In all three major desktop platforms (Linux, macOS, and Windows), OpenGL more or less comes with the system. However, you will need to ensure that you have downloaded and installed a recent driver for your graphics hardware.
Compatible with Windows, Linux and Mac computers, OpenGL or Open Graphics Library provides developers with a cross-platform solution for 3D graphics programming. Although Windows XP includes the opengl32.dll system file by default, you must install the correct driver for your video card in order to enable hardware acceleration for OpenGL-based applications. Video card manufacturers began adding support for OpenGL 4.0 in April 2010. New device drivers may include support for newer versions of OpenGL and for new OpenGL features. Update your video card drivers regularly.
If you installed additional OpenGL drivers from your hardware vendor, then you may want to consider using this version of OpenGL instead of ANGLE. To use OpenGL, pass the command line options -opengl desktop to the configure script.
Version 4.6 of OpenGl comes with numerous updates for higher performance and execution. The specification handbook offers a lot of information via overflow queries, counters, and statistics. It provides highly-efficient shader (AZDO) execution, anisotropic filtering, as well as geometry processing. OpenGL download windows 7 64 bit is also supported in this version and provides various hardware and driver upgrades.
Also if you are interested a post about using different opengl for qt5 built dynamically loading of graphical drivers ( tries to use default opengl -> is fails tries to use ANGLE -> if fails, tries to use opengl software (libmesa) ) - -5/windows-requirements.html#dynamically-loading-graphics-drivers
It seems that both desktop opengl and ANGLE fails for you (which would mean, that you have OpenGL implementation version less then 3.0 (default on win xp has 2.0) for desktop opengl to fail and you don't have DirectX 11 or DirectX 9 correct drivers installed (for ANGLE to fail).
This would mean that this is either virtual machine or window without any drivers. To fix this issue, please include opengl32sw.dll (libmesa) to you executable file as well. This is another fallback in case both desktop and ANGLE failed.
Failed to load opengl32sw.dll (The specified module could not be found.)class QOpenGLStaticContext *__cdecl QOpenGLStaticContext::create(bool): Failed to load and resolve WGL/OpenGL functions - These errors relates to missing opengl32sw.dll file. Which i've already provided link for you to download and put to executable.
The QT itself have has an option to switch or disable several builtin options w/o need to rebuild anything. Such as is described here: -5/windows-requirements.html#dynamically-loading-graphics-drivers
This is an Openport 2.0 driver and J2534 DLL-only install for users who only intend to use non-EcuFlash software with their Openport 2.0. This install also contains a few J2534 coding examples for developers in C. If you plan to use EcuFlash, do not download these files - go to the EcuFlash download page instead, as the driver and J2534 DLL installation are built into the EcuFlash install.
How the 720-S differs from the 740 is that the 720-S is a much sleeker and lighter model--meant for easy portability--and the 720-S also lacks the 1.2-megapixel webcam of the 740. When not in use or while in transit, the 720-S folds up to only about an inch thick at its thickest point, and it weighs less than a pound. A single mini-USB jack is located on the back of the unit, hiding underneath a rubber cap. The display's only controls are power and brightness. The display can be rotated for either landscape or portrait modes. I didn't like that the tilt wasn't adjustable--especially since I felt that the display tilted too far back when in portrait mode.Unfortunately, I already sent the 740 back to DisplayLink, so I didn't have a chance to do a side-by-side comparison of image quality. As far as memory goes, however, the image quality is comparable--meaning that the display has decent image quality, but suffers from a somewhat muted and grainy appearance (presumably from the touch-screen elements of the display) and not so great color accuracy. Once again, I was pleasantly surprised by the display's performance when playing back video, as I didn't see any noticeable lag--not that I would actually use a 7-inch display for watching video.The install disc comes with 32-bit and 64-bit drivers for Windows XP and Vista; however, I was unable to get the touch-screen driver to work properly on my HP Pavilion Elite m9550f testbed running 64-bit Vista. Ultimately, I wound up using the same 64-bit driver that DisplayLink sent me last April for the review of the Mimo 740. Even though the driver from April had a newer version number, I wasn't able to install it on top of the driver I had already installed from the disc--I had to use Windows' System Restore to reset the OS back to before the driver was installed. I finally got the touch-screen driver working, but it was a painful and time-consuming process. (BTW: A beta driver is available for download from the DisplayLink site for Windows 7.)Mac drivers are not included on the disc, but can be downloaded from DisplayLink's website. As I recently upgraded my MacBook Pro to Snow Leopard, the only available driver that works on the new OS is a beta. The driver installed fine and I was up and running quickly on the Mac... Well, the display portion anyway... While the Mimo touch-screen monitors come with the touch-screen drivers for Windows, you actually need to purchase the Mac touch-screen drivers separately ($30). I still had the Mac touch-screen driver from April, but I was unable to get it to successfully install under Snow Leopard. (My iMac still has Leopard on it, but the system is currently at the shop getting fixed, so I didn't have a Leopard system available for testing.)All-in-all, the 720-S did what it is supposed to--at least under Windows. Since I really don't utilize the touch-screen functionality of the display, however, I would probably be better off with the less expensive, non-touch-screen 710-S version. The 720-S sells for $229.99, while the 710-S (which I did not evaluate) costs $149.99The other DisplayLink device I had a chance to play with was the HP USB 2.0 Video Dock. This is actually quite an ingenious device for those who want a simple docking station with external monitor support--where the only connection between your laptop and the docking station is a single USB 2.0 connection. The HP dock includes a four-port USB hub, VGA out, DVI out, 100Mbps Ethernet, mic-in, and headphone-out. Unlike the Mimo monitors, the HP dock is not USB bus-powered, so it requires an external power source.The HP dock's drivers are stored on the device itself, in built-in flash memory; they installed easily and I was up and running in no time. I connected an Ethernet cable to the device's network jack, powered speakers to the headphone jack, a few USB peripherals to the USB hub, and a monitor to the DVI port. Keep in mind, the only connection between my Windows testbed system and the HP dock was a single USB cable. Yet with only this single connection, the HP dock was simultaneously providing network access, sending audio to the speakers, connecting to the USB peripherals plugged into the USB hub, and sending video to a second display. Video response appeared very quick with no noticeable lag. Needless to say, I was very impressed with how seamless the HP dock worked.Despite having two different video-out ports, only one can work at a time--you can't use the device to send video to two external displays simultaneously. The HP Dock supports resolutions up to UXGA (1600x1200) or WSXGA+ (1680x1050).The HP Dock does not come with Mac drivers, but I decided to see what would happen if I connected my MacBook Pro to it. Surprisingly, the video out, audio out, and USB hub all worked! (The DisplayLink driver was already installed from my testing with the Mimo 720-S, and the USB audio and USB hub capabilities are already built into the Mac OS.) The only thing I couldn't get to work with the MacBook Pro was the HP Dock's Ethernet connection--but as nearly all laptops these days come with wireless NICs, that is not a showstopper (albeit, the 100Mbps Ethernet connection will be faster than an 802.11a/b/g/n connection). The big caveat here, however, is that the video response was noticeably slow with plenty of lag--of course, I was using the HP Dock for an unintended purpose, so it's not fair to ding it for this.The HP USB 2.0 Docking Station measures 1.1x8.66x3.2-inches (HWD) and weighs 11.32-oz. HP was selling it for $129.99, but they've just added a $32.50 instant rebate, bringing the price down to $97.49.DisplayLink devices currently have a number of limitations, such as lack of OpenGL support (i.e., Windows 3D screensavers don't display on DisplayLink monitors), known issues with some full-screen motion video playback, and they can't be used as a primary display (a small 7-inch display could be ideal for media sever). But, overall, I've been relatively impressed with the DisplayLink devices I've looked at. And with Wireless USB and USB 3.0, it will be interesting to see what sort of DisplayLink products we'll see in the near future. Stay tuned... 2b1af7f3a8