Same thing he's done for the whole games industry for the last 15 years... bugger all. Point of the statement is though that the industry actively chose Direct X. They were like "No we're not going with OpenGL we're all gonna use Direct X."

Well, isn't that logical?
There were basically only two ways for gamers: consoles (including handhelds) and PCs where Windows had a whopping market share of >95%.

The situation has changed insofar as there's a ton of other gaming devices out there now, like iOS and Android.
So I guess we can definitely take a look at the past but I doubt that it's useful for predicting the future in this specific case.

And no, I don't think that GNU/Linux (aka: the desktop OS) will really play a role in the future when it comes to gaming. But on Android it's extremely strong (mind you: Linux is just a kernel) among with the OpenGL stack.
Same goes for Apple who're very loved by mobile gamers and MacOS is a nice target platform, too.
So this is a point for OpenGL, too.

And no, that doesn't mean that DirectX isn't great, it actually is far easier to handle and as a developer (actually I'm studying computer science and math) I definitely love it but love isn't enough to compete in a market so developers can and will target as many platforms as they can support which brings me back to: engines.

So most engines will stick to DirectX when it comes to Windows but as that's only available on Windows they have to support OpenGL, too. There's simply no way avoiding it as Mantle hasn't gained enough momentum and is only available on Windows. So basically we have two ways (besides going absolutely low level): OpenGL and DirectX.

A great many developers in the AAA PC games industry only know Direct3D (that's one of several reasons you see many games for Windows and XBox only with any Mac port done by either a Wine wrapper or a 3rd-party company like Aspyr) and, as massively delayed Humble Bundle ports like the Vessel and Giana Sisters port show, it's perfectly possible for it to be difficult and time-consuming to port something that was never architected with multiple backends in mind.

I don't know about Giana Sisters but, for Vessel, there was an actual progress report many months in which said basically that and that the developer was still squashing rendering bugs introduced in the process of abstracting away the DirectX calls. (Unfortunately, I'm having trouble finding the URL again and I originally found the link via Humble's twitter so that's not an option.)

I thought the NUC was only provided as a barebones kit where you had to add RAM and a hard drive yourself. In fact, a quick check of Intel's site seems to confirm that.

When people say DirectX they typically mean Direct3D. Microsoft tried at one time to force the distinction, but gave up after it turned out that many of its own people kept saying DirectX when they meant Direct3D.

While GPU compute is integrated into Direct3D (even if it's more limited there than in other API's), the rest of the API's are distinct enough that the situation isn't much different than on the OpenGL side.

It still provides more consistent SDK than multiple third party libraries put together, and that is its major selling point, excluding the marketshare of the OS.

I'm sure some are but most arn't.

Yes that is true but I means as concept. The NUC is barebones now, but they will make gaming PC's that are small and ready to play games even if they aren't all that powerful. It's where I think the future of gaming is headed, but of course that's only my opinion. I offer no guarantees

I was just countering your unsubstantiated blanket statement with a slightly substantiated blanket statement. I don't think we can go any further unless you start backing up your statements and I have better things to do with my time, so I think we can end this here.

The drivers or running games. Quadros are not meant for games.

Mate if you're think you're wasting your time you can leave any time you want. No one is forcing you to be here. Furthermore I really don't get what your statement is about. I don't think OpenGL is bad I just don't see the industry as a while wanting to use it. If you want evidence for this then just compare how many games work on one VS the other.

Just the drivers - it's a work computer. My employer frowns on me playing games at work.

The first two times we installed the driver, it crashed in the middle of the install, and rendered windows non-bootable (blue screen at boot - I don't remember the error). After that, we tried one version older driver, and it installed, but we couldn't get the second screen to display. Finally, after several windows re-installs and a bunch of trial and error, we found a version of the driver that successfully installed, and ran both displays. Every time I boot, I get a message from nvidia that there is an updated driver available, but there's no way I'm going to roll the dice on that. I'm too busy to spend another week trying to get this thing working again.

I'll disagree here. Not always. Windows is already losing ground even on the desktop. Things are definitely getting better. Also, PC market is not shrinking, it's pretty stable. It's just that the global market is growing, so percentage of PCs is going down, but not the amount though. Also, gamers who are interested in high end games aren't likely to switch to laptops which are always more limited.
Not really. It will slowly be replaced by OpenGL when they'll become really comparable. There will simply be no benefits in MS only API when other alternatives will be cross platform. When that will happen, MS will flip and will even start supporting OpenGL on their Xbox. That would signal the demise of DirectX.

Developers don't have problems with that (see SDL 2). Their main problem is graphics APIs in OpenGL being antiquated in comparison with modern Direct3D (especially the upcoming ver. 12). So OpenGL-next addressing it will be a major step.

The other possibility is that MS open sources DirectX and gets it on multiple platforms, like they are doing with .net. Really, that is the only way DirectX will stay dominant.

Some images from the presentation about OpenGL-next:

https://i.imgur.com/z8VtHix.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/sz6ZaYt.jpg
Exactly. But probably that would happen only when MS will get really desperate and it will be too late already. They aren't known for their wisdom of thinking ahead. But who knows, their new CEO seems better than the previous one.

I highly doubt that will happen.

DirectX is a low level stuff that helps bridge the game developers with the OS and the hardware. Whether it is open source or not makes no difference.

Making DirectX multiplatform would not bring anything to the table, because the whole stack is made to provide an interface to Windows. If you transfer DirectX to another OS, it will not do anything. Everything will have to be recoded from scratch to suit that other OS as best as possible. Yet, MS will have nothing to gain from doing all that work.

The only thing they can gain is to keep DirectX viable in the long term. But it's not yet at the point of being seriously threatened. Things change fast however.