Valve: 'Vulkan is the Future, Not Much Reason to Create DX12 Backend'

[Sakkura]

Equity is solely a measure of easily monetized assets and insurance thereof in the form of buildings, land, equipment, etc.. It means very little in the whole scope.

 

Please stop with the ignorance, it's getting tiresome. Equity is assets minus liabilities. It's the same measure as the net worth of an individual.

[RH00D]

In related news Coca-Cola says there's no reason to produce Pepsi.

[HarmFull]

I can see why Valve would promote something like this! It would really benefit their own marketplace and SteamOS if games would be created with Vulcan instead of something like DX12. Multi-platform is what Valve wants! Also this is more appealing to developers due to the bigger market reach. Something AMD failed to recognize with Mantle. Developers won't support something that actually limits their sales options!

 

There is however 1 big hurdle that Vulcan will have to climb over. DirectX is THE standard for windows and with MS pushing Windows 10 this aggressively, DX12 will probably become big fast! In order to topple this, Vulcan has to assure that developers (even though Vulan is multi-platform), that Vulcan is easy to use as well as it has to deliver the same performance as when you would develop with DX12!

 

If and I mean IF, they can pull that off, then DirectX 12 could be defeated in the long run!

[patrickjp93]

Please stop with the ignorance, it's getting tiresome. Equity is assets minus liabilities. It's the same measure as the net worth of an individual.

You can disprove that just by looking at the equity of your house if you own it. Both of my parents are financial sector workers. One worked for Charles Schwabb as a broker for 12 years. The other works for Munich Reinsurance. Both of them say you're full of crap.

[Sakkura]

You can disprove that just by looking at the equity of your house if you own it. Both of my parents are financial sector workers. One worked for Charles Schwabb as a broker for 12 years. The other works for Munich Reinsurance. Both of them say you're full of crap.

 

You really are unbelievable. Your claim is easily demonstrated to be false.

 

 

In accounting and finance, equity is the difference between the value of the assets/interest and the cost of the liabilities of something owned.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_%28finance%29

 

 

Equity = Assets - Liabilities

 

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/equity.asp

 

 

the value of a piece of property (such as a house) after any debts that remain to be paid for it (such as the amount of a mortgage) have been subtracted

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/equity

 

 

Ownership interest in a company as determined by subtracting liabilities from assets.

 

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/equity

 

As for your blatant BS about "oh my parents say," please just quit it. You're just making stuff up as you go along. Remember that thread about Jim Keller, where you were so full of yourself about "oh I'm hardly ever wrong, and I haven't lied since I was 10 because I am so smart, S-M-R-T" and the investor conference call with the news about Keller joining Intel. How fake did that turn out to be.

[LAwLz]

You can disprove that just by looking at the equity of your house if you own it. Both of my parents are financial sector workers. One worked for Charles Schwabb as a broker for 12 years. The other works for Munich Reinsurance. Both of them say you're full of crap.

That argument is hilariously close to "my dad works at Nintendo".

If you want to have a serious argument then you need to post sources to your claims that aren't just "my dad works at Nintendo", because that's both unreliable (no way to validate it) and an logical fallacy (argument from authority).

[Dabombinable]

That argument is hilariously close to "my dad works at Nintendo".

If you want to have a serious argument then you need to post sources to your claims that aren't just "my dad works at Nintendo", because that's both unreliable (no way to validate it) and an logical fallacy (argument from authority).

He won't-you should have seen the spat he threw when I asked him to provide information that doesn't come from him-and to reference his sources when asked.

[patrickjp93]

You really are unbelievable. Your claim is easily demonstrated to be false.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_%28finance%29

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/equity.asp

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/equity

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/equity

As for your blatant BS about "oh my parents say," please just quit it. You're just making stuff up as you go along. Remember that thread about Jim Keller, where you were so full of yourself about "oh I'm hardly ever wrong, and I haven't lied since I was 10 because I am so smart, S-M-R-T" and the investor conference call with the news about Keller joining Intel. How fake did that turn out to be.

Sorry but you're completely misinterpreting how that is used. You're considering the equity of a company to be the lump sum of all assets minus the liabilities associated with each individual one, but it's not remotely that easy. Many assets are not monetizeable or have a concrete liability or have no fixed value. The equity of Intel is not its net worth. Its net worth is far higher.

It's not just my parents saying this. It's economic and finance professors from our business school too. The equation is not so simple. The one you use is one that would be taught in a high school finance class to people who have no background in the subject and don't have the intellectual maturity to realize the true complexity. You are wrong. Go ahead and test that simple equation on any company you like. Hell, go for Apple. Its net worth is more than triple its equity.

[patrickjp93]

That argument is hilariously close to "my dad works at Nintendo".

If you want to have a serious argument then you need to post sources to your claims that aren't just "my dad works at Nintendo", because that's both unreliable (no way to validate it) and an logical fallacy (argument from authority).

It is validatable. Arlie Proctor, Munich reinsurance america, Princeton office. And it's not a fallacy to say experts disagree. You need to be much more careful, amateur. I never commit logical fallacies.

Second, go find any finance textbook used for 2nd and 3rd year finance major education. You'll find that equation goes out the window. And before you make the idiotic statement that is an appeal to authority, it's not because those texts include the very formulae banks use to actually analyze your equity and worth. It's straight from the source.

[suicidalfranco]

Android wasn't designed with a mouse and keyboard in mind. It wasn't designed to be a workstation OS. It's not meant for desktop.

 

God Richard Stalman's Ego

what are you saying? http://www.jide.com/en/remixos

[suicidalfranco]

Who said anything about a desktop OS?

 

Here is how the conversation went:

Notional: "Linux will never be a useful consumer or gaming OS."

Me: "Android, ChromeOS and the PS4's OS disagrees."

Notional: "bla bla bla Android shouldn't count."

to be fair, orbis is based of off freeBSD which is a Unix system, not Linux

[LAwLz]

-snip-

-snip-

Still no sources...

"Any textbook" is not a source by the way.

 

I am not trying to argue for or against you. I am just pointing out that even if you are correct, your arguments for why you are correct are terrible since you do not post any sources.

[patrickjp93]

Still no sources...

"Any textbook" is not a source by the way.

I am not trying to argue for or against you. I am just pointing out that even if you are correct, your arguments for why you are correct are terrible since you do not post any sources.

Pick any one you want. I've been attacked by you and Magetank as cherry picking and not providing evidence (established facts and strong induction on them are evidence and proof, get over it) and I'm not having it this time. That is what I was taught I the Farmer School of business by multiple Eco/Fin professors using multiple textbooks. Fundamentals of Financial Management by Brigham and Houston is one. Feel free to consult others. Equity is not so easy to address with businesses.

[Mattyd7829]

Even though my previous post on this matter was completely wrong, I still "feel" that there is some connection between Valve and Nvidia and this is where this comes from. I am probably totally wrong but I am saying it anyway. 

 

I have no idea whether Vulkan still uses async shaders, or whether Nvidia works as good as AMD on Vulkan but it feels like this is designed to stop dx12 being used as it is bad for Nvidia.

[bogus]

Even though my previous post on this matter was completely wrong, I still "feel" that there is some connection between Valve and Nvidia and this is where this comes from. I am probably totally wrong but I am saying it anyway. 

 

I have no idea whether Vulkan still uses async shaders, or whether Nvidia works as good as AMD on Vulkan but it feels like this is designed to stop dx12 being used as it is bad for Nvidia.

Well hate to break it to you, but both APIs are connected to Mantle (AMD), Vulkan included ...

[Icecube26]

Even though my previous post on this matter was completely wrong, I still "feel" that there is some connection between Valve and Nvidia and this is where this comes from. I am probably totally wrong but I am saying it anyway. 

 

I have no idea whether Vulkan still uses async shaders, or whether Nvidia works as good as AMD on Vulkan but it feels like this is designed to stop dx12 being used as it is bad for Nvidia.

mantle was the reason DX 12 got finished and why vulkan was created.... both apis have key components of mantle in them...

[Humbug]

Even though my previous post on this matter was completely wrong, I still "feel" that there is some connection between Valve and Nvidia and this is where this comes from. I am probably totally wrong but I am saying it anyway. 

 

I have no idea whether Vulkan still uses async shaders, or whether Nvidia works as good as AMD on Vulkan but it feels like this is designed to stop dx12 being used as it is bad for Nvidia.

It does, you will be surprised how similar DX12 and Vulkan are.

For many tasks in the graphics rendering pipeline, the GPU needs to know about ordering; that is, it requires information about which tasks must be executed in sequence (synchronous tasks), and which can be executed in any order (asynchronous tasks). This requires a graphics application programming interface (API) that allows developers to provide this information. This is a key capability of the new generation of graphics APIs, including Mantle, DirectX® 12,and Vulkan™.

Source

http://amd-dev.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wordpress/media/2012/10/Asynchronous-Shaders-White-Paper-FINAL.pdf

 

Valve doesn't seem to be aligned with any GPU maker for more than a decade since they bundled HL2 with ATi cards, and they have never put in vendor-specific stuff. I think you are looking for connections. They have loads of cash from Steam and they don't rely on marketing agreements with hardware vendors.

 

In reality it's quite simple really. Valve wants to push PC gaming in a direction where the ecosystem allows developers to easily produce multi-platform games that work on Mac OSX, Windows and Linux. They want this to be easier to the point where it's almost a no-brainer for PC devs to release cross-platform titles rather than having to analyze how many months and manhours it will take etc. So they are trying to push the game engines, the tools, and the graphics APIs in that direction. The reason for that is they are uncomfortable with the current situation where Microsoft holds all the cards for PC gaming, because this is a threat to Steam's business model. They want to manage their risk. That's why they are giving Source2 for free with native Vulkan and cross-platform support. Rather than windows specific Direct X.

[LAwLz]

Pick any one you want. I've been attacked by you and Magetank as cherry picking and not providing evidence (established facts and strong induction on them are evidence and proof, get over it) and I'm not having it this time. That is what I was taught I the Farmer School of business by multiple Eco/Fin professors using multiple textbooks. Fundamentals of Financial Management by Brigham and Houston is one. Feel free to consult others. Equity is not so easy to address with businesses.

Just claiming that something is established facts, while someone are posting multiple links that disagrees with you, is not the same as providing evidence to support your claims.

All I see here is someone claiming one thing and backing it up with multiple sources, and another person claiming something else while just going "look it up yourself" and "my dad works at Nintendo and says you're wrong".

 

I am not interested in the topic nor am I arguing for or against you. All I am saying is that you can't just make statements and then just claim that what you are saying are established facts and therefore you don't have to provide any evidence.

If you have read it in a book then provide the name of the book, the author, the year it was published and page number. If it was on some website then post a link.

Enough with all this "I said it therefore it is true". Whenever you make a claim contradicting what someone else have said you should be able to provide evidence for it. If it is established facts like you claim then it should be easy to find evidence, right?

[Humbug]

Ok I don't care about above argument but can't resist this.

[bogus]

Just claiming that something is established facts, while someone are posting multiple links that disagrees with you, is not the same as providing evidence to support your claims.

All I see here is someone claiming one thing and backing it up with multiple sources, and another person claiming something else while just going "look it up yourself" and "my dad works at Nintendo and says you're wrong".

 

I am not interested in the topic nor am I arguing for or against you. All I am saying is that you can't just make statements and then just claim that what you are saying are established facts and therefore you don't have to provide any evidence.

If you have read it in a book then provide the name of the book, the author, the year it was published and page number. If it was on some website then post a link.

Enough with all this "I said it therefore it is true". Whenever you make a claim contradicting what someone else have said you should be able to provide evidence for it. If it is established facts like you claim then it should be easy to find evidence, right?

^This is why I say Patrick lives in an imaginary world, and the reality will be tough on him... saddly the kid will learn this the hard way.

He thinks people will just swallow what he says, no matter if he's right, wrong, or just made it up like he does... and then he can ignore when he doesn't know how to reply... or shift subject with a completly non sense reply... it's sad to see someone like this, because such behavior can crack someone later in life.

Such belief only happens to figures people perceive has great achievers - and even those with years of experience are wrong sometimes, and they are not afraid of saying so. Even those are questioned.

 

Not only Patrick lacks experience, he has been proven wrong so many times here, he has made a fool out of himself with no need for it... the low credibility he had, is long lost.

Oh and @patrickjp93 even if you are struggling with argumentation don't expose your family for the sake of it... one day you may compromise them and put them on the line, just to latter appologise in shame, on your behalf.

[patrickjp93]

Just claiming that something is established facts, while someone are posting multiple links that disagrees with you, is not the same as providing evidence to support your claims.

All I see here is someone claiming one thing and backing it up with multiple sources, and another person claiming something else while just going "look it up yourself" and "my dad works at Nintendo and says you're wrong".

I am not interested in the topic nor am I arguing for or against you. All I am saying is that you can't just make statements and then just claim that what you are saying are established facts and therefore you don't have to provide any evidence.

If you have read it in a book then provide the name of the book, the author, the year it was published and page number. If it was on some website then post a link.

Enough with all this "I said it therefore it is true". Whenever you make a claim contradicting what someone else have said you should be able to provide evidence for it. If it is established facts like you claim then it should be easy to find evidence, right?

1) He never backed his point up with any links. Second, I provided sources to the established facts, and you can check the math yourself. It's flawless.

As per equity, I've given you the textbook we used in my business finance class that says equity in business is not remotely concrete not reducible the way personal equity is. I'm waiting for the rebuttal or the end of this nonsense. So far I see neither.

I am perfectly allowed to make statements based in fat that is widely known to people with a decent education. Due I have to cite the fact the sky is blue?! This is the level of basic knowledge I shouldn't have to hold your damn hand!

I gave the book and the authors. My obligation is covered.

[patrickjp93]

^This is why I say Patrick lives in an imaginary world, and the reality will be tough on him... saddly the kid will learn this the hard way.

He thinks people will just swallow what he says, no matter if he's right, wrong, or just made it up like he does... and then he can ignore when he doesn't know how to reply... or shift subject with a completly non sense reply... it's sad to see someone like this, because such behavior can crack someone later in life.

Such belief only happens to figures people perceive has great achievers - and even those with years of experience are wrong sometimes, and they are not afraid of saying so. Even those are questioned.

Not only Patrick lacks experience, he has been proven wrong so many times here, he has made a fool out of himself with no need for it... the low credibility he had, is long lost.

Oh and @patrickjp93 even if you are struggling with argumentation don't expose your family for the sake of it... one day you may compromise them and put them on the line, just to latter appologise in shame, on your behalf.

I have been proven wrong exactly two times on LTT, neither of them being in 2015, and I have provided evidence every time. I don't appreciate you slandering me. You're especially one to talk when I have called your BS 4 times in the last month.

My family is none of your concern, and they will never have to apologize for me, because I don't put myself in jeopardy or a position to require apology. I am nigh undefeatable because I know to not get in the middle of something unless I know exactly what I'm talking about and know beyond all reasonable doubt I am correct.

[Nowak]

Even though my previous post on this matter was completely wrong, I still "feel" that there is some connection between Valve and Nvidia and this is where this comes from. I am probably totally wrong but I am saying it anyway. 

 

I have no idea whether Vulkan still uses async shaders, or whether Nvidia works as good as AMD on Vulkan but it feels like this is designed to stop dx12 being used as it is bad for Nvidia.

I highly doubt it, considering how Valve has historically used ATI/AMD GPUs in their test PCs.

 

Source: The credits of every single Valve game, ATI/AMD gets credited for providing test harware.

[Sharp_3yE]

I also really hope so, mainly because I really do want to switch to Linux.

 

 

I really REALLY hope that the Devs take this advice to heart, and support Vulkan in a big way. Mainly because I REALLY do not want to switch to windows 10.

 

 

The fact it comes to Windows 7 and Linux/OS X makes it a billion times better than DX12, which forces you to downgrade to Windows 10.

 

 

I would love to switch to Linux and never ever use Windows again. I really hope that Vulkan becomes a thing.

 

 

i totaly agree with this.

Windows 10 is just straight up garbage.

 

If game devs are realy smart, they would make their games to support both api´s.

This will be a big seling point.

Vulkan is indeed a great api, and the good thing about it is, that its platform undepended.

It can basicly run on anything.

 

 

Why is Microsoft in the list of Khronos contributors? I really don't see how they can benefit from contributing in Vulkan's development.

Of course they benefit especially if developers decide to use Vulcan over DX12. Windows has supported OpenGL for a very very long time. If they didn't then certain things wouldn't run on their platform. They want people using windows. Does it matter if they aren't using DX12? No, not really. If Vulkan is the future then MS is going to support it on their platforms. MS is pretty open. MS Edge supports Apples video player stuff which allowed Edge to stream Apple's last live event. MS has had competing products all the time but supports it's competition on windows.

 

Before win10 release i would of and have said no way but now with the ultimate shit storm win10 is, i can see this being way more feasible.

 

 

Well, I'm unaware of EA being part of the Khronus Group, nor am I aware of Khronus Group's existence. But you have a point. I just wish I could totally ditch Windows for Linux.

 

I'm just saying if greedy cunts like them would support an API thats crossplatform and somewhat reverse compatible to a degree, why not other lesser cunts in the gaming industry who develops and publishes games? But oh well... I may have needlessly raised my hopes.

 

 

To the rest of you, what is wrong with Windows and Windows 10? Everyone who has windows 10 running well on their machine love it, the only people I can find they don't like W10 are the ones that are having technical problems which is understandable. That happens with EVERY OS at the beginning, even things like IOS that only has about 15 different devices it supports. IOS9 has had issues. Apple released an update which is 9.01 or something like that. So yes, there is problems with windows 10 that supports hundreds of configurations, and it will get better. There is also a large update next month in October as well when W10 was originally going to be released.

 

I'm all for using what ever you like, I am just wondering what you have against Windows or Windows 10?

[SteveGrabowski0]

To the rest of you, what is wrong with Windows and Windows 10? Everyone who has windows 10 running well on their machine love it, the only people I can find they don't like W10 are the ones that are having technical problems which is understandable. That happens with EVERY OS at the beginning, even things like IOS that only has about 15 different devices it supports. IOS9 has had issues. Apple released an update which is 9.01 or something like that. So yes, there is problems with windows 10 that supports hundreds of configurations, and it will get better. There is also a large update next month in October as well when W10 was originally going to be released.

 

I'm all for using what ever you like, I am just wondering what you have against Windows or Windows 10?

 

I find Linux easier to use than Windows, more powerful outside of gaming, and it's free. Games are the only reason I run Windows.