Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!acf4!tsc2597
From: tsc2597@acf4.UUCP (Sam Chin)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: VDI Graphics Info
Message-ID: <1050037@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 23-May-85 00:10:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: acf4.1050037
Posted: Thu May 23 00:10:00 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 24-May-85 08:29:10 EDT
References: <1629@saber.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 16

<>

In general, I agree that the GSS VDI is much more comprehensive than the DRI
VDI and the documentation is superior. The cost of the GSS VDI is much much
more than DRI's though (hundreds vs thousands of dollars) and there are
royalties. It is true that the bindings for DRI's VDI are quite crummy but
they have some demonstration files which have examples of most everything
you want to know. I just converted some of the demo's and interfaced it to a
3D device independent package I had written and had ported a business
graphics package to GSX/GEM in a few hours. It is also simple to write
bindings for non DRI languages as I did for Microsoft Pascal. In general I
think the GSX/GEM programmers toolkit cannot be beat for the price.

Sam Chin
allegra!cmcl2!acf4!tsc2597
tsc2597.acf4@nyu.ARPA