Hi,
i've checked dborca's site for mesafx and found a program (routine) to convert fxt1 and dxt textures (source only for ip reasons). In the readme is written that not every vendor has s3's licence to implement s3tc under d3d AND ogl. Sounds like 3Dfx! Wasn't there a problem with no s3tc textures in opengl? Can some V4/V5 user verify this?

Regards,
Andreas

Since Unreal Tournament shipped with S3TC Textures and eventually created the appropriate OpenGL Renderer, 3dfx Voodoo4 and Voodoo5 were able to render S3TC under OpenGL.

AFAIK (not sure) the only Game at that time to have that.

But from old Internet Pages, it seems it took Epic a very long time before they released it for OpenGL (before, was usable only with S3 Metal I think). I could imagine this being licensing issues, but I could be wrong...

The latest 3dfx OpenGL ICD for Win2k was the first to implement native S3TC support however, so 3dfx was quite "behind" indeed the way I remember it.

There really seem big licencing issues. At least i know that MS licenced S3TC and named it DXTC in D3D. Wasn't there a feature in D3D that compresses textures on the fly so that old games benefit from the compression too? Or does this 'feature' also rely on hardware and the chip compresses all uncompressed textures by default? If yes for what have them paid their licensing fee? I think companies have to pay for the hardware compression-decompression in their video-chips. But what has this to do with the drivers. When a game like UT ships with already S3TC compressed textures the driver does nothing more than throwing them unmodified in the vram. I think that game companies have to pay fees when they (pre-)compress their textures with the S3TC algorithm.

Regards,
Andreas

yes correct FalconFly Unreal Tournament 1998 was the onlygame of it's time which supported S3TC, Quake3 Arena came later with a patch for S3TC.

Unreal Tournament 4.36 was also the only game that Supports S3' only API : S3 MeTaL :)

My Diamond Multimedia VIPER II Z200 with the S3 SAVAGE 2000 GPU can doe S3 MeTaL very well, it also has S3TL the first T&L around, though NV was the first to ever use T&L, which was created by S3, I call that Stealing technology and not creating it really.

deus ex supports s3 metal as well-same engine ;)

cool < that is somthang I gotta try out :D thanx for the tip PS47 :D that made me a happier S3 Savage 2000 user :D

As I have tried explaining to dborca and others elsewhere, my understanding on the texture compression "patents" is that they are licenced to the HARDWARE and not the DRIVERS........since we own the hardware (a V5 AGP card for example) then we each individually own the "licence" to run the compression routines anyway we see fit........ I am no lawyer by any means, but I do have a couple of patents under my belt....... now if you were to try to make a new card, THAT would need to be licenced for the texture compression....... and we ain't makin' new cards.......

I'm not 100% sure, but nowadays I'd be careful with assuming a patent was for Hardware only.

I remember Creative writing native Glide drivers for their RivaTNT series Cards (after unsuccessfully complaining to 3dfx, requesting to move to DirectX/OpenGL to allow their other (NVidia based) Hardware to remain compatible, as Games started to ship 3dfx-only).
3dfx immediately prohibited the release of such Drivers, fearing their 3dfx-only API could be used by competitors Hardware as well.

So I would say, incorporating something in a Driver just as well touches licensing issues, even moreso today than 7 years ago.

Yes, you are exactly correct.  It takes BOTH software AND hardware to fully realize the patent.  But From the documentation that was made available to me, I asertained that it was the HARDWARE that was required to be "licenced".  the software just ENABLED the hardware to use the patent!  And there was no mention of requiring the drivers to be "licenced" to use the technology, only the hardware.  this is how ALL of the hardware venders do it, they pay a rolalty ( for direct X, openGL, Glide, S3TC etc....) on every piece of HARDWARE sold, and then keep "tweaking" the drivers ad-infinitum without having to pay the royalty every time they come out with a new driver for the old hardware.

Nope, any component (Hardware OR Software) is subject to licensing, no bundle required.

Licensing any piece of general Software is already a hughe undertaking (just read the End User license agreement of any Software Package for some fun); licensing proprietary Code is even more subject to legal issues, as it touches the very core technology it's based on.

With recent Software Patents being realized in the US and (possibly upcoming) the EU, things are getting even hotter every day.
The OpenSource community is not so extremely cautious for no reason, they know every piece of their Code may touch legal/licensing issues.