Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
With the deprecation of OpenGL on MacOS and the most likely true rumors of ARM based Macs (that most likely support the Metal graphics API only), how is everyone handling open source gaming on MacOS?
Are people building engines that target OpenGL and Metal? or Vulcan? Or is it even worth it to target MacOS anymore? Apple requires a paid developer account and notarization to even run apps on later versions of Mojave, is that worth the effort?
Porno Gratis Aquí - Porno Español, Sexo Gratis
I don't think people are building engines especially to target Apple platforms. There are major engines like Unreal that have updated their systems to use the Metal APIs but as far as I know from our early research in 2018 and early 2019, at this stage, Unreal crashed frequently on Apple. So I don't know a year later, how this is going on right now. OpenGL and Vulkan or Vulkan and DirectX 12 are common combinations for render pipelines.
From a commercial standing, it feels like games on Mac have become the smallest piece of the market and are no longer worth to target, except exporting a game from your engine is already as straight forward. A limitation is still that you need to own the hardware to be able to build Objective C code and if I should pay for that from Mojave on and also pay for the hardware with no clue how well my game will sell on Mac, I would avaoid building for it rather than. iOS may be a difference because it is still a big deal on the mobile market but it feels as if Apple is getting themselves into a position where the platform gets more and more uneconomical for game developersor at least the quality will vanish for low-price apps.
That said, I already decided a long while ago to NOT target any Apple platform with my software and games
The core premise of this question is based on a misunderstanding.
To correct it: OpenGL is not open-source. The “open” in OpenGL has absolutely nothing to do with open-source, OpenGL itself even pre-dates use of the term “open-source” by the open-source movement, and use of OpenGL neither helps nor hinders a program to be open-source.
In fact, most OpenGL implementations you'll encounter on real-world end-user PCs are as closed-source as anything that comes from any major closed-source vendor.
So OpenGL being deprecated will have no implications for open-source on any platform.
I think, you misunderstood the question. It was more about how people handle not being able to use a single API (OpenGL) for all platforms they would want to support, because Apple deprecated it.
1. Deprecated does not mean “not available”, only “not recommended by a vendor trying to look people into their own API”.
2. You can still use the outdated OpenGL on Apple.
3. You could use something like Angle or MoltenGL to translate it, while still not having to use Metal directly.
4. You could use Vulkan and MoltenVK.
5. You could stop supporting a platform that threatens to remove support for the cross platform API you want to use, because it is too much additional work.
6. You could give in and program large portions of your code twice, thrice, … and support Metal, D3D, … .
Apple never took OpenGL seriously… my laptop only supported version 4.1. You can't even do compute shaders with that. So lame.
I have already abandoned OpenGL on Linux, because software rendering is faster than bad OpenGL drivers and integrated GPUs on laptops. If a game gives the player 300 frames per second and looks like Doom 2016, then nobody will care if it was done in OpenGL, Metal, Vulkan or a bad-ass CPU with many cores.
