Hmm... some quotes I liked from gamedev.net. These quotes I don't neccessarily agree with, but they are good ones.
"This is why they say GL is for CAD. D3D is for games.""I guess the OpenGL vs Direct3D question has finally been answered. It's Direct3D unless you need cross platform compatibility.""Some cad guy told everyone in the thread @ OpenGL's site to calm down, and that games are small, unimportant apps.
""Sounds like lots of 'The sky falling' talk but I thought the sky had fallen years ago. I am using OGL/GLSL and it has everything I need. The trick is not to read the DX SDK 
I learned roughly OS/2 years ago not to take sides. Just use OGL for what it's good for and leave it at that."My favorite quote."What's wrong with drawing a line and put a complete new api for the next version? Dx does it (too often possibly). It's not like it hurts anyone to have opengl1.dll, opengl2.dll and opengl3.dll on it's system."And the most informative and reasonable quote,"It's not the number of apps that matter; it's the size of the market that these apps cater to. What would you estimate is the annual revenue from this "small handful of old CAD apps" (like AutoCAD 2009, released way back in the dark days of March 2008)? This was a US$ 1 billion market in 1979; in 1997, PDM - just one facet of the PLM approach generally employed by modern CAD solutions - was a $1.1 billion market by itself.
I understand the game developer's frustration - I was just about to start learning OpenGL for the Mac, and I still will - but let's not get ridiculous. CAD is a huge industry: every architecture firm, every electrical firm, every large-scale manufacturer, the automotive industry, product design, industrial design... They are a major client of OpenGL, and their perspective is an important one.
Nor can you argue that they could just continue working against 2.1 while the rest of the world moved on to 3.0. CAD applications develop and compete aggressively, as aggressively as games albeit with a different visual emphasis, and they need to take advantage of technology advances just like everyone else.
No question, this is a disappointment, but it doesn't appear to be so much a case of deliberately "screwing developers over" as it is a case of incompetence and lack of strong vision to plot a future. I mean, I'm only a casual OpenGL observer, but that seems to have been the case ever since the Khronos Group became responsible."
That about wraps it up for me. I'm sticking to D3D10, as I imagine in two years when my game is out there will be many Vista users, that is assuming Vista gets fixed.
