[robbies]

Sure, ATI/AMD (and Windows Intel) lagged behind NV in the full OpenGL implementation. But the "compatability" profile is full of a lot of cruft that had nothing to do with modern GPUs, and whose primary value was to passing workstation test suites, not actual modern GPU programming.

I know we have the "but mah immediate mode" crowd, but those folks have to just get off it. Write your own immediate mode recorder if you're so desperate. I'm also looking at you, matrix stack abusers. Your programs are bad, and you should feel bad.

[badsectoracula]

> I know we have the "but mah immediate mode" crowd

I'm in the "but mah immediate mode" crowd, so thanks for the condescending tone. I like immediate mode and matrix stacks and all the nice stuff compatibility mode provides because they are convenient even if they aren't fast. Quite often what you want is convenience, not performance and adding a usually badly documented 3rd party library that might be dropped next year (or whatever) or break its API is not a desirable solution. Especially when the entire point is moot since OpenGL 1.x/2.x and 3.x/4.x compatibility isn't going anywhere any time the next couple of decades - at least.

Besides the parent post is about what someone's favorite API was so i also added what my favorite API is. D3D9 isn't any more deserving to be someone's favorite API than OpenGL.

[robbies]

I would actually argue that it is _bad_ for graphics. The GPU abstraction that OpenGL represents is now 30+ years old, and not at all representative of how modern GPUs (desktop or mobile) work. I'd even argue that OGL obfuscate the GPU machinery to all the budding graphics programmers who use OGL. OGL was never meant to be a graphics toolkit/middleware, but that's what it's become (at least the compat profile).

As far as the value to you, to be perfectly frank, you would not have compatibility profile if it wasn't for workstation ISVs demanding OpenGL 1.1 still be supported for their legacy applications (and shelling out the big bucks to maintain that support). There isn't a singly IHV who is keeping these legacy features on for any hobbyist or learning programmer. Not one. The IHVs know it's bad, but there's a lot of money in keeping it around.

I don't even know if there's value in mentioning this, but I used to be an OpenGL driver engineer, and then when I worked on it, I realized "Hey, wtf, this has nothing to do with how the GPU works!" I'm still happy/proud about the work I did, but I don't think it advanced the graphics state-of-the-art (for the most part, there are some cool things that showed up first in OpenGL). And then as far as the cruft I mentioned...it's just a psychotic maintenance nightmare.

[badsectoracula]

That is all nice but i don't see what is the point of trying to convince me that i shouldn't like something i like :-P. Regardless of how good OpenGL is in representing how GPUs work or why it is still around, it doesn't change the fact that it is still around and i like using it.