Heh, I am really sorry I haven''t contributed after I put the post, but somehow I forgot I posted!
I am happy my topic got such a response, but of course it is such a huge topic it shouldn''t be a surprise. I agree with both sides in many ways. If I had started out learning OpenGL with GLUT, I would probably have gotten better at OGL much faster. On the other hand, I never would have been forced to learn Win32 programming extensively, and now I am more advanced in that area.
It is good to know that you can take out the console, but what good is that ability if noone uses it? I have had too many demos released that had the console left in, which is too ugly to keep in a final project. That equalizes itself.
Saying that no games use GLUT brings me back around to the first point in this post. As we have been told it is for beginners, and obviously is NOT acceptable for more advanced methods. The problem is that people become attached to the simplicity, and are too lazy to truely code the win32. Thus, advanced demos are released that still use beginner code. I also want to say again that if you are never forced to learn win32, you will have a harder time getting up to par- learning OpenGL with win32 is sort of a double whammy. It is harder, but in the end you have learned 2 very advanced methods that you will use for years to come.
As far as portability goes, I must say glut wins that one- but not as gracefully as liked. It works on any platform, a wonderful plus, but it requires you to download the dlls. That is an ugly draw back. If the downloader knows what glut is, then they will usually have a bad first impression- it is beginners code. Also, extra downloads suck.
It all truely boils down to what you prefer. Either way you will get by, but I have to say Win32 is the better choice.
And can we post without slamming eachother- Nate, and others? Let''s be mature about it
L8r,
The Rainmaker
Biendschmofan''s Tutorials Of OpenGL Glander
