• simple
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    What’s suspicious about it…?

      • 8Bitz0@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Until you actually try to use Vulkan on macOS. Since there’s no native support, you end up needing MoltenVK.

        • leopold@lemmy.kde.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Is there any particular problem with MoltenVK? As I see it, it’s by far the best solution for cross platform software on macOS in need of graphical hardware acceleration.

          • 8Bitz0@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 months ago

            There’s nothing wrong with the software itself. It works great for what it does. On the other hand, it’s a compatibility layer, which always increases friction between things a little. I think the best use for this is running legacy software.

            There aren’t many alternatives. Maybe in the future, we’ll see graphics API abstraction libraries like wgpu get used more. This gives developers a single API which can use DirectX on Windows, Vulkan on Linux, or Metal on macOS. This could allow support for entirely new graphics APIs without developers using it having to do anything.

            Of course, that’s my opinion. People can build their software how they like.

    • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      No idea, especially since MacOS has limited OpenGL support and no Vulkan support, Metal is basically the only graphics API on Mac

      • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, even Asahi has better OpenGL support than real macOS. They make damn sure you have to use Metal to get the most out of it, just like eventually you get caught up in DirectX on Windows whether you want it or not. You can use Vulkan and OpenGL, but the OS really wants to work with Metal/DirectX buffers in the end.

        I appreciate that the devs care enough to make it really good from the start, because that sets the benchmark. Now the Linux version has to have a similar enough polish to it.

        In comparison, Atom and VSCode both worked fine on Linux just about day one thanks to Electron, but it was also widely disliked for the poor performance. It’s a part of what Zed competes on, performance compared to VSCode.

      • KindaABigDyl@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        The other guy mentioned:

        they already said they were Mac only because they used Metal for rendering

        And you say:

        Metal is basically the only graphics API on Mac

        So they’re on Mac bc they need Metal, but they picked Metal bc they’re on a Mac? It’s circular and friggin weird man

        Not to mention there are cross-platform wrappers that will pick from all three depending on system - some that are very prolific among Rust devs (Zed is coded in Rust) like wgpu, for instance. They could’ve used wgpu and supported all 3 from the get-go and it would be easier than doing Metal anyway!

        And so picking just Mac and/or Metal first is suspicious.

        • aksdb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I don’t see where your problem comes from. It’s really simple: they wanted to target Mac, likely because that’s their preferred platform. So obviously they use the best fitting APIs for that purpose. Why would they develop a Linux or Windows application, if what they want is Mac? Nothing suspicious about that.