[Development] Qt 5.1 installers ready for testing

[Mark]

I much prefer OpenGL. I've seen plenty of bugs caused by angle (like
no multisampling which is still an open issue and reported) that made
me switch to Qt 5.1 builds with OpenGL native. Also imho ANGLE is just
a lame excuse to be able to use OpenGL "properly" because the native
OpenGL is poorly supported by the driver vendors.

The problem is them, the driver vendors, aka AMD, Nvidia en Intel with
heavy emphasis on AMD. They (especially AMD) neglect to make decently
working OpenGL drivers and they should be heavily pushed to fix their
crap. ANGLE should not need to exist.

I think Qt shouldn't provide an ANGLE build by default but have a
runtime option to use it. Optional and not enabled by default.

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Ray Donnelly <mingw.android at gmail.com> wrote:
> I much prefer angleproject to 'native' OpenGL on Windows.
>
> Mainly because you can compile and then debug into the 'driver' should you
> need to.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Axel Waggershauser <awagger at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Koehne Kai <Kai.Koehne at digia.com> wrote:
>> >> Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.1 installers ready for testing
>> >>
>> >> What about a windows mingw "non-opengl" (a.k.a. ANGLE) package? Any
>> >> plans
>> >> regarding that? If there should be a perceived lack of interest:
>> >> I am interested :).
>> >
>> > Just out of interest, why would you prefer ANGLE packages over OpenGL?
>>
>> To benefit from the advantages that ANGLE was introduced for in the
>> first place: getting better overall stability/usability due to
>> avoiding the myriad of buggy/outdated OpenGL drivers out there. Also,
>> I started a recent project with the mingw ANGLE installer for 5.0.1
>> (the only mingw installer provided up until now) and although I am
>> really happy to be able to play around with proper OpenGL now, I'd
>> still very much welcome (rely on, actually) being able to ship this
>> one project linked against ANGLE.
>>
>> Ideal of course, would be, if this would eventually be merged down to
>> one package with a link-time switch, maybe even a runtime switch.
>>
>>  - Axel
>> _______________________________________________
>> Development mailing list
>> Development at qt-project.org
>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>