IRIX - Mac OS X (comparison of graphics development tools)

Apple hardware/software and related topics.
Forum rules
Any posts concerning pirated software or offering to buy/sell/trade commercial software are subject to removal.
User avatar
melchez
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:14 am
Location: NC - USA

IRIX - Mac OS X (comparison of graphics development tools)

Unread postby melchez » Wed May 04, 2011 2:15 am

IRIX - Mac OS X (comparison of graphics development tools)

Disclaimer - I'm not a programmer, developer or anything remotely as intelligent

I've been messing around with Xcode over the years, not getting past the "hello world !" stage but still having fun. Once in a while do a the IRIX - Mac OS X comparison thing in my little head.

IRIX - One of the big reasons I see folks holding on to it was the tools SGI had under the hood when it came to graphics, beside being the platform for the start of OpenGL aka irixGL the Dmedia libraries gave developers a serious platform to develop some interesting graphical tools, not to over look the audio ability of the OS.

Mac OS X - seem to have taken the torch and offers it developers a wealth of tools to create power graphical tools by way of the Core frameworks: Core Animation, Core Image, Core Data, Core Audio, Quiktime and the rest. It just seem like folks are not really into this being that there are few apps outside of Apple created apps that take advantage of the Core Framework, to name a few: Cheetah3D, Pixelmator, Node (Mac OS X version of Processing.org), I'm pretty sure there a lot more in the science world. Xcode is an affordable developing tool, $4 via the AppStore. I can understand trying to develop programs that can be ran or easily recompiled on different platforms but I say screw that when you have option to create a powerful app using a specific OS platform from the tools it offer to create it. :D

What are your take, thoughts on this??

Those that remember the examples that came with the older Xcode, the OpenGl ones were some the ones we had in the IRIX demos. The latest Xcode don't come with them but you can recompile them in Xcode 4, if you access to them. I recompile them, some of them ran smooth but others ran crazy most likely do to the speed of the current CPUs and GPUs vs when they first came out, anyone with some programming skill probably could make needed adjustments. (the ocean scene the dolphins are swimming mad fast!).

edit: Meant irisGL and not irixGL
Last edited by melchez on Wed May 04, 2011 5:22 am, edited 3 times in total.
5/11/11 12:58:19 AM gfxCardStatus[268] AMD Radeon HD 6750M in use. Bummer! Less battery life for you.
5/11/11 12:58:20 AM gfxCardStatus[268] Intel HD Graphics 3000 in use. Sweet deal! More battery life.
MacBook Pro 17inch 2011
Mac Mini 2010

iffy50
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 1:45 pm
Location: Bonn, Germany

Re: IRIX - Mac OS X (comparison of graphics development tool

Unread postby iffy50 » Wed May 04, 2011 4:32 am

My view on the OS X side of things:
A lot of the big names in graphics development are supporting at least dual platform (Windows & Mac) and in some cases 3 (with Linux). In this situation they want to have as much common code between the different platforms to decrease the development effort and simplify feature parity. They also don't generally have much interest in making a particular OS better than another as you only end up alienating part of your user base. In many cases, it would be easier for a shop to change their application than it would be to change their OS (and a lot more than just a single application)

For the smaller developers that have only Mac based products, the interviews with developers I remember reading when Snow Leopard came it is that they would plan to support the technologies, but these core technologies can take a lot of re-developing so they'll be there at some point, but it might take a long time.

Apple, obviously is almost exclusively single platform and has every reason to make their products use all of the advantages that they can to continue the hardware sells software sells hardware loop. And if you look at apps like Final Cut Pro, it works.

I can't really make much of a comparison for IRIX, as I wasn't there back in the day.

sniff.

Ian

SAQ
Posts: 5871
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 8:37 am
Location: Renton, WA

Re: IRIX - Mac OS X (comparison of graphics development tool

Unread postby SAQ » Wed May 04, 2011 7:56 am

The big problem with dmedia and many other IRIX-specific things is that while they are neat and seem to be a good approach, they are also very proprietary, so few programs used them.

Why code for an elegant setup if it only exists on one machine, and other hacks work everywhere? OpenGL became so big simply because it was open (well, that and reasonably good) - you could have it on SGI, and later on AIX, Solaris, Linux, Tru64, OpenVMS for some odd reason, etc. True, it had competiton (PHIGS et al), but techinically OpenGL was in some ways better and definitely easier to use.
"Brakes??? What Brakes???"

"I am O SH-- the Great and Powerful"

:Indigo: :Octane: :Indigo2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indy: :PI: :O3x0: :ChallengeL: :O2000R: (single-CM)

User avatar
melchez
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:14 am
Location: NC - USA

Re: IRIX - Mac OS X (comparison of graphics development tool

Unread postby melchez » Wed May 04, 2011 9:51 pm

I think it was more of an issue with accessibility and availability than proprietary technology that causes so few programs being made that actually used those features and toolsets. Considering the cost of a SGI machine, MIPS Pro compiler, and the size of the targeted users is more of an issue than it being proprietary. But that just how things were done then.

Mac OS X Framework and technology is proprietary but it is much more available, accessible, affordable with a much larger user base than SGI had (even though the targeted group is slightly different). Look at the large amount of iPad and iPhone apps being produced. To create these apps one have to use the same developing tools that can be used to produce apps that take advantage of the Mac OS X Core Framework.
I wouldn't expect too many large companies to produce Mac OS X only apps, especially companies with mullti-platform applications. But OS X is a platform with large amount of tools and frameworks to produce some interesting, powerful and unique applications.
5/11/11 12:58:19 AM gfxCardStatus[268] AMD Radeon HD 6750M in use. Bummer! Less battery life for you.
5/11/11 12:58:20 AM gfxCardStatus[268] Intel HD Graphics 3000 in use. Sweet deal! More battery life.
MacBook Pro 17inch 2011
Mac Mini 2010


Return to “Apple”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests