EnderAndrew Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Microsoft has finally saw sense and decided to drop Windows Graphic Foundation (WGF) and replace it with the more easier and logical DirectX 10 name for its next generation API.The DirectX 10 API will have completely new and faster dynamic link libraries (DLLs) and is supposed to run much faster. The company decided to cut the backward compatibility with DirectX 9, 8, 7 and lower in this API but there will be a way to use games programmed for those APIs. Microsoft will enable support for DX 9 or lower games through a software layer, meaning it might run slower. If I install DirectX 10 (when it comes out) I will actually decrease performance of games that use DirectX 9? Personally, I think that would make me very reticent to purchase DirectX 10 games, or install DirectX 10 until I see overwhelmingly good reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaxen83 Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 I will personally wait and see if there is a DirectX 9d since the current one for TSL is 9c... Deep from within... Victims live a life of fantasy. Some see salvation as an act of God, a few look within for it. 朱宣澧 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted September 9, 2005 Author Share Posted September 9, 2005 I just read there will be a 9d to support Pixel Shader 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaxen83 Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 The next game I decide to buy next year, if I do so would have that. Deep from within... Victims live a life of fantasy. Some see salvation as an act of God, a few look within for it. 朱宣澧 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Seeing as it's Microsoft that sets all the rules in the computer world, you might as well see DirectX 10 as progress. Nothing stops progress so I'm guessing my next GPU must be DirectX 10 compatible. In a way it's good. I remember when they switched from the old Windows OS (95, 98, ME) to the 'new' one (2000, 2003, XP). At first it felt like a stupid move because of all the old programs that stopped working, but I can still remember all the problems the games had back then. XP was actually a good move in the end (if for nothing else, to get away from the 640 Kb architecture). Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nur Ab Sal Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 What with KOTOR then? HERMOCRATES: Nur Ab Sal was one such king. He it was, say the wise men of Egypt, who first put men in the colossus, making many freaks of nature at times when the celestial spheres were well aligned. SOCRATES: This I doubt. We are hearing a child's tale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serious Callers Only Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Ah. The slaves of MicroShaft meekly obey the market leader. Its rumored that microsoft might be considering to run OpenGl in an "emulation layer" mapping to directx calls. Which is slower than direct hardware access. Thats convenient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted September 9, 2005 Author Share Posted September 9, 2005 That's no rumor. They have openly said that is what will happen in Windows Vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bokishi Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 I heard about that too. OpenGl sounds doomed, as do the games supporting it (like all of them dude). Current 3DMark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted September 10, 2005 Author Share Posted September 10, 2005 I don't plan on upgrading to Windows Vista. It requires 4 times the memory of Windows XP, doesn't offer any great new features, and ruins some great things. You can't watch HD video on Windows Vista, because it requires a monitor that supports a new DRM, and no such monitor exists yet. All the great aspects of Windows Vista have been removed, as those features won't be ready in time, while a bunch of features that open new security holes are present. Great. Seriously, I defend Windows XP all the time, but avoid Vista like the plague. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darque Posted September 10, 2005 Share Posted September 10, 2005 Good ol' microsoft, always screwing the consumer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted September 10, 2005 Share Posted September 10, 2005 That is another reason to stick to consoles now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalimeeri Posted September 10, 2005 Share Posted September 10, 2005 Windows XP is not without its faults, but I don't plan on upgrading either. I spent enough on the hardware and software I have right now, and I see no reason to 'upgrade' it for the sake of the latest and maybe not-so-great OS. Vista doesn't seem to offer much benefit to the end user. At what point do people finally say 'enough' and leave it sitting on the shelves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musopticon? Posted September 10, 2005 Share Posted September 10, 2005 I don't plan on upgrading to Windows Vista. It requires 4 times the memory of Windows XP, doesn't offer any great new features, and ruins some great things. You can't watch HD video on Windows Vista, because it requires a monitor that supports a new DRM, and no such monitor exists yet. All the great aspects of Windows Vista have been removed, as those features won't be ready in time, while a bunch of features that open new security holes are present. Great. Seriously, I defend Windows XP all the time, but avoid Vista like the plague. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks for the info, Ender. I'll pass. kirottu said: I was raised by polar bears. I had to fight against blood thirsty wolves and rabid penguins to get my food. Those who were too weak to survive were sent to Sweden. It has made me the man I am today. A man who craves furry hentai. So let us go and embrace the rustling smells of unseen worlds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted September 11, 2005 Author Share Posted September 11, 2005 It should be noted that when the first service pack for Vista comes out, it MAY be worth it to upgrade as you'll get this new file layer that makes for easy/quick searching of your computer. Except Google Desktop Search already provides that now, for free. Vista allows you to have this pretty new interface with transperancy, except software like StyleXP and WindowBlinds have been offering that for years, and you if you really want to try out the official new interface, Microsoft is allowing it as a beta download for XP. .NET 2.0 is also a feature of Vista, that you can download for XP. DirectX10 is going to be a feature of Vista that you may not even want, but likely will also be a download for XP. The new API opens TONS of new security holes. It is like ActiveX but worse. Just booting Vista right now, without opening a single app takes up 700 megs of memory. They are saying you need 2 gigs of memory really for the OS. If you want a 64 bit OS, then there is both Linux x64, and Windows XP Pro x64, which is even better than normal Windows XP since it has been updated to use the more stable Server 2003 core code. Seriously, I can't think of a single reason to upgrade to Vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted September 11, 2005 Share Posted September 11, 2005 Well, except for the fact that most development houses seem to be Microsoft lapdogs and always codes primarily for the Windows OS (with DirectX and all that comes with it). Except perhaps Id and Epic, who seem to be able to let the Linux market in on the action. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted September 11, 2005 Author Share Posted September 11, 2005 I'm sure that people will code for DirectX 10 and force us to switch, even if it means poorer performance for DirectX 9 games on our computer. But I imagine that there will be a Windows XP release of DirectX 10. I doubt the games will require us to upgrade to Vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted September 11, 2005 Share Posted September 11, 2005 Well, except for the fact that most development houses seem to be Microsoft lapdogs and always codes primarily for the Windows OS (with DirectX and all that comes with it). Except perhaps Id and Epic, who seem to be able to let the Linux market in on the action. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, you make a game that will sell the most at the lowest production costs and GEE WHO HAS THE LARGEST MARKET SHARE?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted September 11, 2005 Author Share Posted September 11, 2005 That isn't entirely true. Plenty of people make games that require the latest and greatest technology when it comes to PC games. If they were designing the game to target the largest market share, they would lower the minimum requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bokishi Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 Vista allows you to have this pretty new interface with transperancy, except software like StyleXP and WindowBlinds have been offering that for years, and you if you really want to try out the official new interface, Microsoft is allowing it as a beta download for XP. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hmm, and where can I find this? Current 3DMark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted September 12, 2005 Author Share Posted September 12, 2005 Vista allows you to have this pretty new interface with transperancy, except software like StyleXP and WindowBlinds have been offering that for years, and you if you really want to try out the official new interface, Microsoft is allowing it as a beta download for XP. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hmm, and where can I find this? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oops. A quick search isn't showing anything at download.microsoft.com It must not be a public beta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 Well, you make a game that will sell the most at the lowest production costs and GEE WHO HAS THE LARGEST MARKET SHARE?!?!?! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I honestly don't think it would raise production costs to produce a game that utilizes Open GL instead of DirectX. As far as I can tell, it's mostly DirectX that makes most games OS dependant. Since most development houses uses C++ as their main programming language, it would be quite possible to compile the source for any OS, as long as it used standard libraries instead of Microsoft's copyrighted versions. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 I haven't seen many games that require the latest and greatest computer equipment. Even Half-Life 2 only requires a DirectX 7 video card to actually play the game. You won't get the beautiful shaders or anything, but you can still play it. Having said that, the majority of people that do own the latest and greatest computers still use a Microsoft Windows OS, so it's still part of the largest marketshare. Also, towards Mkreku, if DirectX was the only thing that made games OS dependent, then I'm pretty sure that a game like Neverwinter Nights would probably have made it to Linux as well (Neverwinter Nights engine is OpenGL). Also, just from experience this past year, the difference in compilers alone makes "recompiling" code more difficult. The work I did this summer utilized only open source libraries on Linux, and we repeatedly broke the Windows build when making minor tweaks to the code. Eventually it got so broken we just said Fark It and continued with the Linux build exclusively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted September 12, 2005 Author Share Posted September 12, 2005 Turbo Pascal is designed to easily compile the same code to most any OS. Too bad no one really uses Turbo Pascal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serious Callers Only Posted September 12, 2005 Share Posted September 12, 2005 Also, towards Mkreku, if DirectX was the only thing that made games OS dependent, then I'm pretty sure that a game like Neverwinter Nights would probably have made it to Linux as well (Neverwinter Nights engine is OpenGL). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> NWN DID have a linux build. Just Tadahah, not NWN2. Because of directx. Embrace and extend. Vendor lock-in. Are the name of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now