Man The API doesn't expose OpenGL . The API is even a lower level than OpenGL lib . Although it does resemble OpenGL structure partially .
Sent from my iPhone On Feb 17, 2011, at 11:03 PM, bo <[email protected]> wrote: > Does it mean OpenGL will be exposed as an API for actionscript? > > I found this interesting: > "as well as a new software 3D renderer fallback that will aim to > provide the vast majority of computers with fast, reliable, 3D > rendering in Flash" > > Vast majority of computers should have Intel integrated GPUs. I.e., > the GMA 950, GMA X3100. If the fallback is necessary, does it mean the > software rasterizer the new Flash uses is faster than those integrated > GPUs? > > Also, if Flash will have a native software fall back, would the > software rasterizer code portions from Away3D, Sandy, Sophie, and etc. > be considered obsolete? > > Or is Adobe licensing one of the engine developers to create a > certified software OpenGL implementation for actionscript? > > Thanks > > On Feb 17, 1:45 pm, John Wilson <[email protected]> > wrote: >> No, the Molehill API which will provide the additional 3D support is >> too low level to be of any use without a 3D engine sitting on top of >> it. See the MAX 2010 video on the Away3D home page (http:// >> away3d.com/). >> >> Regards, >> >> John Wilson >> >> On Feb 17, 3:54 pm, bo <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> It seems the next Flash version will have native 3D support with >>> hardware access. An OpenGL + GLSL binding? Or some proprietary API? >> >>> I am curious what does it mean to our Away3D and other Flash software >>> 3D engine users. >> >>> Would everyone just migrate to the new fast and standardized API and >>> have no incentive to come back to software based engines? >> >>> Thanks- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text -
