12984@microunity.com> jsw@microunity.com (Jeff Weinstein) writes:
>In article <Bvpxw8.K4x@apollo.hp.com>, mcsavaney_d@apollo.hp.com (#David McSavaney) writes:
>> What about the software author that is required to purchase OpenGL source
>> code to support platforms that do not provide OpenGL? What happens
>> when they have to provide source code of _their_ product with embedded
>> OpenGL calls to important customers? Or to put their application in escrow? 
>> Do they have to pay the $300,000 (three hundred thousand dollars) for the 
>> OpenGL source code license fee? What are the subsequent source code 
>> redistribution fees?
>
>  Are you suggesting that an application software developer would get PEX
>from MIT, port it to some workstation platform that doesn't currently support
>PEX and somehow integrate it with the hardware vendor's X server product(or
>perhaps port the X server as well)?  If that isn't what you are suggesting
>then I don't see why you are making this argument about OpenGL.
                                                                            
I must be caught in some degree of confusion here Jeff. If a software
author has need to supply source code of their product for legal reasons
then I _believe_ they will have an easier time if they use vendor-supplied
software with readily-available run-time libraries embedded in
the OS. I might still be confused over exactly what you mean tho'.

>
>> Unfortunately SGI has adopted a three tiered software pricing structure
>> similar to the software pricing structure used by many companies
>> or products (take OSF's DCE pricing for example). It is a pricing structure 
>
>As far as I know Nth Graphics has only a level 1 OpenGL
>license, which is a measly $25k.  The small third party software developer
>can buy GL for the Sun or HP for about $1000 from Nth.

GL 4.0 from Nth Graphics for either HP or Sun is US$3,600 List Price
for first, single development seat. Reductions apply for subsequent copies.
(Price taken from Nth Graphics Price List dated 6/92)

Dave McSavaney
Workstation Product Marketing
Hewlett-Packard Company
                       
Not an official statement of Hewlett-Packard Company
From: bglazier@buffalo.asd.sgi.com (Bill Glazier)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
Subject: Re: (FAQ?) Where to get opengl spec/conformance test
Date: 16 Oct 92 23:36:33 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <1bni38INN30e@agate.berkeley.edu>, faustus@ygdrasil.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct16.220917.5648@odin.corp.sgi.com> bglazier@buffalo.asd.sgi.com (Bill Glazier) writes:
|> > We have a Level 1 license so people who want to create a 'home grown'
|> > OpenGL implementation, not based on the SI, can do so.  It's $25K.
|> 
|> Does this mean that if I pay $25K for the license, write my own
|> version, and pass the conformance test, I can make it public domain?
|> I know this would probably not be of a lot of use to most people, but
|> I am thinking about a university environment where one might provide
|> students with a simple X11-based OpenGL library and take out strategic
|> parts of it, and ask them to replace them to learn the algorithms, or
|> maybe just a lowest-common-denominator implementation that is
|> available to everybody.  If something like this were available I think
|> it would help SGI sell OpenGL, because developers would be more likely
|> to commit to something that they are sure would run on every X11-based
|> system, even if it's slow, without making the people who still have
|> Sun 3's or MicroVaxes pay extra.

You can do exactly what you describe for a university environment for $500.
In fact, we give you the sample implementation as part of the license.   
You just can't distribute source or binary code outside the university.  We've
had dozens of universities inquire about the program. We agree it is a very good thing for OpenGL and for students wanting to learn about 3D programming.  

We currently charge a $5 royalty per copy for commercial distribution of 
OpenGL binary code.  So, no you can't make it public domain.  We haven't 
heard from developers that an unoptimized version for all X based systems
is an important selection criteria. Companies with an installed base of
older systems can chose to support these older installations with OpenGL
through their commercial license.

Give me a call if you are interested in a University license. 
 
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
From: andreas@awstar.rus.uni-stuttgart.de (Andreas Wierse)
Subject: Re: OpenGL vs IRIS GL matrix conventions
Organization: Visualization Group Comp.Center (RUS) U of Stuttgart, FRG
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 18:23:44 GMT

In article <1b4eloINNscf@fido.asd.sgi.com> segal@spud.asd.sgi.com (Mark Segal) writes:
>When I wrote the OpenGL specification, I decided to do my part to bring
>computer graphics into line with the rest of mathematics, so I adopted
>the 'vector as column' notation (some recent computer graphics texts have
>taken the same approach).

Hi,

I'm very happy this really happened. I remember the hours I (as a
mathematician) spent with bringing my real world matrix multiplications
to the GL.

One additional question: once there was an explanation of all the matrix
stuff (projection, model and view matrices and how their elements are
influenced by all the rotate-, scale-, lookat-, etc. calls). This
vanished two years ago (the reason why I still have the old manuals on
the shelf :-) and didn't appear in the manuals again. Will all this
stuff be handled in detail in the new OpenGL books ?

Hopefully

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Wierse              | Institute for Computerapplications II
                             | Dep. Computersimulation and Visualization
 wierse@rus.uni-stuttgart.de | Computer Center University of Stuttgart
 Tel.: ++49-711-685-5796     | Allmandring 30
 Fax:  ++49-711-682357       | D-7000 Stuttgart 80     Germany
From: akin@sgi.com (Allen Akin)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
Subject: Re: OpenGl vs PEX
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:32:02 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: tuolumne.asd.sgi.com

In article <1992Oct8.034714.4500@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au> pete@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Peter Alexander Merel) writes:
| 
| There's Shographics' pextk - that seems to compare well, and it's free too.
| 

As I understand it, pextk only supports GL features that have close
analogs in PEX.  That is, it doesn't include texture mapping, alpha
blending, antialiasing, stencilling, accumulation buffering, etc.
because those things are not universally available in PEX
implementations.  For example, if you were to use pextk with the PEX
SI, it would lack hidden surface elimination, because the PEX SI
doesn't include that feature.

These are the sorts of things most people have in mind when they say
that the OpenGL sample implementation costs more than the PEX SI, but
delivers more functionality in return.

Allen
From: lang@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (John J. Lang)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:16:34 GMT
Subject: Re: HP and OpenGL
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl

> |> I _am_ able to talk to people about PEXlib and OpenGL and why
> |> HP supports PEX. Just give me a call.

> Gee, it seems that HP's public statements differ somewhat from reality.  Just
> ask any of the numerous HP engineers that regularly hop on a plane to
> Austin, Texas to visit Nth Graphics.

Just to set the record straight, there has been exactly 1 engineer make
1 trip to Nth Graphics.  There has been some limited support for Nth
since then, by both E-mail and phone.

> If they are 100% committed to PHIGS and PEX and PEXlib (notice how
> their previously 'strategic' Starbase API has seemingly disappeared
> from their marketing literature), why would they do this? 8*>

Because GL 4.0 does have a significant number of programs written for
it.  Providing an easy way to port that software to HP hardware is a
benefit to HP.  Nth Graphics provides a relatively inexpensive way to do
that (compared to the cost, in dollars and engineering time, to directly
support GL 4.0).

On the subject of Starbase.  My opinion is that HP recognizes the benefits
of an open graphics standard (notice we have been supporting PHIGS for
many years), which is why we are supporting PEX and PEXlib.  Starbase is
still an important API for us, and we will continue supporting it as long
as it is being used by our customer.  But, because Starbase is only
supported on HP platforms, it is expected that PEXlib will be a more
desirable API for application development (PEXlib being similar in scope
to Starbase).

> BTW, it's good to know HP folks subscribe to this newsgroup.  I was surprised
> none of them voted on the establishment of the newsgroup.

Actually, if you look at your records, I did vote for the newgroup.

>                                                           Also, I hope Jerry
> Norman and his team at Nth become wildly succesful (and wealthy) selling 
> OpenGL on HP (and other) workstations!  HP apparently hopes the same thing!       

So do I.  Smaller companies, like Nth, can offer a great benefit to HP by
supporting software that HP does not wish to spend the money to support
directly.

John Lang
lang@fc.hp.com

PS.  These are my personal opinions, not an official statement of HP.
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
From: jsw@microunity.com (Jeff Weinstein)
Subject: Re: HP and OpenGL
Organization: MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:42:15 GMT

In article <Bw2rB0.4Cz@apollo.hp.com>, mcsavaney_d@apollo.hp.com (#David McSavaney) writes:
> PEX is the only way to provide truly portable, network distributable 3D 
> applications based on industry standards - OpenGL does not. That Bill, is
> why HP supports PEX. 

  Can you please substantiate this claim?  It seems to me that GL is as
good or better on these counts.  If you are going to make claims like this
here you really need to put some facts behind them.
                                          
> Bill, I'd very much like to have an up to date copy of the OpenGL license
> agreement and any associated terms and condtions. Can you fax a copy
> to me please? (508) 436 5116. Thanks.

  Based on your other comments I can only conclude that you plan to use
this information to somehow attack OpenGL...

	--Jeff

-- 
Jeff Weinstein - X Protocol Police
MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc.
jsw@microunity.com
Any opinions expressed above are mine.
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
From: jlevine@netcom.com (James Levine)
Subject: (FAQ?) Where to get opengl spec/conformance test
Followup-To: jlevine.osbunorth@xerox.com
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 05:30:54 GMT


How does one get his hands on the opengl specification and conformance test
requirements?  Is it published anywhere?


Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
From: brianp@ssec.wisc.edu (Brian Paul)
Subject: OpenGL vs IRIS GL matrix conventions
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Space Science and Engineering Center
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 14:34:48 GMT

                                                                                
While reading the man pages for the modeling transformation functions,
I discovered OpenGL uses post-multiplication whereas the IRIS GL uses
pre-multiplication.  Also, modeling and viewing matrices in OpenGL are
the transposes of the corresponding IRIS GL matrices.  Why the change of
convention?

I thought that pre-multiplication in the IRIS GL was used because the
hardware used pre-multiply.  Has post-multiply been favored because it's
a better convention?  What about any performance penalty?

Just curious.

Brian
From: mjk@hoot.asd.sgi.com (Mark Kilgard)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
Subject: Re: OpenGl vs PEX
Date: 13 Oct 92 00:12:02 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <5269@bacon.IMSI.COM>, jordan@IMSI.COM (Jordan Hayes) writes:
|> By the way, what if I don't want someone else's binary-only server?
|> What if I want to drop OpenGL into my own X11R5 server?  (Hint: SGI is
|> not shipping X11R5 yet, when was R5 released?)

X11R5 will be bundled as part of SGI's IRIX 5.0 release.

- Mark
From: faustus@ygdrasil.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
Subject: Re: (FAQ?) Where to get opengl spec/conformance test
Date: 16 Oct 1992 23:09:28 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: ygdrasil.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Oct16.220917.5648@odin.corp.sgi.com> bglazier@buffalo.asd.sgi.com (Bill Glazier) writes:
> We have a Level 1 license so people who want to create a 'home grown'
> OpenGL implementation, not based on the SI, can do so.  It's $25K.

Does this mean that if I pay $25K for the license, write my own
version, and pass the conformance test, I can make it public domain?
I know this would probably not be of a lot of use to most people, but
I am thinking about a university environment where one might provide
students with a simple X11-based OpenGL library and take out strategic
parts of it, and ask them to replace them to learn the algorithms, or
maybe just a lowest-common-denominator implementation that is
available to everybody.  If something like this were available I think
it would help SGI sell OpenGL, because developers would be more likely
to commit to something that they are sure would run on every X11-based
system, even if it's slow, without making the people who still have
Sun 3's or MicroVaxes pay extra.

	Wayne
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
From: ldawes@news.cs.uah.edu (Lisa Dawes)
Subject: GLX? PEX vs. OpenGL
Reply-To: ldawes@news.cs.uah.edu (Lisa Dawes)
Organization: Computer Science Dept. - Univ. of Alabama in Huntsville
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 14:46:07 GMT


What is GLX? Is this a GL X Window protocol similiar to PEX?
Will this allow users of OpenGL to control remote X terminals
which support GLX?  I am aware of a vender who has developed a
high performance PEX terminal, is there such a thing for OpenGL?
From: akin@sgi.com (Allen Akin)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
Subject: Re: Info wanted about Open_GL on DEC.
Date: 7 Oct 92 16:54:44 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: tuolumne.asd.sgi.com

In article <HARI.92Oct7095951@robios5.me.wisc.edu> hari@robios.me.wisc.edu (Kambainathan Hari) writes:
| 
| * Is Open_GL available on the DEC ?

Digital is an OpenGL licensee, and at the OpenGL BOF at SIGGRAPH they
indicated that OpenGL would be available on some DEC platforms in the
first half of 1993.

| * Whom should I contact and how much is it likely to cost ?

Check with your local DEC sales representative.  If he doesn't have
the information at hand, ask him to contact Derek Speed.

Allen