Microsoft Makes Direct X 11.1 a Windows 8 Exclusive 553
BluPhenix316 writes "Microsoft has made Direct X 11.1 a Windows 8 Exclusive. I think this is merely an update to make Direct X more integrated with Windows 8. Is this going to be the trend? To lock you into the OS updates so Windows 7 doesn't last as long as Windows XP has?"
The update is pretty minor, but it does add Stereoscopic rendering, and there seemed to be an implication that no new DirectX updates after this will be made for Windows 7.
Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:5, Interesting)
Careful what you wish for (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead of worrying about DirectX, you can worry about which versions of which distro has a driver for your graphics hardware.
But sure, the grass is always greener and all that.
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:5, Informative)
Why would you worry about which version has your graphics drivers? Ubuntu, which will be the only distro for the near future with Steam support, will have the major drivers available. If you choose to use another, it's up to you to get it to work until they decide to branch out to another distribution.
http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/steamd-penguins/ [valvesoftware.com]
Why Ubuntu? There are a couple of reasons for that. First, we’re just starting development and working with a single distribution is critical when you are experimenting, as we are. It reduces the variability of the testing space and makes early iteration easier and faster. Secondly, Ubuntu is a popular distribution and has recognition with the general gaming and developer communities. This doesn’t mean that Ubuntu will be the only distribution we support. Based on the success of our efforts around Ubuntu, we will look at supporting other distributions in the future.
Re: (Score:3)
Right, but Ubuntu will only have drivers for certain GPUs. If yours isn't one of them, forget it.
Re: (Score:3)
... so the makers of those GPUs get rewarded with money. Others may see some benefit in providing Linux source drivers to get some of this money. It needs to start somewhere, and the big problem up until this point, is there wasn't enough reason to. With so much being web-based now, Microsoft trying the Apple-style lock-in on the desktop, and now this, there's never been a better time.
Re: (Score:3)
Right, but Ubuntu will only have drivers for certain GPUs. If yours isn't one of them, forget it.
This is no different to Windows. Windows driver support is especially poor if you have a GPU older than 3 years. The reality is that Windows has better support for new hardware than Linux, but the complete reverse is true for older hardware.
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:5, Insightful)
What decade are you living in?
Since the unified driver architectures of the mid 2000's both ATI and nVIDIA just support everything. It's only brand new cards where driver support is sketchy, but that's only ever a short term problem.
Driver support is only bad in windows if you have a directx 8 class card, and for that you're talking about 8 year old parts at this point.
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:4, Informative)
I can't speak for nvidia, but all of ATi's DX 9 cards are unsupported. I had a hell of a time getting an XPress 200M working in Windows 8 when I tested it out.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:5, Funny)
So in the future, it will not be booting Windows for games and Linux for work, but booting Ubuntu for games and Mint for work?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:5, Funny)
and we won't have to put up with this anymore.
You're jumping the gun there. This headline just in: No new games plan to use Direct X 11.1. Why? Gamers aren't morons and only morons buy Windows 8 and gaming companies want customers.
Re: (Score:3)
Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam
*sunglasses* yeeeaaahh?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Linux sucks as a desktop os
... have you ever actually used Linux as a "Desktop OS"? All* of them?
If you've just "tried" one, then you really have no room for an opinion.
* by 'all' I mean the variations in desktop UI's... KDE, Gnome, MATE, XFCE, Fluxbox, Windowmaker, and so on and so forth.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Sounds like a lot of time and effort expended into getting what you were already used to with Windows.
I tend to agree with him. I have yet to find a Linux DE that has the right balance between having too many options (KDE) or too few options (GNOME), while still having a modern GPU accelerated desktop which looks slick (Windows 7). Besides, the advantage is my wife can use my computer efficiently because it looks pretty much the same as her computer (and no she could never run a Linux distro - she's a teach
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:5, Interesting)
1. It's just that she's used to a particular toolset. Linux offers competent toolsets to do what she does. They're just different from what she knows. This is different from not having the tools at all or even having less adequate ones. In the latter context, there are plenty of examples where all operating systems need work.
2. Aesthetics are subjective. I find aero to be gaudy and ugly. The older win2k/nt4 look was much cleaner and faster. Layout wise, it was far superior as well. Windows 8 borders on useless except for extremely simple tasks. I also find OSX and linux gpu accelerated desktops to be slow and ugly too. Seriously, I don't want all these needed fades and transisions and other stupid shit. I want it to respond. Instantly. That's just me.
3. microsoft is making 11.1 exclusive to windows 8 because they know that gamers panned it and they're trying to force them. Vendors need to realize that if their old products appeal to consumers more than their new ones, forcing their hands isn't going to make people rush out and buy. It makes them resentful.
Re: (Score:3)
Just tried it with aero on and off. You are right about the cpu use. I guess in the case of the gui, it doesn't exist in the driver/library code.. It exists between the cpu and gpu somewhere. however, I tested this in 7, and lot of GDI+ was done in the cpu, at least until vista.
Yes, those routines were buggy, but they could have fixed those without introducing an almost ten fold increase in memory footprint along with other annoying design and technical aspects. There is a point were making too many stac
Why do you need that transition effect? (Score:5, Insightful)
A desktop, any desktop, is for using, not for admiring the same bloody animation over and over again. I use windows for gaming but have EVERYTHING turned off except the font options. Aero was disabled years ago. And I just tested it but my start menu shows instantly. A second? I would already be killing Ballmer with a rusty spoon if it took a tenth of a second. My life is worth more to me then wait a second everytime I want to do something.
You are aware that all these startup animations and such are completly useless?E17 had to articiially slow the loading process on Linux to be able to show off its animation effect of the loading screen. Nice... and disabled. What the fuck is the logic behind that?
My PC is not a movie prop. It doesn't have to look the part, it has a task to do and it should do its task as quickly as possible. Maybe if you disabled all the bling, your PC wouldn't need a full second to load a start menu.
Is your life that devoid of meaning that it needs the soothing animation effect to make it tolerable? It is like people who complain about a tearing effect when they move a window around... who the fuck cares? I select a window, drag it to where I want it and I want it done as fast possible and not as nice as possible. I guess there are people who really do have all the compiz options on for more then the 1 minute it takes to get utterly tired of them.
Maybe I am just wrong in thinking an OS is about its applications, not about its bling.
Considering the Windows 7 guy was fired and the Windows 8 and Office girl was promoted, I am starting to feel very alone.
Re: (Score:3)
Is your life that devoid of meaning that it needs the soothing animation effect to make it tolerable? It is like people who complain about a tearing effect when they move a window around... who the fuck cares? I select a window, drag it to where I want it and I want it done as fast possible and not as nice as possible.
Well, the tearing effect in particular bothers me because oftentimes I like to read the contents of a window while I am moving it. I think a window manager with functionality as the #1 priority should try as hard as possible to never obscure the contents of a window.
I know what you mean about desktop eye candy slowing things down... it's one of the reasons I made the switch from Mac OS X to Windows 7 a few years ago; Windows is more responsive, even with the unnecessary "aero" bullhooey enabled. Linux i
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:4, Insightful)
A teacher. Who can not learn new things.
Cognitive disconnect?
My wife is a vet (as in 'animal doctor'). She has tons of patience - for animals (horses, to be specific). When it comes to technology she has no patience whatsoever, and seems to have a complete lack of the urge to explore. You can guide her to press the button which says 'click' ten times, and will need to do the same the eleventh because she'll have forgotten how to do it. At her work they use Windows since all that crappy vet-software is built on the ramshackle house of cards called Microsoft - parts of it still need VB6...
At home we have no Windows so she uses Linux. In her case it is Ubuntu, but if she happens to use one of my computers she's confronted with Debian running Xmonad. She grumbles, but then she always grumbles when it comes to computers. I don't notice her grumbling any more using Linux than she does using Windows. If she can, so can your wife - and as it seems to be her job to teach children about new things I hope she has the aptitude and open mind to pick up a new thing or two herself. If not, I pity the children under her care.
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:5, Interesting)
Stick with being a prisoner of Microsoft.
A lot more people are choosing not to do that.
Even Microsoft knows Windows 8 is shit. They've just sacked Sinofsky over it.
"REDMOND, Wash. — Nov. 12, 2012 — Microsoft Corp. today announced that Windows and Windows Live President Steven Sinofsky will be leaving the company and that Julie Larson-Green will be promoted to lead all Windows software and hardware engineering."
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/Press/2012/Nov12/11-12AnnouncementPR.aspx [microsoft.com]
He "decided to leave" (Score:3)
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:4, Insightful)
Or he can just save himself the trouble and use Acrobat. Try explaining to someone that you extracted images from his PDFs and repackaged them in a OSS-friendly manner. At BEST, he'll go 'that's nice, but could you just give me a PDF please?' At worst (and most likely, honestly,) he'll call you an idiot and stop doing business with you.
Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean it's worth the time or effort. In the long run, the average user will almost always prefer Windows or OSX to any flavor of Linux you throw at him.
Linux fills its niches, but a desktop OS just isn't one of those niches. The primary goal of a desktop OS should be ease of use and compatibility of software. A lot of Linux distributions have come a long way in the former, but the latter is still just not there. Just because there's an 'equivalent' of a piece of software available for a Linux platform doesn't necessarily mean it's actually equal.
Blind zealotry for any platform is stupid because it's just that - a platform. A working environment. Every environment is going to be better at some things than others. There's a reason why multi-booting exists.
Re: (Score:3)
You really think the solution is to use a Live CD and run a server on my network? This might work for certain scenarios but it doesn't match what Acrobat does - load up a PDF, convert images to text, allows searching of text within that PDF, all without any extra work since it's all elegantly integrated into the same tool. There's major value in being able to do that within the one program without any additional setup and have it used by a non-geek. I think geeks overlook this rather important facet.
Re: (Score:3)
Linux fills its niches, but a desktop OS just isn't one of those niches.
That's funny. Eight of my family members and twelve of my close friends, and myself all use Linux as a desktop OS, and have been for the past six years. Perhaps you are the one who has "Blind zealotry for any platform"? I put it to you that your outlook "is stupid", and furthermore, I don't think you know what you're talking about at all. Hell, one of my friends who works in the mortgage industry brings her Linux laptop to work so she can use LibreOffice to open some MS/Word documents that MS/Word has tr
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:4, Interesting)
I use linux because I can make it do everything I don't want to do - windows sux for automation...
Re: (Score:3)
I tried opening some .doc and .docx files recently with it (version 3.6.2) - it was able to open them and show things mostly like they do in Office 2010. But it's that mostly bit which is the problem, and I don't care about whether it's Microsoft's problem or not, the fact remains that it's not a perfect replication.
The users I support report this problem within the Microsoft system: Going from 2010 to 2007 or to 2003. We've had the most issues with Powerpoint and Access though, with Access 2010 files not working on any older version at all (and 2007 does the same thing to 2003).
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:5, Insightful)
If you've just "tried" one, then you really have no room for an opinion.
* by 'all' I mean the variations in desktop UI's... KDE, Gnome, MATE, XFCE, Fluxbox, Windowmaker, and so on and so forth.
No one has time for this.
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft could go a long way if they just stopped selling Visual Studio.... give it away so you can get the dev tools in the hands of those who need it (and have the most time to make apps for you...
You mean like they have been doing for the last 5+ years?
Here's a link to the latest: http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/eng/downloads#d-2012-express [microsoft.com]
How to get rid of all Windows boxes, forever? (Score:4, Interesting)
Linux sucks as a desktop os
Microsoft always does this bait and hook game. Already XP can't run IE9, and sites are stopping support for IE8. There's no option, accept Microsoft doesn't maintain support for their OS without forced upgrades, or just don't use it. There are some options.
The thing many people are waiting for I think is some simple way to stream win32 API suport to run any win-app you want, on demand, from one single box sitting on the network. Then get rid of every Microsoft product in sight.
Re:How to get rid of all Windows boxes, forever? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Time to retire XP (Score:5, Informative)
Wrong. There are still hundreds of millions of users with perfectly good computers that are running XP. They don't want to upgrade and migrate all their data and settings. They don't want to pay for new software that will let them do the things they do already. Hell, the feature touted in the thread summary (stereoscopic rendering) is already on Windows XP in OpenGL (and has been forever, including lots of effects that Microsoft forced you to get Vista for). Requiring an OS upgrade for simple features has nothing to do with technology (since OpenGL has no problem) - it is all about bilking you for more money.
According to StatCounte [statcounter.com]r XP usage is now tying MacOSX and Vista usage! Look under United States and add November statistics to do the calculation?
XP is a security nightmare. THe only place where XP and IE 6 are huge is CHina. Outside of that market it is dying. It is time to move on and stop fearing change. XP security is really bad just like IE 6 which came with it as the grandparent stated was from a different era where a good password is all you needed and oh stay out of websites you do not know etc.
Today, you get hacked by just having flash out of date or java installed through an infected ad network. I setup a new install of WIndows 7 just the other day and someone hit the blue E and BAM msn.com had an ad. Had to re-image the damn thing. XP lacks ASLR, DEP (except on a few services), and heap-spray protection. ASLR = random address layering (out of order). All you need to do to hack an XP box is know which ram addresses core dll files use. You can do this as a regular user.
Just insert some code by overflowing a buffer or integer in XP and BAM your code is running as admin, even if the code started as a regular user. Dep and ASLR with Windows 7 can stop this. VC10 has bounds checking when a program crashes to prevent loss of control ... again does not work on XP. XP does not seperate processes and priveldges and even impersonates administrator and hardware devices ... wow.
XP
- can't scale beyond 2 cores efficiently
- SATA driver can't multitask with command queing
- Swaps like a mofo due to a terrible paging algorithm (double pennalty if you use the default SATA driver) even if you have plenty of ram
- Slower and shitty graphics due to not supporting WDDM and a compuser below DirectX11 and the hardware. This makes your computer more stable
- Driver BSOD protection
- No UEFI support
- No Trim SSD Support
- No modern browser support after 2014 (Chrome and FF will drop it)
I assume if you work in IT (like most slashdotters) that you are under 30 and are used to behavior that dictates run unupdated ancient platforms but DO NOT TOUCH IT. THose of use over 35 remember doing it every 2- 3 years like your phones.
It is irresponsible and dangerous to run XP today and especially after next year. It is time to move on my friend. It is 2012 now. Your PC is not an appliance like a fridge if it is internet enabled. We wont support you anymore and it wont be our problem for not supporting IE 6- 8 and XP. That problem is yours.
Re: (Score:3)
and 95% of the reason it's sitting in the landfill is because of useless, forced obsolescence created by software that takes a lot more resources yet fails to give valid reasons why. The technical reason of course is that more and more of the stack is being coded in bulky interpreted languages and/or is just sloppy (you know, the old 'you have the memory so why not use it' mentality). The other 5% is for situations where your application actually needs more cpu/ram.
Argument from antiquity. Just because s
Re: (Score:3)
because some of us don't want separate devices for every task and we like the enhancements powerful hardware brings to them? We've been using one machine for a lot of things since 1993 and we'd like to continue doing so.
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:5, Interesting)
Wow! Is it still the 1990s?
In case you haven't noticed where things are and where they are going, we have specialized computers everywhere. Your smartphone is the most obvious, but also, your DVD player, your TV and lots of things are specialized computers. And so yes, you do want a separate device for most every task. That is, unless you carry a laptop around instead of a phone.
And things are only getting worse...or better depending on how you look at it. Before long, you will carry your computer and data with you all the time. The interface will depend on the application. In the car, it will be what you want in the car. At home, it will be what you want in the home.
And when you get down to it, most people only do a rather limited set of things with their computers. If they are mostly internet, then guess what? It doesn't matter which OS you use. This Microsoft-proprietary internet is just about dead. The internet+flash is going away too.
And here's a prediction:
Windows 7 will be the last loved OS by Microsoft. Windows 8 will be rejected in an unprecedented manner. It will be rejected by users... that has been done before. Windows 8 will be rejected by developers -- the people Microsoft has most depended on. At the end of the day, what keeps people using Windows is the applications. And when people start coding for other platforms instead of Windows 8, that'll be the end of Microsoft's reign. After that, it's all coasting downhill under its own weight.
And just as hard as it was to imagine IBM not making type writers, it is certainly hard for people to see PCs go. But we've seen it all before. The exit of the floppy... both 5'25" and 3.5" were OMG!! It caused fear and panic for a while. A lot of things are changing. Get used to it. Most of the time it's better. But heaven help us when storage is on the cloud with no option otherwise. That will happen when applications will no longer store data locally... just "cached" locally with built-in limits. Welcome to computing 2.0. Applications and data as a service.
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:5, Insightful)
yes, I'm well aware of this, and with that specialization comes the consumer hostile lockdown. The difference as that a dvd player (traditional ones anyway) doesn't track your play history and upload it to some assholes online who then sell the data to anyone who wants to know. The last thing I'd do is plug my tv into the internet, esp if it's got a camera on it. Since I can't easily control the software, I'm at the whim of the 'quality' code running on the device which was probably coded by underpaid indians or koreans.. No thanks. That ethernet jack is never getting a route to the internet. This is all far far worse than the aggregates the cable company gets from tracking stats with the cable box.
No, before long, all your data will be on the network somewhere, where it is beholden to the auspices and behavioral expectations of the ASP, the ISP, and of course, the state. Your only interaction will be that of access, not control. This access will be closely monitored and I can guarantee any action taken that is antithetical to the interests of the above will result in the related data erased and possibly your account terminated...or worse, jailtime. There are a lot of scary trends in place that make these statements less paranoid sounding every day, so don't bother retorting it as such.
The upgrade from the floppy to removable hds and then to flash was not riddled with middle men grabbing control and passing it off as convenience along the way. That's the difference. Since you agree with some of this perhaps you can throw away that initial fallacious argument. In many ways the 1990s were about computers as tools of individual empowerment. Today, they're becoming more and more the tools of enslavement.
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:4, Insightful)
well yeah.. my statements include that implicitly. The specialized devices don't generally allow control over the firmware if anything because they're not meant to be general purpose computers. The difference is that in the past, these specialized devices were fixed function and unnetworked. Today it's much different and that power is being used in consumer unfriendly ways.
Re:Let's hope Steam on Linux gathers... steam (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows 7 will be the last loved OS by Microsoft. Windows 8 will be rejected in an unprecedented manner. It will be rejected by users... that has been done before. Windows 8 will be rejected by developers -- the people Microsoft has most depended on. At the end of the day, what keeps people using Windows is the applications. And when people start coding for other platforms instead of Windows 8, that'll be the end of Microsoft's reign. After that, it's all coasting downhill under its own weight.
Lol. Let share a little bit of wisdom with you. People don't stop using something because it sucks, people stop using things because there are "better" alternatives. The key word here is "better". Right now there is nothing that even comes close to Microsoft's suite of offerings for the corporate market. You might argue the Linux is technically better for reason X or Apple is better because reason Y, but the simple fact is that MS has the market cornered for business apps, and they are the incumbent, which is an extremely hard position to change. Don't be confused by Apple's recent success, consumer's are fickle which is why MS has invested heavily in Corporate lock-in. The only cases of MS "rejection" were because MS themselves had better alternatives, not the competition. Windows 8 might not be your cup of tea, but I've got a prediction for you. The only thing that will beat it will either be Windows 7 or Windows 9.
Years later ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Just like what happened to IE 10.
Initially Microsoft only let users of Win 8 to enjoy IE 10, shutting out millions and millions of Win7 users.
Only now, rumor has it that M$ gonna let Win7 users use IE10 - http://slashdot.org/submission/2350635/ie-10-for-win-7---would-it-be-a-little-bit-too-late- [slashdot.org] - but it would be too late.
The same thing may happen here.
Only after Linux gathering massive Steam (pun intended) Microsoft gave up and allowing DirectX 11.1 to run on Win7 - and it will too, be too little, too late.
Re:Years later ... (Score:4, Insightful)
It would be nice to have a +1 "I hope you're right" mod.
Well there's 11.1 reasons to use OpenGL (Score:5, Insightful)
As per the subject, this just adds to the reasons for using OpenGL
Re: (Score:3)
Great. Now if only the big studios will make the switch.
Indie developers have been using OpenGL for ages. Windows will continue to be the gaming platform of choice so long as Call of Duty and Madden continue to push the version of DirectX necessary.
It's not surprising move though. I believe Microsoft started this with XP (DirectX 9c?), and have been doing it since. There were no negative repercussions then, and I honestly doubt there will be with DirectX 11.1.
Of course, if Windows 8 utterly tanks, as it pro
Re:Well there's 11.1 reasons to use OpenGL (Score:5, Informative)
Solution: don't buy from the big studios. Send them an email telling them that you aren't buying, and tell them why. Inform them that the indies are supplying your needs, with OpenGL compatible games. Problem solved.
Re:Well there's 11.1 reasons to use OpenGL (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
But big studios make all the fun games. Sure, indie developers make standouts from time to time (Amnesia, Braid, etc), but I like Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Dishonored. These are way too involved for an indie group to make. And since it's not going to make one lick of difference if I send them an email or not, I'd rather just do what's necessary to play them since we only live once anyway.
Re:Well there's 11.1 reasons to use OpenGL (Score:5, Insightful)
It'll take a lot more than that (Score:3)
People seem to forget that Steam is just a platform to sell games, an online store. It doesn't port your games. So Valve putting Steam on Linux means very little, unless companies start porting their games to Linux.
For that to happen, there will have to be a worthwhile amount of sales for existing Linux titles. Publishers will need to see that the cost of the port will be worth it. Remember it isn't as simple as "Just use OpenGL and you can port it!" Each platform takes work and QA and that means money. The
Re: (Score:3)
This could very well make OpenGL the future standard.
I know I'm playing devil's advocate more than usual, but... if it weren't for DirectX, what would compete with OpelGL to ensure progress?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah the only problem is getting developers to support it, and after the 3.x fiasco, with all hands on the tiller plenty of developers are still swearing it off. Though it does seem to be changing with the 4.x version. But it has it's own image to repair among the community first.
Re: (Score:3)
Vista couldn't do it with major overhaul and upgrade to DX9 in form of DX10 which was Vista exclusive.
DX11.1 improvements are miniscule in terms of actual upgrades to DX11. Win8 is almost as bad in comparison to 7 as Vista was to XP.
I don't really see this working as a reasonable reason for the switch. If it was, we'd have seen the jump back in Vista times.
What do you expect? (Score:5, Insightful)
If a company releases a new product, they have to add new features to get you to buy it. Why add features to a product people have already bought when they're trying to push the new shiny?
The real story would be if they didn't continue with security updates and bug fixes, but I doubt that's the case.
Re: (Score:2)
It goes beyond adding features; it's also about allocating resources to build compatibility for multiple versions of the OS, test on multiple versions and support multiple versions. "The new shiny" is not the issue. Windows 8 is Microsoft's upgrade path, if you want to continue to be current, you upgrade. Windows 8 has not made Windows 7 obsolete, it just means you need to be happy where you are.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, you can always switch to Linux or Mac, I hear both of those are more much responsive than Microsoft when it comes to meeting expectations about what a customer wants. /sarcasm
Re:What do you expect? (Score:5, Interesting)
I use Linux so I'm no longer an authority on Windows, but why switch? Can't you just use Windows 7 for a few years? You don't have to get a new computer or update your OS just because something new has come out. If Windows 7 works for you keep using it.
In Linux land gnome 3 was a terrible interface. However each month developers came out with tweeks, applets and extensions that made it useful for users. I just kept using XFCE, but the point is don't worry about Windows 8. Either it will become workable, or it will be replaced by Windows 9.
Windows XP didn't hit it's stride until SP2, so relax. Use what you are using and wait it out.
It could also be that this version of Direct X is Windows 8 specific. I don't use Windows, but is it common to have that small 'a' subscript in a release. It sure seems odd to me. Like it is some kind of sub-release targeted ad a specific sub architecture of Windows.
Re:What do you expect? (Score:4, Funny)
You don't have to get a new computer or update your OS just because something new has come out.
NOW you tell me.
Doesn't matter (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Doesn't matter (Score:5, Insightful)
I just bought a new computer. I chose the Win 7 option over Win 8.
Frankly I am not interested in it. I have used it, I have a computer still running the RC. Just not interested in it. It is Win 7 with a tablet GUI slapped on the front.
The fact is the new GUI does nothing to increase efficiency. Frankly it seems to me that it is a marketing ploy to force people to become familiar with the interface. This is in the hopes that once people get comfortable with it that they will choose the Windows tablets.
I do not like it when people try to trick/force me into something. No thanks.
I still can't tell the difference betwen DX9 and10 (Score:4, Interesting)
Supposedly the big draw for Vista was the coming of DX10 and all that entailed. Side by side comparisons of DX9 vs DX10 were so minor the magazines (yes, those still existed in 2006) had to draw red circles around the detail, they made wireframe renders of DiRT so you could see all the extra triangles in the flags and water... that you couldn't see without the help, along with paragraphs explaining how what you couldn't see was so high tech.
I certainly can't tell the difference between DX10 and DX11, and 11.1a has got to be so minor as to be ignored by developers -- why would you want to alienate your customer base like that? Like microsoft, they're in the business to make money too. Whatever gains were had with the tessellation improvements in DX10 were offset by the improvements in technology; it's just too hard to tell the difference between DX versions these days.
Has rendering technology finally matured?
Re:I still can't tell the difference betwen DX9 an (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I still can't tell the difference betwen DX9 an (Score:4, Informative)
Early on in DX10 times, it was the exact opposite. Switching to DX10 renderer cost around 10-30% performance over what you would get on DX9.
It wasn't until DX11 and win7 that we started to see games that would actually have proper support that didn't come with a massive performance hit when switching from DX9 to DX11. And even so, DX11 still generally is a net fps loss because of the extra features that put extra load on the hardware. Load that isn't there in DX9.
Re:I still can't tell the difference betwen DX9 an (Score:4, Insightful)
Has rendering technology finally matured?
It's the game developers that have matured. The technology hasn't changed that much -- but the developers have gained experience and understanding. They aren't willing to jump to the latest version just because it's the latest version anymore. They have some business sense now; Which is why the Windows 8 app store looks like a barren desert. Developers know they won't make money there. Same with game developers -- they go where the money is, not where the marketing is. So when you're looking at DX10 versus DX11; The API doesn't make much difference in performance, so why not stick with something supported by more video cards out there, and better optimized in newer video cards anyway?
The developers have matured -- they have a business sense now, not just technical proficiency. DX11.1 can bite their shiny metal ass. Nobody will be developing on it for years to come.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Rendering technology is waiting for the next generation of consoles. Devs are scared of doing pc-exclusive "super-graphics" because it will be PC-only and that market is mired in doubt of piracy and confusing sales numbers thanks to the myriad of digital options which aren't listed in the regular sales numbers.
Nothing radical will happen in the near-future apart from input methods such as Oculus Rift.
Re:I still can't tell the difference betwen DX9 an (Score:5, Interesting)
I was actually excited when I first saw DirectX 10 screenshots. You actually get foliage [incrysis.com] with DirectX10, especially in the third set. (Check out the mountains in the back.) Pity that Vista's poor uptake meant nobody besides Crysis or Hellgate: London did much with with it.
DirectX 11 [youtube.com] was even more impressive--tesselation essentially gets you a hojillion transformable polygons for free. Check out the crowd [pcgameshardware.com] animated entirely in GPU hardware.
If you really can't tell the difference, just rejoice, quietly, that all of your gaming needs were met nine years ago. You'll never be tempted to buy a new video card for that XP rig.
Re: (Score:3)
And yet in your example, the developers still felt the need to clearly label in ALL CAPS which one was which.
Standard Operating Procedure (Score:4, Insightful)
We can argue about exactly when they should stop supporting old OSes, but at some point it makes sense to move resources from your old product to your new product.
Re: (Score:2)
> We can argue about exactly when they should stop supporting old OSes, but at some point it makes sense to
> move resources from your old product to your new product.
We're arguing that windows 7 is not an `old os` and that its unrealistic to expect people who've bought a computer 2 months ago to now buy another one, or pay for an upgrade they don't want just to take advantage of a new graphics subsystem which would work perfectly well under Windows 7. If people voted with their feet and refused to bu
So? (Score:2)
Anything out there requires it?
Nope?
Non issue
Unless the new os sees adoption developers won't care
So? (Score:3)
I'm hardly a Microsoft fan, but I don't expect them to just keep churning out new software for their old products. Why should they support older versions of Windows for new versions of their software?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is more complicated than that. DirectX requires WDDM which is aero and 3D composition GPU support starting with DX 10. WDDM 1.2 is not compatible with any other kernel. A rewrite would be needed that would make WIndows 7 not Windows 7 anymore and break video and CAD software and piss off the corporate users.
DirectX 11.1 uses this in an abstraction layer.
This is why IE 9 is not available for XP. It has nothing to do with MS forcing users to upgrade. Its smooth graphics and font rendering require all that to make it smoother than FF or Chrome which rely on DirectX 9. IE 10 as a result is Win 8 only at the moment until it is rewritten for the older WDDM 1.1 and DIrectX11.
Re:So? (Score:5, Funny)
What, are you new here?
That is NOT how we react to Microsoft stories,
First of all, you didn't use the proper "M$" when referring to Microsoft, and on top of that you tried to be reasonable and did not bring up throwing chairs or monkey boy or Bob or even mention BSDs one time.
And not a single cuss word.
I'm not sure you and Slashdot are a good fit.
Didn't work with Vista (Score:4, Insightful)
The baseline requirement in nearly all games being released today is still DX9, because that's what XP supports. MS absolutely failed in trying to leverage gaming requirements as a means to pawn off unwanted upgrades on users. Because of that previous failure, DX10/11 still feels new to most people and they won't be demanding upgrades for it anytime soon. In the meantime, the delay in new DX feature adoption gives OpenGL-based open source/indie game developers time to catch up, just as before. And more OpenGL means less dependence on Windows as a whole, so this is a win-win-win situation.
Just like tying new IE releases to Windows upgrades. Chrome, Firefox, etc. cannot thank MS enough for that.
Re:Didn't work with Vista (Score:4, Insightful)
They're DX9 because that's what XBOX360 essentially "sorta kinda" renders with. It makes no sense costs-wise to add PC-only DX11 features into ports beyond bare minimum, if even that.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not true anymore. About 50% of upcoming new games require direct X 10 as minimum, for example: Assassin's Creed III, Call of Duty: Black Ops II, Company of Heroes 2, Total War: Shogun 2 Fall of the Samurai, Ghost Recon: Future Soldier, XCOM: Enemy Unknown
New WDDM version is the reason (Score:5, Insightful)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Display_Driver_Model#WDDM_1.2 [wikipedia.org]
Sounds like a key feature of DirectX 11.1, the stereoscopic 3D rendering, is a feature of WDDM 1.2 and given WDDM 1.2 is only available in Windows 8, that kinda ties DirectX 11.1 to it as well.
Windows 7 uses WDDM 1.1. Could Microsoft safely update this to version 1.2 such that DirectX 11.1 could be made available for it as well? Probably (Microsoft developed it all, so there's no reason why they couldn't). Would it be a worthwhile investment for them to do so? Probably not; they're having enough trouble getting people to want to use Windows 8 as it is - forcing people to shift to it in any way possible, no matter how slimey, is not above them.
I doubt it'll matter much though - you'd have to be particularly crazy to develop a game that requires DirectX 11.1 any time soon. especially given the backlash against Windows 8.;
Re:Mod parent up (Score:3, Informative)
WDDM 1.2 has something called a composer that schedules between CPU and GPU tasks with directX 11.1 on top. It is a major performance improvement and great for power saving features.
Unfortunately, it can't be backported to Windows 7/XP as they would no longer be Windows 7 and XP anymore as it is a kernel rewrite. IT would break corporate software which is why they love using obsolete platforms for decades as it never changes.
Well no wonder IE 10 is not available on Windows 7. All that hardware acceleration
Re:Mod parent up (Score:5, Interesting)
As for your claim that it would require a "kernel rewrite" I have to say I'm impressed. Apparently you know the implementation of the system which apparently up to now was believed to be closed source. I am curious how you know how the kernel would have to be "re-written" when according to the version numbers they just went from 6.1 to 6.2.
Re:New WDDM version is the reason (Score:4, Interesting)
Stereoscopic 3D (Score:5, Insightful)
They did it with Vista, too (Score:4, Informative)
And no one bought that any more than they'll be buying 8.
Right... like every vendor (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux has incorporated btrfs into the 3.x kernel and isn't porting it back to the 2.4 kernel. Is this what it's come to? Etc. etc. etc. Yes, this is Slashdot, but the MS bashing was played out sometime around 2006. If you're going to pick on them, at least pick something legitimate and don't whine about them not backporting features ad-infinitum.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple absolutely blows, the fact you're even attempting to compare their s
Part of the Wall (Score:3, Insightful)
They'll Relent (Score:4, Insightful)
Because they'll have to.
Windows 8 is a toilet (remember, it's the "other version" every "every other version of Windows sucks") and they're forcing obsolescence on Windows 7 far too early.
Not a big deal. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That'll be why most games are still DX9 so they can run on XP.
Yet again, Microsoft can't see any rational reason for people to 'upgrade' to Windows Metro, so they're trying to force them by arbitrary restrictions on DirectX. Yet again, it will ensure that games don't use the new version until about Windows 11.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't really see a problem here.
Clearly you haven't tried Windows 8 yet.
Hell, I'm an MSDN subscriber, so I have access to a number of license keys for personal use, but after my experience with Win 8 at work a few weeks back (in the span of 30 minutes, I managed to crash it twice, forcing a reboot both times, and realized that it clearly wasn't made for a mouse when I kept seeing suggestions that I "tap here to do X"), I have no intention of "upgrading", let alone suggesting that others should pay them $40 to do so. Call me when Win 9 is
The Difference Between OpenGL and DirectX (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have programmed shaders before you know that new APIs make absolutely no difference in advancing graphics since any graphics effect that has and will ever exist can be programmed using even ancient shader models like GLSL version 2. New APIs serve only to lock users into their own API artificially, even though the graphics capabilities already exist and will be the same for a long time to come. Using shaders, a programmer can do anything using graphics, even things that don't exist yet. All of the effects advancements like SSAO (screen space ambient occlusion) and raytracing are advancements in algorithms that can be easily written in any existing shader language. A new DirectX API version in my opinion is completely useless and only serves no purpose other than to try to get people to buy Windows 8. Programmers don't need a new API to make better graphics, they need creativity and ingenuity using existing shader languages which will never need to change.
Re: (Score:3)
Again? (Score:3)
And in other news...Steve Sinofsky is GONE. (Score:5, Interesting)
Steve Sinofsky, the "brains" behind Windows 8, has just been given the boot.
Gee... one wonders why.
http://allthingsd.com/20121112/breaking-windows-head-steven-sinofsky-to-leave-microsoft/ [allthingsd.com]
Maybe it's because 8 is a stinker and they have to deep discount the so-called upgrade to 15 bucks just to get people to try it?
--
BMO
Re:And in other news...Steve Sinofsky is GONE. (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe it's because 8 is a stinker and they have to deep discount the so-called upgrade to 15 bucks just to get people to try it?
If that were the case, why put Larson-Green in his place? She's the one behind Metro (and Ribbon before that)...
Re: (Score:3)
That's an informative point and it's a shame you posted it AC as it means that many people may not get to see it. Microsoft promoted up the person who has been leading the changes in Microsoft's user interfaces; if anything this means expect more of it.
I've actually upgraded my home PC to Windows 8 since release. Is it better/worse than 7? I really can't say yet as there are some annoying short
perfect answer (Score:3)
The best summary is from Rock, Paper, Shotgun:
It's been a while since Microsoft pulled the "oh no, this new version of DirectX couldn't possibly work on earlier versions of Windows" scamgasm, but as the relatively friendly age of Windows 7 is overshadowed by the dawning of the firm's desperate desire to make Windows 8 a cross-platform goliath/software shop, an old habit has returned.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/11/12/old-dog-old-tricks-ms-locks-directx-11-1-to-win-8/ [rockpapershotgun.com]
(reposting because /. stupid UTF-8 non-support mangled the quote the first time)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
DX 10/11 will be around for some time unfortunately.
Re: (Score:2)
No
Re: (Score:2)
I see no reason it couldn't work, provided they had the resources (developers and testers).
The only down side is Microsoft has the advantage here with their usual "lets create and use undocumented system calls to make this really hard to reverse engineer" tactic.
I love the WINE project for their effort but there will come a time that businesses will simply start development with cross platform in mind. With projects like wxGTK, Qt, and OpenGL making that process easier I see no reason why they wouldn't util
Re:WINE (Score:5, Insightful)