Curse

EternalTempest · Oct 18, 2006, 05:30 AM // 05:30

It looking like Microsoft *may* be making Direct X 10 work on Windows XP.

The reason I say may is the news is breaking from "The Inquirer" a tech news site that's right... 75% of the time on "rumors". If it is true, look for DirectX 9.L

This reason was given:

Quote:

DirectX 9.0 L is simply a renamed and refurbished DirectX 10 for Windows XP. It will make DirectX 10 games to work on Windows XP. And games such as the upcoming Crysis won't work on the existing DirectX 9.0 c. they need a DirectX 9.0 L One of the biggest issues is the fact that Nvidia or ATI won't have any mainstream or entry-level cards until at least mid- to end of Q1 2007. This suggests that if Vista tips up around the beginning of the year, gamers will be turned off by it.

I do hope there not wrong with this.

Infidelus · Oct 18, 2006, 01:17 PM // 13:17

Not gonna happen

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35140

Tijger · Oct 18, 2006, 05:43 PM // 17:43

The Inquirer is not a reliable source for anything IT related, its the IT version of a supermarket tabloid.

Stemnin · Oct 18, 2006, 06:08 PM // 18:08

They're saying DX9.0L is for vista only, not win XP.

Quote:

DX9.0L is a special version of DirectX 9 for Vista only that allows DX9 games to run with Vista's new driver model. It's not possible to run D3D10 on XP without running in pure software emulation.

Mushroom · Oct 18, 2006, 07:15 PM // 19:15

This type of thing is not unusual either. Almost every time a new OS comes out, a lot of older games will not run on the new OS, and a lot of newer games will not run on the old OS.

XP is 6 years old now, and I believe it is time to put it out to pasture. Trying to continue it's lifespan will only result in yet another occurance of the "Windows 98 That Would Not Go Away".

Myself, I would much prefer that they continue with newer versions of Windows, and not struggle to try and bring old versions up to modern requirements.

xerverkillah · Oct 19, 2006, 12:57 AM // 00:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mushroom

Myself, I would much prefer that they continue with newer versions of Windows, and not struggle to try and bring old versions up to modern requirements.

same. these sort of things doesnt worry me at all since g80 + vista have my name on it when they come out.

scrinner · Oct 19, 2006, 01:17 AM // 01:17

dx 9.0l is simply Dx 9 for Vista.

D.E.V.i.A.N.C.E · Oct 19, 2006, 01:01 PM // 13:01

before that article came out, I remeber reading something about microsoft may port DX10 to windows xp after a few months... I'd like to find that article again, but with so much vista news its gunna take awhile. it coulda been some rumor from some blogger who made it sounded like a fact

also read WINE (the linux windows everoment emulator) also mentioned about porting Dx10 to win xp users.

Mushroom · Oct 19, 2006, 02:16 PM // 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by D.E.V.i.A.N.C.E

also read WINE (the linux windows everoment emulator) also mentioned about porting Dx10 to win xp users.

I love how people always call WINE an emulator. Even though the official name is "Wine Is Not an Emulator".

All WINE is is a compatibility layer, that allows most of the various flavors to Linux to run some Windows code. It is very buggy, because of course it can't support all Windows code.

A lot of the biggest changes in Vista are "under the hood". For example, it works natively with IP6. When working with IP4 addresses, it will do a translation to and from IP6.

And even more important, there is a new API and new memory management features. And of course, DirectX 10. In the end, this means that there will soon be a lot of programs written to take advantage of these features, and not even bothering to keep compatibility with XP.

After all, when StarCraft came out, few of us worried that it did not run on Win 3.1. By late 1996, almost no software was written that would support 3.1 or DOS. People either had to upgrade, or be left behind.

The same thing happened when we moved to XP. A lot of software (and hardware) simply was not compatible with the new OS. I had to dump my Creative Webcam, because they refused to make new drivers and software for an item that was almost 4 years old.

I think Vista will be the biggest change since Win95. Between Vista and the end of support for 98/ME, a lot of people are finally gonna go ahead and upgrade their old systems. And you have no idea how many are out there. At least once a week, somebody brings in an old Pentium I system for me to work on. And once a month, I see a 486 walk in the door.

2 weeks ago, a guy actually walked in the door with an 80286 system! His hard drive failed, and he simply could not understand why I could not get him a new MFM 20 MB drive to replace his old one. I tried to explain to him that I did not even have a copy of DOS in the store anymore to reload his old system, even if I had a hard drive.

He left, sure that I was trying to rip him off by selling him a new computer he did not need. My coworkers and I just laughed after he left, there was nothing else we could do.

D.E.V.i.A.N.C.E · Oct 19, 2006, 02:31 PM // 14:31

and LAME Lame Ain't an MP3 Encoder

It was in my own words type deal for people who dont really know what it is(from a linux platform), since we where talking about microsoft products.

EternalTempest · Oct 19, 2006, 10:19 PM // 22:19

Microsoft has stated there going back to the 3 year New OS cycle they use to have. I have not problems with newer versions of windows but with the 3 year cycle + microsoft trying to move to a subscription model where you rent your software I do have some concerns. Corp volume license users of vista will have to activate windows in some way this teim around.

Not only that with the changes in the EULA allowing you to move it only to one machine where a motherboard/cpu can trip the "new machine transfer". Then if you upgrade your video/hard drive/soundcard, etc latter you may be SOL and have to buy a new license. So if you upgrade a lot...

I do think Vista is a good OS (from the public beta testing) but the "new" os every 3 years (if they can hit that goal) is nothing more then a version of what Vista was suppose to be. Vista is a "shadow" of what it was planned to be.

I'm a strong feel companies should be current + 1 behind (no matter how old it is). So in MS case that will be Vista + XP (for another 3 years).

Don't get me wrong I can see them not adding new features to XP (such as Direct X 10, new isolated IE 7 mode where the browser can be isolated from the OS). I just want more security updates for XP until Vista "2.0" come out.

Vista will also be one of the 1st where I have to dual boot XP/Vista where in the past XP handled 9X software rather well and I didn't need to.

If in OS does what you need it to do and your NOT intrested in newer games / features, as long as it's not more then one behind, what wrong with basic support? (Not new features backported).

Sorry for the long rant

Laughing Man · Oct 20, 2006, 03:29 PM // 15:29

Companies tend to always stay away from the latest Windows OS. I've worked in the IT department of two companies (as an intern). Hughes Network System, and the Society for Neuroscience. For both, most of the computers on the network were still running Windows 2000 and were in the process of upgrading to XP.

Why? Because the IT department needs to test it to make sure everything works correctly. And so many other steps.

Hell my dad just told me WMATA (the Metro system in Maryland, VA, and DC) just upgraded his computer Windows to XP within the past year.

Keep in mind game companies design games for as many people as possible. If they were to jump directly to DX10 their profits would sink quite a bit considering not every PC gamer jumps to the next OS (especially since gamers tend to mess around with their PC parts and wouldn't be happy with Windows' transfer rule..though I'm sure Vista will be cracked within a month anyway) and new hardware.

D.E.V.i.A.N.C.E · Oct 20, 2006, 03:41 PM // 15:41

I'll be waiting for the guy standing infront of a microsoft sign thats counting down the days left till vista launch with a corprate version burned copy in his hand... with the CD key on the otherside.

here we go...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCKGW more info on that..

Omega X · Oct 20, 2006, 05:15 PM // 17:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by D.E.V.i.A.N.C.E

I'll be waiting for the guy standing infront of a microsoft sign thats counting down the days left till vista launch with a corprate version burned copy in his hand... with the CD key on the otherside.

here we go...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCKGW more info on that..

LOL! I remember that.

I wonder if they will do it again...

gabrial heart · Oct 20, 2006, 05:16 PM // 17:16

Meh, you can forget WINE, they won't be doing anything more with it. Codeweavers has crossover in beta now (free to d/l and use) and will release a final (pay) version with much better support that is based on the wine engine. It runs on LINUX and on Intel macs with scattered reviews. I've tried it and it'll run ms apps no problem, but as far as games it's got a way to go.

Unfortunately, we are going to be tied to MS for quite a while. None of the free options are well documented enough or provide enough suppport (ease of use) for the average gamer to make a switch worth while in the long run.

A DX10 version is actually available to run on XP right now in an SDK build for testing purposes, but the final release I'm sure will be a vista only option. It will continue that the hard core folks will play with linux and the rest of the world will be running MS OS's for quite sometime to come.

Ubuntu may actually get a good grip on those that REALLY want to game on linux instead of Microsloth. For those looking for alternatives, you might want to check out their free offerings (the LTS) makes it sound like they are commited to it as well. They also over those with the pre-intel macs a pretty good option for gaming as well.