OpenGL++: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:27, 20 May 2005

Revision as of 03:33, 20 May 2005

Line 7:

Much of OGL++ was a combination of ideas from earlier SGI projects in the same vein, namely [[Open Inventor]] which offered ease-of-use, and [[OpenGL Performer]] which was written separately from Inventor to deliver a system that optimized scene graphs for increased performance and exploited scalable architectures. It was later intended that a new design could get the best of both worlds while forming the underlying framework for several projects including [[Computer Aided Design|CAD]], [[image processing]], [[flight simulator|visual simulation]], [[scientific visualization]] and user interfaces or 3D manipulators allowing them to interoperate, thereby offering both rapid development and high performance.

SGI had already almost completed one effort to merge the functionality of scene graphs[[Cosmo 3D]], Cosmo 3D was in fact the spinoff from an earlier collaboration with Sun which was supposed to produce a scene graph for Java in conjunction with SGI's new scene graph, Sun and SGI went their separate ways with Java3D and Cosmo3D. When SGI announced the OGL++ effort, they halted development of Cosmo3D when it had just reached a beta release. By then a CAD/'"Large Model Visialization'Visualization" layer of functionality called OpenGL Optimizer had already been implemented on Cosmo3D and then released as a product. Other "front end" packages like, Cosmo Code, a [[VRML]] authoring tool, were produced by a different division and use of the Cosmo name was merely part of a broader marketing strategy, it ran on OpenGL. OGL++ was intended to be a cleaned up and more flexible version of Cosmo3D, most of the Cosmo3D team started work on OGL++ and a lot of the effort was aimed at a specification and implementation that could deliver on the promise of a truly powerful yet generic scene graph.

In the end, there is little to show for any of these efforts. Parnerships with [[Sun Microsystems]], Intel and IBM and Microsoft all led to nothing as SGI jumped from project to project. In retrospect, SGI reacted badly to a rapidly changing environment. An internal desire to create a new improved generic but extensible scene graph was constantly sidetracked by a belief that SGI couldn't go it alone. Partnerships were formed and later abandoned due to irreconcilable differences or simply as priorities and internal pressures shifted. OGL++ was the most nacent of these efforts and although it was the option that rapidly gained the strongest interest the power of the idea forced an unholy alliance between Microsoft and SGI in the form of Farenheit, SGI joining because of it's long held belief that it couldn't go it alone and Microsoft because it wanted to avert the possibility of a truly open 3D scene graph. Ancillary issues like powerful CAD APIs running on Cosmo3D complicated the picture. In the final analysis the new unified scene graph concept was bounced from project to project, and eventually died in 2000 when Fahrenheit was killed.