#can't get examples run
3 messages in this thread
from a fellow reviewer…
1) Forget the ADI stuff. There isnt one in existance that supports
CDK. Stick with a VESA, but dont expect much speed. I got about
4-6fps on my 486/33 w/Speedstar 24x. You REALLY REALLY need to get
one of the $7000 rendering accelerator boards (Sapphire, dView,
Fireboard) to make CDK run well. 2) ditch the metaware Make. it is
worse than Microsofts. grab one from your favorite compiler and use
it. I used Borlands without problem (once i re arranged the makefiles
a bit)
> 1) Forget the ADI stuff. There isnt one in existance that supports CDK.
> Stick with a VESA, but dont expect much speed. I got about 4-6fps on my
> 486/33 w/Speedstar 24x. You REALLY REALLY need to get one of the $7000
> rendering accelerator boards (Sapphire, dView, Fireboard) to make CDK run
> well.
This certainly depends on the kind of applications you have in mind.
For standalone Cyberspace applications, a dedicated hardware is
definitely the best. The aspect I have in mind is using CDK as 3D
visualization/manipulation within existing AutoCAD applications
(simulation, collision detection, etc.) In that case the CDK
application has to live with the ADI drivers currently running in the
machine.
In regards to MAKE utils, we use one called Opus Make and its the best make
I've seen.
-Chris
Panacea