I think this has a good chance of vastly improving the graphics driver situation on Linux. Providing Vulkan support should be a lot less work than providing a full OpenGL driver, and an OpenGL library can probably be written on top of that.
I wonder how relevant Vulkan is going to be with Apple replacing OpenGL with Metal, Microsoft on DX12, Sony with GNMX, Nintendo with GX2.<p>Currently I see it only mattering on Android (if Google cares about it) and GNU/Linux.
Will there be an OpenGL compatibility layer on top of Vulkan? Otherwise, GPU vendors will have to maintain OpenGL for backwards compatibility for a very long time?
So, Vulkan on Linux, Direct3D on Windows, Metal on OSX, whatever the consoles use... and WebGL(which is OpenGL-ESish).<p>Are we back to the Glide days?
> Vulkan API is more low-level than OpenGL (programmer is responsible for memory and threads management for example), what triggered this decision?<p>Surely you have to do this with OpenGL as well.
This is good news. Simplification will help across the board. Also, open source graphics card and middleware projects might benefit from the simplification of lower layers.
Ok... "the industry" thinks that we need a new, completely incompatible, standard for graphics development that is locked down (no mention of open source or free software) and that lower level of abstraction will make it more reliable (that is some major PR-bullshit)...<p>This can, as I see it, only lead to giving more power to the big companies and shafting the indie developers and linux gamers... So in general, fuck those people!