Would anyone recommend replacing my current GL libs with this implementation? I know it''s much more up-to-date than Microsoft''s. And if so, what is involved in this process? Just replacing the header and lib files?

You are only using Microsoft''s implementation if you do not have hardware accelerated 3D graphics. Manufacturers is implementing their own OpenGL and this is loaded by the MS implementation if found. Mesa do not have the same hardware support so it is only a option if you are running OpenGL without a 3D card.

Actually, it says Mesa supports the following hardware (then it lists a bunch of card vendors). That seemed strange to me as well. Perhaps it wraps them up the same way the MS library does?

When you have a function that isn''t supported by hardware, does the manufacturer''s driver have to support it in software, or does the default (MS or Mesa) driver end up supporting it?

Just curious.

Remember that Mesa is cross platform. Probably was the list showing hardware support under linux. For Windows do I think that Mesa has Voodoo support and some Direct3D wrapper but the ordinary MS way should work much better.

I guess that the vendors do not have to implement all OpenGL 1.1 functions but that they do it anyway. If they are showing a higher version number must all functions of that version be implemented in some way.

so I''m guessing there have been no API changes since 1.1?

If it had been no API changes would 1.3 be the same as 1.1 and that is of course not true. I think that you are assuming that you are using 1.1 functions from MS but that is not the case. If you have the latest nvidia drivers will the functions accept all 1.2 and 1.3 parameters. All parameters for the extensions specific for your card will also be accepted.
This is easy to check if you do not belive me.
All of this will be clear once you start to use extensions.