Plans for better graphics support?

J

james_mac

Junior Member
I know that currently there isn't native graphics support, so things like 3d graphics don't work well at all. Is there plans to change this? Or is it just not possible? If it is possible, will this be included in the product by the time the product ships?
 
How long for better gfx support?

I do not really care about 3D right now (it would be cool to play some games) But all I care about it better 2D (GDI+) support.
 
Given tat we have boot camp I just don't see the need for 3d support. If at some point they want to develop it that would be great but it's not like we have no other way of running this type of software.
 
"Invisible" apps

One thing I'd sort of like to see is a "hidden Windows" feature, which would make Windows apps behave like Classic did, with the apps living in the dock and coming to the front if I clicked, say, Excel or Entourage, but not necessarily being locked into the VM's screen. It'd be a nice twist, to have things work without necessarily seeing Windows or the desktop.
 
Actually bootcamp is a major pain. I'm thinking of wiping OSX off and going to Kubuntu just because linux supports more games through transgaming.

I am not a hardcore gamer, but I believe true 3D support will be a large drawcard. A lot of people I know are now buying macbook pro's for the hardware. Dualboot is a pain if you a casual gamer since you have to shut down everything reboot etc just to take a bit of a break.

That said, lot of other apps use 3d as well. CAD, 3d animation studios etc that may want to standardise on Mac.
 
wamatt said:
That said, lot of other apps use 3d as well. CAD, 3d animation studios etc that may want to standardise on Mac.
Click to expand...

Uhmm, how many apps are you thinking about 1 or 2? I have hundreds of applications - maybe 2 or 3 need Open GL or Direct 3D. Namely 3D Studio or Cobalt and I have a dedicated workstation for those. All my other 'graphical' apps already run natively under OS X (FCP, Motion, After Effects, etc.). I would think that most people here are looking to run a specific Windoze program for work. The odds are that's some kind of 2D application. Tha's just my guess of course.

Parallels - maybe a poll is on order? Question: how many applications do you wish to run with Parallels that uses Direct 3D or OpenGL and is not a game?
 
I do photography/multimedia slideshows using Windows software (Proshow Gold, PicturesToExe). I have not found slideshow software native for the Mac that is suitable for what I like to create. Anyway, this slideshow software uses video hardware to accomplish some of the effects, such as pan and zoom. Would like to be able to run my slideshows in Parallels, as I prefer the Parallels solution for my other Windows needs, and I don't want to manage two copies of Windows on my Mac just to run Bootcamp for the slideshows.
 
MicroDev said:
Question: how many applications do you wish to run with Parallels that uses Direct 3D or OpenGL and is not a game?
Click to expand...

For me the main one is ESRI ArcGIS 3D Analyst http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/extensions/3danalyst/index.html which is a piece of software that I suspect MANY people will want to run in Parallels because it is very much of an industry standard and is Windows only.

Also, Research Systems IDL http://rsinc.com/idl/ which runs in Rosetta but is MUCH faster in Parallels. I need to use it at the same time as all of my usual Mac software so Boot Camp is not an option, and I'm not sure how far down the pipeline is a Universal or Mactel version.

Also, Cycling 74 Max/MSP/Jitter http://cycling74.com/products/jitter which, like IDL, runs under Rosetta but runs faster in Parallels. I usually run this in boot camp, but it would be nice to have the option to use Parallels occasionally to avoid rebooting.

So that's three that are not games and are not AutoCAD ;)
 
Last edited:
My office uses AutoCAD and 3 D Studio amoung others that we would need to use at the same time as other apps in OS X. So I vote for OpenGL support. Dual Boot is not an option.
 
I hope Parallels makes hardware graphics acceleration a priority. I don't expect it in the upcoming release, but I hope it could be rolled into the subsequent major release. I only really need Parallels for development work. All of my development work happens to use OpenGL. I'm working on a program that I intend to be cross platform with OSX, Windows, and maybe Linux. Some programs are time critical. On Linux, without hardware acceleration the CPU load for the X server shoots up to nearly 100%. With hardware acceleration the total CPU load for my program (including X server) on the same machine will be about 8%. It makes it hard to keep the timing accurate when the CPU is spending all its time doing what should be done by the graphics card.

Anyway, BootCamp is not a valid option. I am not going to copy files to a shared partition and reboot into a different OS every time I want to test something.
 
While I agree that graphics acceleration is a very important thing - the things I think are far more important are better USB support, better OS X integration, faster disk images or direct partitions.
 
Decent 3D acceleration is a feature that would trigger me paying for an upgrade. It doesn't have to be blazing fast, but enabling (for example) a VM on a MacBook Pro to run 3D games on par with a Mac Mini running a similar app natively would be sufficient in my book. Anything better than that would be gravy.

On the other hand, it's not a must-have item in my book. (I can always find friends with a Windows box to test my games. :))
 
MtDewaholic said:
I hope Parallels makes hardware graphics acceleration a priority. I don't expect it in the upcoming release, but I hope it could be rolled into the subsequent major release. I only really need Parallels for development work. All of my development work happens to use OpenGL. I'm working on a program that I intend to be cross platform with OSX, Windows, and maybe Linux. Some programs are time critical. On Linux, without hardware acceleration the CPU load for the X server shoots up to nearly 100%. With hardware acceleration the total CPU load for my program (including X server) on the same machine will be about 8%. It makes it hard to keep the timing accurate when the CPU is spending all its time doing what should be done by the graphics card.

Anyway, BootCamp is not a valid option. I am not going to copy files to a shared partition and reboot into a different OS every time I want to test something.
Click to expand...

Well, unless the graphics hardware itself supports virtualization (which is a long way off) I do not think 3D graphics acceleration in Parallels or any virtualization product can be a reality.

Pierce_Brosnan.jpg
 
I have noticed that some software (read games) will not install due to my graphics card (Parallels graphics driver) not being 8MB or better. There are two possible options:

1. Improve mouse support with native graphics drivers as this is the only reason that I can see for installing the Parallels graphics driver.

2. Allow us to set a memory limit for the graphics card hardware parameters prior to launching the VM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top