when you compare opengl in terms of fps to direct x, there is a difference. vast in fact.
Its why "teh" bedroom bangers think im cheating in COD on an APPLE PPC spec machine with OSX because my fps is so clean, faster, and accurate to shoot at them. not counting the cable modem
I tested blitz years ago in opengl with an ATI using media from DT and it was "blisteringly' fast compared to what i had available to me in DBC using dorkect X. direct X has even lost its ability to work on all cards, and dominated the field, now you need a direct x card for each version they pimp out.
Im talking major difference in speed, but there is a technological drawback, hence dx 10 is easier for DBPers to code on since lee and mike are doing the hard work for us,over the top of dX and not having to worry about the nerd / geek / boffin stuff under the hood. we also benefit from the latest "effects" because the majority of people use it hence the majority gain the benefit.
If your looking for a better fps result (are not we all) for something as popular as world of warcraft burning crusade you cant go wrong with an OSX version and a high spec video card. topple that with an OSX user account completely dedicated solely to one game, you eliminate a lot of junk that does not need to be loaded at runtime. You can do that with windows but the result is not as good.
However not many people have the budget to keep up to date with those specs and therefore have to substitute with what they can afford.
early days benchmarks nothing wrong with that but be real about whats possible in terms of cash.
it also appears that ATI, and the relationship they have with opengl is surmountable for fps. However since AMD have bought them out, lets hope it doesn't lose track of those intentions.
We all know microsoft gobbles up the ideas and theories that are set in stone by other companies that take the risk of making something new happen. Its obvious that some company that large can afford to buy out the smarter cookies they didnt invest in, shit, i would do the same if i had the budget to strangle hold a monopoly.
take a look at vista being a clone to OS X effects, have a look at apple ripping widgets from unix, rips offs everywhere. we all know that word for windows started onthe mac platform and set many technological standards for what we assume today just happened.
If you have only used a intel/AMD machine and windows 3.1 / 3.11/95/me/xp etc. and not SGI irix/ SUN solaris/ APPLE mac os 4 - 9 & OSX, or at least something else other then like linux or u*ix, have a go at something new, you might be pleasantly surprised.
For my personal experience, Apple and its products have given me a lot of money, enough to secure my future in more then one property investment, sure not in game dev, but it has helped paid for a lot of projects that bedroom bangers would poo poo'd out of ignorance.
Sometimes it pays to use the underdog OS then competing with every tom dick and harry.
At the end of the day though, if you prefer one to the other, there is no crime to it, however are you happy with what you have achieved and secure in your future. if your happy and it suits you there is no crime in using what you like.
Ignorance about other options however makes you look very silly indeed, especially when you "hear say" other comments you have read and never really used it.
computers never used to be an us vs them attitude, I could visit a computer club in the 80's and atari / amiga people would talk groovy stuff. however since the advent of windows and mac its declined rapidly into garbage.
