I didn't feel like quoting the person but I think this pertains to the entire thread, alot of people seem to not like the idea of DX10, I beg to differ, a game where you can find comparisons is a game called Crysis coming out for the PC and 360.
Watch the dx9 and dx10 comparisons and it's like going from a normal tv(dx9) to a really nice hdtv(dx10)
it's HUGELY noticeable what they can do with dx10 in comparison.
Yeah, uhh, read the thread. We all know what dx10 does, and noone here is against the idea of dx10.
What we are against is being made to buy an OS to take advantage of the tech, when it could have been, and will be (whether by MS or not) implemented in the OS people already have (XP), just to sell some more copies of an unfinished and soon to be obsolete POS OS.
DX10 is the only thing Vista has that gets it a second look from gamers, and is really the only new thing that Vista has going for it. That is why DX10 is vista only, not that it couldn't be done in XP.
i dont care, i like Vista, i like it better than XP, and im having to trouble at all gaming wise. Xp had many things about it i dident like, that vista has corrected, like the Games menu option (xp just created a menu in the startbar, vista can figure out that it is a game and create a shortcut to a games folder, very smart. Besides vista has very smart search funktions which i use all the time..
i dont care, i like Vista, i like it better than XP, and im having to trouble at all gaming wise. Xp had many things about it i dident like, that vista has corrected, like the Games menu option (xp just created a menu in the startbar, vista can figure out that it is a game and create a shortcut to a games folder, very smart. Besides vista has very smart search funktions which i use all the time..
slighly off subjuct but if you want some good search features jsut get Google Desktop
Remeber I am not anti-vista-devil i am just trying to resist buying the OS just for AoC, and with vista that is really all i see is dx10 and a more "pretty" system. I think it all boils down to my sceptism every since i bought that wonderful OS copy know as Windows ME (i still have nightmares about that)
I enjoy vista and i really dont see the problem getin a upgrade from windows xp to vista disk. No one likes the new os but end up using it in the end. just get used to the fact that vista is the next os and xp is long buy dying now. Yeah theres bugs but what doesnt and no its not like Vanguard seeing as i dont lag or skip frames when i load up vista on my PC.
I enjoy vista and i really dont see the problem getin a upgrade from windows xp to vista disk. No one likes the new os but end up using it in the end. just get used to the fact that vista is the next os and xp is long buy dying now. Yeah theres bugs but what doesnt and no its not like Vanguard seeing as i dont lag or skip frames when i load up vista on my PC.
I have a problem with any company that forces a new product on consumers by purposely changing architecture. New games will want to use the better abilities within DX10 but MS is removing a choice from consumers and developers. Consumers should have a choice in products... take away that choice and you remove a cornerstone in capitalism and consumerism. They are using an unfair trade practice to force purchases.
As to Vista... I did not even want to go to XP... after win2K security for windows software is non-existent. I run a dual box now with linux just because MS is only good for gaming now. The whole .net architecture is flawed and a security nightmare. MS chooses accessibility over security at every turn. Also lets talk about upgrade disks... They suck... the only real way to get a truly stable version is to install from scratch which MS smacks you with a $100 - $200 charge.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
Speaking as an MS certified person who works in IT field for large company. I can say I detest Microsoft. I don't know many people in my field who cheer for the company. its a joke. Most games even coming out now tend to have vista specific issues. Many games aren't even supported by it. Its another tactic to force consumers hands, and for that matter even companies.
Historically most large scale corps don't upgrade when MS desires them. I've supported more then one company that refuses to upgrade to current version of windows till it has been out a long time. Stability issues is a major factor. And rule of thumb for a tech is typically don't touch new Windows release till SP1 has been released at least. Its not till sp1 on a windows release that it has some form of stability. Now I know sp1 is on the deck for vista. Still I can't manage to get myself to upgrade. I I like AoC, I've got a pc that can easily run vista. Just the idea of it and MS' tactics piss me off. And the only reason they get away with it is because consummers bend over and say ok whatever you say chief.
Personally I prefer Linux. With programs like Cedega it won't be long before a lot of games are running under Linux. In fact a great deal of popular games already are.
I've no issues with Vista, and when dx10 games come out i'd rather play them on Vista instead of some using some hacked thing with XP. Its the way it was meant to be played and yes M$ forced our hand to Vista for dx10 only fine, but with a service pack 2 upgrade to vista expected the same time as AoC comes out, im sure it will sort out most of the issues people experience. Just my opinion
FYI - SP1 for vista is way delayed at this point. rumors abound about when but consider history, MS typically has SPs out to us partners for as much as a year before they are in general release and as of yet there is no SP1 BETA. Additionally, all along MS has said it wants SP1 to come along with Windows Server 2008 and that just got pushed back until Feb of 2008, ad in Google and the Anti Trust courts getting on MS about Vista's search built in and SP1 for Vista is a ways off.
Aside from that - neither NVIDIA or ATIs drivers are ready to run taxing games in Vista - they can barely run last years games as good as XP let alone the next generation. I have never been an MS hater, in fact i typically defend Windows - but when it comes to enthusiasts or businesses and vista it is an easy call to say Vista is crap. I score it a winner for the dumass users out there that benifit from the extra layers of user friendly crap and who need the security improvements (minor but still improvements) but for those who are in business or those who game or otherwise want the most out of thier hardware Vista is the second coming of Milenium -
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by AgtSmith
Originally posted by AmazingAvery
I've no issues with Vista, and when dx10 games come out i'd rather play them on Vista instead of some using some hacked thing with XP. Its the way it was meant to be played and yes M$ forced our hand to Vista for dx10 only fine, but with a service pack 2 upgrade to vista expected the same time as AoC comes out, im sure it will sort out most of the issues people experience. Just my opinion
FYI - SP1 for vista is way delayed at this point. rumors abound about when but consider history, MS typically has SPs out to us partners for as much as a year before they are in general release and as of yet there is no SP1 BETA. Additionally, all along MS has said it wants SP1 to come along with Windows Server 2008 and that just got pushed back until Feb of 2008, ad in Google and the Anti Trust courts getting on MS about Vista's search built in and SP1 for Vista is a ways off.
Aside from that - neither NVIDIA or ATIs drivers are ready to run taxing games in Vista - they can barely run last years games as good as XP let alone the next generation. I have never been an MS hater, in fact i typically defend Windows - but when it comes to enthusiasts or businesses and vista it is an easy call to say Vista is crap. I score it a winner for the dumass users out there that benifit from the extra layers of user friendly crap and who need the security improvements (minor but still improvements) but for those who are in business or those who game or otherwise want the most out of thier hardware Vista is the second coming of Milenium -
Just call it Me II.
Actually people can test and download the BETA for SP1 VISTA right now
And it is still slated for FULL release in the Autumn.
Windows Automated Installation Kit Documentation (Windows Server code named "Longhorn" Beta 3 & Windows Vista SP1)
Brief Description:
Documentation update for the Windows Automated Installation Kit and Unattended Setup Reference.
That is not Vista Service Pack 1, it will be quite some time before that is finalized and released to the public. And without regard to SP1 drivers for Vista are in such sorry shape that it really doesn't matter if MS kicks out 3 service packs.
As for the ZDnet blogger - sometimes she has some insight but the fact that MS allready publicly announced the delay of Server 2008 until February 2008 throws off her speculation.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by AgtSmith
Windows Automated Installation Kit Documentation (Windows Server code named "Longhorn" Beta 3 & Windows Vista SP1)
Brief Description: Documentation update for the Windows Automated Installation Kit and Unattended Setup Reference.
That is not Vista Service Pack 1, it will be quite some time before that is finalized and released to the public. And without regard to SP1 drivers for Vista are in such sorry shape that it really doesn't matter if MS kicks out 3 service packs.
As for the ZDnet blogger - sometimes she has some insight but the fact that MS allready publicly announced the delay of Server 2008 until February 2008 throws off her speculation.
Speaking as an MS certified person who works in IT field for large company. I can say I detest Microsoft. I don't know many people in my field who cheer for the company. its a joke. Most games even coming out now tend to have vista specific issues. Many games aren't even supported by it. Its another tactic to force consumers hands, and for that matter even companies. Historically most large scale corps don't upgrade when MS desires them. I've supported more then one company that refuses to upgrade to current version of windows till it has been out a long time. Stability issues is a major factor. And rule of thumb for a tech is typically don't touch new Windows release till SP1 has been released at least. Its not till sp1 on a windows release that it has some form of stability. Now I know sp1 is on the deck for vista. Still I can't manage to get myself to upgrade. I I like AoC, I've got a pc that can easily run vista. Just the idea of it and MS' tactics piss me off. And the only reason they get away with it is because consummers bend over and say ok whatever you say chief. Personally I prefer Linux. With programs like Cedega it won't be long before a lot of games are running under Linux. In fact a great deal of popular games already are.
Spoken like a true IT officer lol. THen again promoting upgrades to Vista will only ensure job stability for the Company ( i personally do not have the heart to do it, i have enough problems trying to show "adminstrative assitants" where oulook is when they delete thier shortcuts ) ......Macs need to run more games.......(god help me if my boss reads that last comment lol)
alright fools, now THIS is the reason why you should get vista with a DX10 card, since DX10 doesnt only get you better graphics, it also does this.
"Not just another version
DirectX’s popularity over the years has been steadily increasing. Classic games like Thief: The Dark Project, Max Payne, Grand Theft Auto III have used various versions of DirectX to support their graphics. In more recent times, we see top class games like Half-Life 2, Battlefield 2, World of Warcraft and Oblivion: The Elder Scrolls IV making use of DirectX 9.0b/c.
Suffice to say that the latest games use the newest available version of DirectX.
But hey, DirectX10 is not just another version of DirectX. This version has been re-built from the ground up to change the way applications think about material management and load balancing between the CPU and GPU. D3D10, as also DirectX10 is called, takes advantage of the improved communication between the CPU and GPU and efficiently manages the data transfer between them.
As a result of your graphics card becoming more powerful, not only do you get more pixels, but you get more materials and objects. The complexity of scenes and environments can increase exponentially without ever increasing CPU overhead. This means that the CPU handles all film-like (advanced) graphics effects, material management and so frees up CPU cycles to concentrate on AI and Physics."
Windows Automated Installation Kit Documentation (Windows Server code named "Longhorn" Beta 3 & Windows Vista SP1)
Brief Description: Documentation update for the Windows Automated Installation Kit and Unattended Setup Reference.
That is not Vista Service Pack 1, it will be quite some time before that is finalized and released to the public. And without regard to SP1 drivers for Vista are in such sorry shape that it really doesn't matter if MS kicks out 3 service packs.
As for the ZDnet blogger - sometimes she has some insight but the fact that MS allready publicly announced the delay of Server 2008 until February 2008 throws off her speculation.
I know many ppl who have no issues with vista in day to day running and playing games and also people who have it for business and hate it.
That article is BS, SP1 is nto going to be available for public download anytime soon. Sometime soon certain partners and possibbly MSDN subscribers will get access but it will not get put out for public download until it is final. Some rumors where swirling that we would get a BETA around the middle of this month but they are just that - rumors.
Anyone who runs Vista for games, or any performance applications, and says they have no issues just doesn't have a clue as to what an 'issue' is. It is a total POS in terms of performance right now. Even simple file operations are performing far, far worse than in XP. Games - on average 15% to 40% slower and I won't even go into stability. People allways claim they have no issues, when Vanguard came out people said they had no issues with it - there are just some people who have no clue what is happening right in front of them.
Don't get me wrong, Vista has some nice little improvements to it that one day, after tons of fixes and performance improvements, will be nice to have - but it is simply a complete performance mess right now and the core driver support from ATI and NVIDIA is absolute crap. Gaming on Vista now makes about as much sense as that video I saw of some guy trying to play WoW on his iPhone.
Originally posted by Maximos Personally I prefer Linux. With programs like Cedega it won't be long before a lot of games are running under Linux. In fact a great deal of popular games already are.
What color is the sky in the world you live in? Seriously man, Linux is NEVER going to have games made for it - NEVER. Developers struggle to make money as it is without developing for a platform with 2% market share. Granted, some distros are better than in the past, but at its core Linux is the anti-Windows and so long as that attitude is prevelaint (and it is alive and well) it will fail to do anything mroe than it has now and tha tis be a GREAT OS when you have a specific purpose for it. Vista has its issue but it will improve and it will get all software developers intending to reach the 95% of the world who lives under a blue sky with a yellow sun developing for it and not Linux.
Reality check - it is Vista VS. XP - not Windows VS Linux.
Originally posted by Andorae So you see, you make your pc faster and stuff with dx10, not just prettier games... but if you dont like vista now, wait until SP1 has been released atleast, because atm vista is still quite buggy.
Sorry to disagree but DX10 does nothing for anything other than 3D accelerated games and even then only those #d accelerated games that support the DX10 API and only then if you have proper DX10 hardware. It doesn't do anything to make the rest of computing on Vista slower or faster.
Wait for SP1 is not bad idea - almost always good idea for MS stuff or any major software release of any type. But the issue with Vista to me isn't the bugginess, we had that with XP to in differing degrees. I can forgive that. What fries me with vista is that ther eis simply not one single thing that is better, faster, or otherwise clearly improved over XP. Yes, slicker GUI, integrated search, and other subtle things - but those are not real performance improvements they are just built in versions of what XP had by third party - so a nice inclusion but not a real improvement. to top that off you pay a steep price in stability, performance, and administration (the menu/wizard depth to get to things is dizzying in Vista) to get these former add ons built in to Vista. It just isn't worth it.
Originally posted by Andorae So you see, you make your pc faster and stuff with dx10, not just prettier games... but if you dont like vista now, wait until SP1 has been released atleast, because atm vista is still quite buggy.
Sorry to disagree but DX10 does nothing for anything other than 3D accelerated games and even then only those #d accelerated games that support the DX10 API and only then if you have proper DX10 hardware. It doesn't do anything to make the rest of computing on Vista slower or faster.
Just one question, did you just ignore what i posted or are you just stupid? they clearly say in that article
But hey, DirectX10 is not just another version of DirectX. This version has been re-built from the ground up to change the way applications think about material management and load balancing between the CPU and GPU. D3D10, as also DirectX10 is called, takes advantage of the improved communication between the CPU and GPU and efficiently manages the data transfer between them.
this statement alone is enough, what he said clearly means that the computer will load files and folders and games and other stuff alot faster with D3D10 that comes with DX10.
Because if it was only improving graphics, everyone could very well just use the new version of OPENGL which has the same shaders as DX10 and can support the same graphics.
Originally posted by Andorae So you see, you make your pc faster and stuff with dx10, not just prettier games... but if you dont like vista now, wait until SP1 has been released atleast, because atm vista is still quite buggy.
Sorry to disagree but DX10 does nothing for anything other than 3D accelerated games and even then only those #d accelerated games that support the DX10 API and only then if you have proper DX10 hardware. It doesn't do anything to make the rest of computing on Vista slower or faster.
Just one question, did you just ignore what i posted or are you just stupid? they clearly say in that article
But hey, DirectX10 is not just another version of DirectX. This version has been re-built from the ground up to change the way applications think about material management and load balancing between the CPU and GPU. D3D10, as also DirectX10 is called, takes advantage of the improved communication between the CPU and GPU and efficiently manages the data transfer between them.
this statement alone is enough, what he said clearly means that the computer will load files and folders and games and other stuff alot faster with D3D10 that comes with DX10.
Because if it was only improving graphics, everyone could very well just use the new version of OPENGL which has the same shaders as DX10 and can support the same graphics.
Most everything you have said there is so absolutely wrong I wouldn't even know where to begin pointing it out. Your own conclusions are wrong and whoever you are quoting is speaking more in marketting speak than technical speak.
Wtf are you talking about, you are saying that you... someone who doesnt work for microsoft knows more than someone who does work for microsoft and with development of the direct x 10? lmfao dont ridicule yourself, what he says is true, and also loads of other people at other forums have agreed to this, you are only saying his statement is false because you are a hater.
AgtSmith are you trying to say that a company like MS would overstate the the capabilities of there merchandise in order to increase the revenue on a product that isn't the best on the market?!?!?!??
HAHAHAHA your so crazy, I'm sure no company does that, they only want to make me happy and give me the best product for the cheapest price.
/Takes of his rose colored glasses, and puts down the MS propaganda pamphlet.
If only i could find a troll with a tin foil hat. =(
Please QUOTE some type of FACTs since your saying somebody is totaly WRONG. Everything I've seen writen even by companies other then MS seem to support what the person says contrary to your "Your Wrong You Fail" Troll stated here.
I cannot prove a negative, that is an impossibility. So asking me to prove that what someone says that someone else says is wrong is pretty pointless. If you want to to believe the Direct X 10 is majik mojo that makes all Vista computers run faster even when it isn't being used then go ahead. But if you post that nonsense I am going to post that it is nonsense. DX10 is to Vista what DX9 was to XP - nothing more, nothing less. In fact, there are a number of projects in development to allow DX10 to be ported to XP and rumors that MS will eventually allow such officially. Despite claims to the contrary there is no technical reason DX10 couldn't run on XP - it is mostly (emphasis on the mostly) for marketing reasons that DX10 has been kept as a Vista exclusive. It offers great promises of improvements; at this point they are real claims but how much performance benefit they will be verses how much improvement they bring are as of yet untested.
OK, that being said here is some info on the guy you are quoting (actually misquoting but more on that later):
I'm a Product Manager at Microsoft working on the Windows Vista launch team. I also work with key influencers in our user community. This means I get to do cool stuff, play with lots of electronic toys, travel the world, and blog about it at the same time. I know you're jealous
Allow me translate Mr. Whites biography - MS non-technical, non-engineering marketing and community relations writer. I would lay good money that as an active MS partner and MS OEM system builder (not to mention MCSE and MCSA certified as well as CCNA, A=, Network+, and Security+ certified, working now on CEH as well) that I have had more to do with MS code than Mr. White has - just FYI. Now, if you need a blurb of less than 500 words about some nifty new software feature then Mr. White is your man. It might surprise you to learn this but not everyone at Microsoft is a computer expert, engineer, or programmer. There are accountants, lawyers, receptionists, marketing/advertising folk, etc, etc, etc.
Here is the page you are quoting from, or misquoting from.
If you read the page he is talking in marketing speak and not in technical terms - so allot of what he says is over simplified or otherwise inaccurate - but nothing he says, even in the loose marketing speak context of that page, refers to anything other than what I said. DX 10 is for 3d applications. I said that, he says that - it is a fact. Notepad, Nero, Email clients, Internet browsers, Word, etc, etc, etc do NOT benefit from DX10 as you suggest in your mis characterization of what he said. 3D applications benefit from the DirectX 10 API (application programming interface BTW) as it offers new capabilities over DX 9 just as DX 9 offered new capabilities over DX 8. Some of the technical specifications and capabilities of DX 10 look great on paper and are very exciting, some are suspect and yet to be seen how beneficial or realistic they are. Thus is the way of any new technology whether of the software or hardware variety. AS DX10 stands now one of the better features is proving un-doable by NVIDIA so MS has dropped it - that feature being virtual memory addressing for GPUs which in and of itself would be a great thing. But NVIDIA screwed the pooch and hasn't been able to get it working right so MS dropped the requirement, or so it seems it will happen at this point. This could happen with other elements, still others could look good on paper but offer less benefit in real application, and so on and so on. Until some real DX 10 games get out there it is hard to really say what the benefit will be. Surely, MS has always done a good job with DX 9 and there is no reason to think DX 10 will not be superior to DX 9 - but is it so much better to justify the move to Vista? that becomes a discussion for the advertising and marketing people at this point because the only real, clear cut innovation that vista offers over XP is Direct X 10 - thus it is getting allot of hype from MS marketing writers like Mr. Nick White.
DX 10 is certainly worth being excited about - any such advancement in the technologies governing and supporting games are. However, this time around the generational shift is filled with tones that are quite non-technical as Vista is in desperate need of selling points (particularly for performance PC users) so allot is said about DX 10 that is probably best checked with your technically inclined acquaintances. As things stand right now - driver support for DX 10 hardware form both NVIDIA and ATI is so piss poor terrible (partly the fault of those companies, partly the fault of MS in terms of DX 10 complexities and/or Vista issues, partly the nature of a change like this from XP to Vista) that I don't care if DX 10 is programatically capable of full on holodecks - the hardware/software needed to run it is not capable of delivering. Will it get fixed - probably. But there is a problem to that - the longer it takes to get accepted the less reason there is to develop for it which is what is needed to drive adoption - a bit of the chicken and egg thing. SP1 is looking to be as late as 2008 which means that widespread adoption is likely to be put off until at least the end of 2008 which means games cannot possibly fully go DX 10 before 2009 which means we are well into the end of vista life cycle before the thing they say sis the reason to get it is going to be used fully. And thus is the problem of modern software - development and deployment cycles that are so large that they defeat themselves.
So we shall leave it there, think what you will but I suggest if you have limited funds, patience, or operating systems that you stick with XP for gaming for at least a while. The time for DX 10/Vista will come and when it does, as is allways the case, it will be unavoidably clear that the time has come. In the mean time - get DX10 hardware as it is solid and far outperforms comporable DX 9 hardware - and being prepared is allways a good thing.
Kind of two things to say from the points you make :
1. Directx10 maybe faster better, etc.. though there is still little reason to upgrade to vista from XP. In fact making directx10 vista only is a key marketing point in selling vista which has little or no other advantages over XP. As outlined above vista has a modified XP kernel with added security layer. All othe other new features were removed from Vista as the software was well overdue. Vista is also due to be replaced quite quickly with another OS only a few years after. In essence Vista isnt value for money.
On top of this is debate about whether directx10 could be with some effort backported to XP. Of course M$ probably isnt interested in even tihnking this.
2. Companies lie sometimes, actually most of the time. Well by lie ... I mean spin the truth pretty darned far. The truth is that vista isnt an amazing new OS. Unix / Linux have been secure and stable for years and XP provides many, many features for the home users. Fact is as amazing as M$ presents vista underneath many as not impressed. This is mroe true of the transition between vista and xp than say 98 and XP. *
* On the other note does anyone remeber windows ME edition. What a joke that was !
I cannot prove a negative, that is an impossibility. So asking me to prove that what someone says that someone else says is wrong is pretty pointless. If you want to to believe the Direct X 10 is majik mojo that makes all Vista computers run faster even when it isn't being used then go ahead. But if you post that nonsense I am going to post that it is nonsense. DX10 is to Vista what DX9 was to XP - nothing more, nothing less. In fact, there are a number of projects in development to allow DX10 to be ported to XP and rumors that MS will eventually allow such officially. Despite claims to the contrary there is no technical reason DX10 couldn't run on XP - it is mostly (emphasis on the mostly) for marketing reasons that DX10 has been kept as a Vista exclusive. It offers great promises of improvements; at this point they are real claims but how much performance benefit they will be verses how much improvement they bring are as of yet untested.
OK, that being said here is some info on the guy you are quoting (actually misquoting but more on that later):
I'm a Product Manager at Microsoft working on the Windows Vista launch team. I also work with key influencers in our user community. This means I get to do cool stuff, play with lots of electronic toys, travel the world, and blog about it at the same time. I know you're jealous
Allow me translate Mr. Whites biography - MS non-technical, non-engineering marketing and community relations writer. I would lay good money that as an active MS partner and MS OEM system builder (not to mention MCSE and MCSA certified as well as CCNA, A=, Network+, and Security+ certified, working now on CEH as well) that I have had more to do with MS code than Mr. White has - just FYI. Now, if you need a blurb of less than 500 words about some nifty new software feature then Mr. White is your man. It might surprise you to learn this but not everyone at Microsoft is a computer expert, engineer, or programmer. There are accountants, lawyers, receptionists, marketing/advertising folk, etc, etc, etc. Here is the page you are quoting from, or misquoting from.
If you read the page he is talking in marketing speak and not in technical terms - so allot of what he says is over simplified or otherwise inaccurate - but nothing he says, even in the loose marketing speak context of that page, refers to anything other than what I said. DX 10 is for 3d applications. I said that, he says that - it is a fact. Notepad, Nero, Email clients, Internet browsers, Word, etc, etc, etc do NOT benefit from DX10 as you suggest in your mis characterization of what he said. 3D applications benefit from the DirectX 10 API (application programming interface BTW) as it offers new capabilities over DX 9 just as DX 9 offered new capabilities over DX 8. Some of the technical specifications and capabilities of DX 10 look great on paper and are very exciting, some are suspect and yet to be seen how beneficial or realistic they are. Thus is the way of any new technology whether of the software or hardware variety. AS DX10 stands now one of the better features is proving un-doable by NVIDIA so MS has dropped it - that feature being virtual memory addressing for GPUs which in and of itself would be a great thing. But NVIDIA screwed the pooch and hasn't been able to get it working right so MS dropped the requirement, or so it seems it will happen at this point. This could happen with other elements, still others could look good on paper but offer less benefit in real application, and so on and so on. Until some real DX 10 games get out there it is hard to really say what the benefit will be. Surely, MS has always done a good job with DX 9 and there is no reason to think DX 10 will not be superior to DX 9 - but is it so much better to justify the move to Vista? that becomes a discussion for the advertising and marketing people at this point because the only real, clear cut innovation that vista offers over XP is Direct X 10 - thus it is getting allot of hype from MS marketing writers like Mr. Nick White.
DX 10 is certainly worth being excited about - any such advancement in the technologies governing and supporting games are. However, this time around the generational shift is filled with tones that are quite non-technical as Vista is in desperate need of selling points (particularly for performance PC users) so allot is said about DX 10 that is probably best checked with your technically inclined acquaintances. As things stand right now - driver support for DX 10 hardware form both NVIDIA and ATI is so piss poor terrible (partly the fault of those companies, partly the fault of MS in terms of DX 10 complexities and/or Vista issues, partly the nature of a change like this from XP to Vista) that I don't care if DX 10 is programatically capable of full on holodecks - the hardware/software needed to run it is not capable of delivering. Will it get fixed - probably. But there is a problem to that - the longer it takes to get accepted the less reason there is to develop for it which is what is needed to drive adoption - a bit of the chicken and egg thing. SP1 is looking to be as late as 2008 which means that widespread adoption is likely to be put off until at least the end of 2008 which means games cannot possibly fully go DX 10 before 2009 which means we are well into the end of vista life cycle before the thing they say sis the reason to get it is going to be used fully. And thus is the problem of modern software - development and deployment cycles that are so large that they defeat themselves.
So we shall leave it there, think what you will but I suggest if you have limited funds, patience, or operating systems that you stick with XP for gaming for at least a while. The time for DX 10/Vista will come and when it does, as is allways the case, it will be unavoidably clear that the time has come. In the mean time - get DX10 hardware as it is solid and far outperforms comporable DX 9 hardware - and being prepared is allways a good thing.
I think your reading things I'm not seeing other people type. I never saw anyone say that DX10 Makes notepad run better. He basicly copied what Nvida said about DX10, It's a rebuilt system that changes the way the CPU and GPU work together, allowing for a more efficent data transfer.
I'd also like to note that it is VERY likely that DX10's full potential will only be reachable with Vista, because based on what Microsoft did in the past with DX8, and 9. Yes they made it so Windows 98 and ME COULD run a dumbed down version of them, however it wasn't the same version as XP. " DirectX 8.1 (RC7) This version for the down level operating systems. Windows 98, Windows ME, and Windows 2000"
Lets look back.
DX9 Released December 19, 2002.
DX9.00.0904 Released October 2004 Included support for Windows ME. (Note: It wasn't the same version as XP, and didn't include yield the same benchmark scores, as it's XP counterpart. )
Maybe Microsoft did make Vista just to make money, but there are good features to it. Just because people hate change doesn't mean its not going to happen. Did anyone here know that Vista at is 6 month of release date has FAR FAR fewer published security flaws then the best version of Linux at the 6 month point? Read this.
alright fools, now THIS is the reason why you should get vista with a DX10 card, since DX10 doesnt only get you better graphics, it also does this.
"Not just another version
DirectX’s popularity over the years has been steadily increasing. Classic games like Thief: The Dark Project, Max Payne, Grand Theft Auto III have used various versions of DirectX to support their graphics. In more recent times, we see top class games like Half-Life 2, Battlefield 2, World of Warcraft and Oblivion: The Elder Scrolls IV making use of DirectX 9.0b/c.
Suffice to say that the latest games use the newest available version of DirectX.
But hey, DirectX10 is not just another version of DirectX. This version has been re-built from the ground up to change the way applications think about material management and load balancing between the CPU and GPU. D3D10, as also DirectX10 is called, takes advantage of the improved communication between the CPU and GPU and efficiently manages the data transfer between them.
As a result of your graphics card becoming more powerful, not only do you get more pixels, but you get more materials and objects. The complexity of scenes and environments can increase exponentially without ever increasing CPU overhead. This means that the CPU handles all film-like (advanced) graphics effects, material management and so frees up CPU cycles to concentrate on AI and Physics."
read the bold, this is taken from http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/articles/447226.aspx So you see, you make your pc faster and stuff with dx10, not just prettier games... but if you dont like vista now, wait until SP1 has been released atleast, because atm vista is still quite buggy.
There where several comments indicating that DX10 somehow makes the whole PC faster when, in fact, it is just a more advanced 3d rendering API - so it only affects 3D applications and offers new capabilities with as of yet unknown performance implications. That is why I chimed in, it was at best a mis-characterization and at worst an outright falsehood.
DX10 does NOTHING to make your PC faster. It ONLY affects games, nothing else - and to date all games in Vista run substantially slower than they do in XP. Taking the highlighted comments above you can see the fallacies.
The comment that Dx10 does something other than affect graphics - it doesn't. DX 10 is only applicable to 3d rendering, in short - games. In the quoted comment from the MS marketing dufus an error is made in referring to DX 10 as accelerating "applications', it should read "3d applications" to be accurate. A convenient marketing error. Later the same MS moron claims you get more pixels with DX 10. This is just so patently false it is curious he could even suggest something like this. How would a software program like DX10 add more pixels to a consumers monitor? LCDs are physically built with a fixed resolution, nothing can change that short of taking out the panel and replacing it, even CRTs have fixed resolutions that they can display. Claiming you get more pixels with DX 10 is just ridiculously wrong.
Lastly, the poster I was responding to outright claims that DX 10 "makes your PC faster", this is not only theoretically or esoterically wrong it is functionally wrong. DX 10 just adds more capability in terms of a Vista computer's 3d rendering capabilities over an XP computer's 3d rendering capabilities. It is possible that DX 10 will add these capabilities and increase the performance as well but that is speculation and will take years to achieve as the programming interface is so new it will take time for developers to shake out what is possible with it. What is more likely, is that the new API will do as other versions of DX have done over their predecessors, it will increase the capabilities while making things more efficient so that the resulting increase in image quality is not as taxing as it would have been to achieve with the old version. In short, DX 10 will give us more and its under the hood improvements will hopefully reduce the cost of that 'more'.
The original comment I replied to: Originally posted by Andorae
alright fools, now THIS is the reason why you should get vista with a DX10 card, since DX10 doesnt only get you better graphics, it also does this.
"Not just another version
DirectX’s popularity over the years has been steadily increasing. Classic games like Thief: The Dark Project, Max Payne, Grand Theft Auto III have used various versions of DirectX to support their graphics. In more recent times, we see top class games like Half-Life 2, Battlefield 2, World of Warcraft and Oblivion: The Elder Scrolls IV making use of DirectX 9.0b/c.
Suffice to say that the latest games use the newest available version of DirectX.
But hey, DirectX10 is not just another version of DirectX. This version has been re-built from the ground up to change the way applications think about material management and load balancing between the CPU and GPU. D3D10, as also DirectX10 is called, takes advantage of the improved communication between the CPU and GPU and efficiently manages the data transfer between them.
As a result of your graphics card becoming more powerful, not only do you get more pixels, but you get more materials and objects. The complexity of scenes and environments can increase exponentially without ever increasing CPU overhead. This means that the CPU handles all film-like (advanced) graphics effects, material management and so frees up CPU cycles to concentrate on AI and Physics."
read the bold, this is taken from http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/articles/447226.aspx So you see, you make your pc faster and stuff with dx10, not just prettier games... but if you dont like vista now, wait until SP1 has been released atleast, because atm vista is still quite buggy.
There where several comments indicating that DX10 somehow makes the whole PC faster when, in fact, it is just a more advanced 3d rendering API - so it only affects 3D applications and offers new capabilities with as of yet unknown performance implications. That is why I chimed in, it was at best a mis-characterization and at worst an outright falsehood.
DX10 does NOTHING to make your PC faster. It ONLY affects games, nothing else - and to date all games in Vista run substantially slower than they do in XP. Taking the highlighted comments above you can see the fallacies.
The comment that Dx10 does something other than affect graphics - it doesn't. DX 10 is only applicable to 3d rendering, in short - games. In the quoted comment from the MS marketing dufus an error is made in referring to DX 10 as accelerating "applications', it should read "3d applications" to be accurate. A convenient marketing error. Later the same MS moron claims you get more pixels with DX 10. This is just so patently false it is curious he could even suggest something like this. How would a software program like DX10 add more pixels to a consumers monitor? LCDs are physically built with a fixed resolution, nothing can change that short of taking out the panel and replacing it, even CRTs have fixed resolutions that they can display. Claiming you get more pixels with DX 10 is just ridiculously wrong.
Lastly, the poster I was responding to outright claims that DX 10 "makes your PC faster", this is not only theoretically or esoterically wrong it is functionally wrong. DX 10 just adds more capability in terms of a Vista computer's 3d rendering capabilities over an XP computer's 3d rendering capabilities. It is possible that DX 10 will add these capabilities and increase the performance as well but that is speculation and will take years to achieve as the programming interface is so new it will take time for developers to shake out what is possible with it. What is more likely, is that the new API will do as other versions of DX have done over their predecessors, it will increase the capabilities while making things more efficient so that the resulting increase in image quality is not as taxing as it would have been to achieve with the old version. In short, DX 10 will give us more and its under the hood improvements will hopefully reduce the cost of that 'more'.
Comments
What we are against is being made to buy an OS to take advantage of the tech, when it could have been, and will be (whether by MS or not) implemented in the OS people already have (XP), just to sell some more copies of an unfinished and soon to be obsolete POS OS.
DX10 is the only thing Vista has that gets it a second look from gamers, and is really the only new thing that Vista has going for it. That is why DX10 is vista only, not that it couldn't be done in XP.
i dont care, i like Vista, i like it better than XP, and im having to trouble at all gaming wise. Xp had many things about it i dident like, that vista has corrected, like the Games menu option (xp just created a menu in the startbar, vista can figure out that it is a game and create a shortcut to a games folder, very smart. Besides vista has very smart search funktions which i use all the time..
read that for real world directx 9 vs directx 10 performance.
keep in mind the specs on the test machine.
i just dont see how gaming on a pc financially makes any sense. i can buy a 360 that outperforms a 4000.00 pc in directx 10 for 250 bucks used.
i cant even get a decent directx 10 video card for that much.
Games i'm playing right now...
"In short, I thought NGE was a very bad idea" - Raph Koster talking about NGE on his blog at raphkoster.com
Remeber I am not anti-vista-devil i am just trying to resist buying the OS just for AoC, and with vista that is really all i see is dx10 and a more "pretty" system. I think it all boils down to my sceptism every since i bought that wonderful OS copy know as Windows ME (i still have nightmares about that)
I enjoy vista and i really dont see the problem getin a upgrade from windows xp to vista disk. No one likes the new os but end up using it in the end. just get used to the fact that vista is the next os and xp is long buy dying now. Yeah theres bugs but what doesnt and no its not like Vanguard seeing as i dont lag or skip frames when i load up vista on my PC.
As to Vista... I did not even want to go to XP... after win2K security for windows software is non-existent. I run a dual box now with linux just because MS is only good for gaming now. The whole .net architecture is flawed and a security nightmare. MS chooses accessibility over security at every turn. Also lets talk about upgrade disks... They suck... the only real way to get a truly stable version is to install from scratch which MS smacks you with a $100 - $200 charge.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
Speaking as an MS certified person who works in IT field for large company. I can say I detest Microsoft. I don't know many people in my field who cheer for the company. its a joke. Most games even coming out now tend to have vista specific issues. Many games aren't even supported by it. Its another tactic to force consumers hands, and for that matter even companies.
Historically most large scale corps don't upgrade when MS desires them. I've supported more then one company that refuses to upgrade to current version of windows till it has been out a long time. Stability issues is a major factor. And rule of thumb for a tech is typically don't touch new Windows release till SP1 has been released at least. Its not till sp1 on a windows release that it has some form of stability. Now I know sp1 is on the deck for vista. Still I can't manage to get myself to upgrade. I I like AoC, I've got a pc that can easily run vista. Just the idea of it and MS' tactics piss me off. And the only reason they get away with it is because consummers bend over and say ok whatever you say chief.
Personally I prefer Linux. With programs like Cedega it won't be long before a lot of games are running under Linux. In fact a great deal of popular games already are.
FYI - SP1 for vista is way delayed at this point. rumors abound about when but consider history, MS typically has SPs out to us partners for as much as a year before they are in general release and as of yet there is no SP1 BETA. Additionally, all along MS has said it wants SP1 to come along with Windows Server 2008 and that just got pushed back until Feb of 2008, ad in Google and the Anti Trust courts getting on MS about Vista's search built in and SP1 for Vista is a ways off.
Aside from that - neither NVIDIA or ATIs drivers are ready to run taxing games in Vista - they can barely run last years games as good as XP let alone the next generation. I have never been an MS hater, in fact i typically defend Windows - but when it comes to enthusiasts or businesses and vista it is an easy call to say Vista is crap. I score it a winner for the dumass users out there that benifit from the extra layers of user friendly crap and who need the security improvements (minor but still improvements) but for those who are in business or those who game or otherwise want the most out of thier hardware Vista is the second coming of Milenium -
Just call it Me II.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
FYI - SP1 for vista is way delayed at this point. rumors abound about when but consider history, MS typically has SPs out to us partners for as much as a year before they are in general release and as of yet there is no SP1 BETA. Additionally, all along MS has said it wants SP1 to come along with Windows Server 2008 and that just got pushed back until Feb of 2008, ad in Google and the Anti Trust courts getting on MS about Vista's search built in and SP1 for Vista is a ways off.
Aside from that - neither NVIDIA or ATIs drivers are ready to run taxing games in Vista - they can barely run last years games as good as XP let alone the next generation. I have never been an MS hater, in fact i typically defend Windows - but when it comes to enthusiasts or businesses and vista it is an easy call to say Vista is crap. I score it a winner for the dumass users out there that benifit from the extra layers of user friendly crap and who need the security improvements (minor but still improvements) but for those who are in business or those who game or otherwise want the most out of thier hardware Vista is the second coming of Milenium -
Just call it Me II.
Actually people can test and download the BETA for SP1 VISTA right now
And it is still slated for FULL release in the Autumn.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=c0758bb7-b0c9-4a70-9462-4e3e8e3176b1&DisplayLang=en
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=559
Best to test it out on a Virtual Machine though.
SP1 brings the following fixes:
Corrupt Windows image fixes
Better language support
Setup and login fixes
Help topic updates
Better overall performance (file copies, shutdown times)
A better Desktop Search
ReadyBoost enhancements
That is not Vista Service Pack 1, it will be quite some time before that is finalized and released to the public. And without regard to SP1 drivers for Vista are in such sorry shape that it really doesn't matter if MS kicks out 3 service packs.
As for the ZDnet blogger - sometimes she has some insight but the fact that MS allready publicly announced the delay of Server 2008 until February 2008 throws off her speculation.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
That is not Vista Service Pack 1, it will be quite some time before that is finalized and released to the public. And without regard to SP1 drivers for Vista are in such sorry shape that it really doesn't matter if MS kicks out 3 service packs.
As for the ZDnet blogger - sometimes she has some insight but the fact that MS allready publicly announced the delay of Server 2008 until February 2008 throws off her speculation.
Sorry wrong link to that, I meant this link http://www.maximumpc.com/article/windows_vista_now_with_sp1
I know many ppl who have no issues with vista in day to day running and playing games and also people who have it for business and hate it.
Spoken like a true IT officer lol. THen again promoting upgrades to Vista will only ensure job stability for the Company ( i personally do not have the heart to do it, i have enough problems trying to show "adminstrative assitants" where oulook is when they delete thier shortcuts
alright fools, now THIS is the reason why you should get vista with a DX10 card, since DX10 doesnt only get you better graphics, it also does this.
"Not just another version
DirectX’s popularity over the years has been steadily increasing. Classic games like Thief: The Dark Project, Max Payne, Grand Theft Auto III have used various versions of DirectX to support their graphics. In more recent times, we see top class games like Half-Life 2, Battlefield 2, World of Warcraft and Oblivion: The Elder Scrolls IV making use of DirectX 9.0b/c.
Suffice to say that the latest games use the newest available version of DirectX.
But hey, DirectX10 is not just another version of DirectX. This version has been re-built from the ground up to change the way applications think about material management and load balancing between the CPU and GPU. D3D10, as also DirectX10 is called, takes advantage of the improved communication between the CPU and GPU and efficiently manages the data transfer between them.
As a result of your graphics card becoming more powerful, not only do you get more pixels, but you get more materials and objects. The complexity of scenes and environments can increase exponentially without ever increasing CPU overhead. This means that the CPU handles all film-like (advanced) graphics effects, material management and so frees up CPU cycles to concentrate on AI and Physics."
read the bold, this is taken from http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/articles/447226.aspx
So you see, you make your pc faster and stuff with dx10, not just prettier games...
but if you dont like vista now, wait until SP1 has been released atleast, because atm vista is still quite buggy.
That is not Vista Service Pack 1, it will be quite some time before that is finalized and released to the public. And without regard to SP1 drivers for Vista are in such sorry shape that it really doesn't matter if MS kicks out 3 service packs.
As for the ZDnet blogger - sometimes she has some insight but the fact that MS allready publicly announced the delay of Server 2008 until February 2008 throws off her speculation.
Sorry wrong link to that, I meant this link http://www.maximumpc.com/article/windows_vista_now_with_sp1
I know many ppl who have no issues with vista in day to day running and playing games and also people who have it for business and hate it.
That article is BS, SP1 is nto going to be available for public download anytime soon. Sometime soon certain partners and possibbly MSDN subscribers will get access but it will not get put out for public download until it is final. Some rumors where swirling that we would get a BETA around the middle of this month but they are just that - rumors.
Anyone who runs Vista for games, or any performance applications, and says they have no issues just doesn't have a clue as to what an 'issue' is. It is a total POS in terms of performance right now. Even simple file operations are performing far, far worse than in XP. Games - on average 15% to 40% slower and I won't even go into stability. People allways claim they have no issues, when Vanguard came out people said they had no issues with it - there are just some people who have no clue what is happening right in front of them.
Don't get me wrong, Vista has some nice little improvements to it that one day, after tons of fixes and performance improvements, will be nice to have - but it is simply a complete performance mess right now and the core driver support from ATI and NVIDIA is absolute crap. Gaming on Vista now makes about as much sense as that video I saw of some guy trying to play WoW on his iPhone.
What color is the sky in the world you live in? Seriously man, Linux is NEVER going to have games made for it - NEVER. Developers struggle to make money as it is without developing for a platform with 2% market share. Granted, some distros are better than in the past, but at its core Linux is the anti-Windows and so long as that attitude is prevelaint (and it is alive and well) it will fail to do anything mroe than it has now and tha tis be a GREAT OS when you have a specific purpose for it. Vista has its issue but it will improve and it will get all software developers intending to reach the 95% of the world who lives under a blue sky with a yellow sun developing for it and not Linux.
Reality check - it is Vista VS. XP - not Windows VS Linux.
Sorry to disagree but DX10 does nothing for anything other than 3D accelerated games and even then only those #d accelerated games that support the DX10 API and only then if you have proper DX10 hardware. It doesn't do anything to make the rest of computing on Vista slower or faster.
Wait for SP1 is not bad idea - almost always good idea for MS stuff or any major software release of any type. But the issue with Vista to me isn't the bugginess, we had that with XP to in differing degrees. I can forgive that. What fries me with vista is that ther eis simply not one single thing that is better, faster, or otherwise clearly improved over XP. Yes, slicker GUI, integrated search, and other subtle things - but those are not real performance improvements they are just built in versions of what XP had by third party - so a nice inclusion but not a real improvement. to top that off you pay a steep price in stability, performance, and administration (the menu/wizard depth to get to things is dizzying in Vista) to get these former add ons built in to Vista. It just isn't worth it.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
Sorry to disagree but DX10 does nothing for anything other than 3D accelerated games and even then only those #d accelerated games that support the DX10 API and only then if you have proper DX10 hardware. It doesn't do anything to make the rest of computing on Vista slower or faster.
Just one question, did you just ignore what i posted or are you just stupid? they clearly say in that article
But hey, DirectX10 is not just another version of DirectX. This version has been re-built from the ground up to change the way applications think about material management and load balancing between the CPU and GPU. D3D10, as also DirectX10 is called, takes advantage of the improved communication between the CPU and GPU and efficiently manages the data transfer between them.
this statement alone is enough, what he said clearly means that the computer will load files and folders and games and other stuff alot faster with D3D10 that comes with DX10.
Because if it was only improving graphics, everyone could very well just use the new version of OPENGL which has the same shaders as DX10 and can support the same graphics.
Sorry to disagree but DX10 does nothing for anything other than 3D accelerated games and even then only those #d accelerated games that support the DX10 API and only then if you have proper DX10 hardware. It doesn't do anything to make the rest of computing on Vista slower or faster.
Just one question, did you just ignore what i posted or are you just stupid? they clearly say in that article
But hey, DirectX10 is not just another version of DirectX. This version has been re-built from the ground up to change the way applications think about material management and load balancing between the CPU and GPU. D3D10, as also DirectX10 is called, takes advantage of the improved communication between the CPU and GPU and efficiently manages the data transfer between them.
this statement alone is enough, what he said clearly means that the computer will load files and folders and games and other stuff alot faster with D3D10 that comes with DX10.
Because if it was only improving graphics, everyone could very well just use the new version of OPENGL which has the same shaders as DX10 and can support the same graphics.
Most everything you have said there is so absolutely wrong I wouldn't even know where to begin pointing it out. Your own conclusions are wrong and whoever you are quoting is speaking more in marketting speak than technical speak.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
wow... nerd fight! Watch out, he is about to throw is morher board at you!
@AgtSmith
Wtf are you talking about, you are saying that you... someone who doesnt work for microsoft knows more than someone who does work for microsoft and with development of the direct x 10? lmfao dont ridicule yourself, what he says is true, and also loads of other people at other forums have agreed to this, you are only saying his statement is false because you are a hater.
AgtSmith are you trying to say that a company like MS would overstate the the capabilities of there merchandise in order to increase the revenue on a product that isn't the best on the market?!?!?!??
HAHAHAHA your so crazy, I'm sure no company does that, they only want to make me happy and give me the best product for the cheapest price.
/Takes of his rose colored glasses, and puts down the MS propaganda pamphlet.
If only i could find a troll with a tin foil hat. =(
Please QUOTE some type of FACTs since your saying somebody is totaly WRONG. Everything I've seen writen even by companies other then MS seem to support what the person says contrary to your "Your Wrong You Fail" Troll stated here.
I cannot prove a negative, that is an impossibility. So asking me to prove that what someone says that someone else says is wrong is pretty pointless. If you want to to believe the Direct X 10 is majik mojo that makes all Vista computers run faster even when it isn't being used then go ahead. But if you post that nonsense I am going to post that it is nonsense. DX10 is to Vista what DX9 was to XP - nothing more, nothing less. In fact, there are a number of projects in development to allow DX10 to be ported to XP and rumors that MS will eventually allow such officially. Despite claims to the contrary there is no technical reason DX10 couldn't run on XP - it is mostly (emphasis on the mostly) for marketing reasons that DX10 has been kept as a Vista exclusive. It offers great promises of improvements; at this point they are real claims but how much performance benefit they will be verses how much improvement they bring are as of yet untested.
OK, that being said here is some info on the guy you are quoting (actually misquoting but more on that later):
About Nick White
I'm a Product Manager at Microsoft working on the Windows Vista launch team. I also work with key influencers in our user community. This means I get to do cool stuff, play with lots of electronic toys, travel the world, and blog about it at the same time. I know you're jealous
Allow me translate Mr. Whites biography - MS non-technical, non-engineering marketing and community relations writer. I would lay good money that as an active MS partner and MS OEM system builder (not to mention MCSE and MCSA certified as well as CCNA, A=, Network+, and Security+ certified, working now on CEH as well) that I have had more to do with MS code than Mr. White has - just FYI. Now, if you need a blurb of less than 500 words about some nifty new software feature then Mr. White is your man. It might surprise you to learn this but not everyone at Microsoft is a computer expert, engineer, or programmer. There are accountants, lawyers, receptionists, marketing/advertising folk, etc, etc, etc.
Here is the page you are quoting from, or misquoting from.
If you read the page he is talking in marketing speak and not in technical terms - so allot of what he says is over simplified or otherwise inaccurate - but nothing he says, even in the loose marketing speak context of that page, refers to anything other than what I said. DX 10 is for 3d applications. I said that, he says that - it is a fact. Notepad, Nero, Email clients, Internet browsers, Word, etc, etc, etc do NOT benefit from DX10 as you suggest in your mis characterization of what he said. 3D applications benefit from the DirectX 10 API (application programming interface BTW) as it offers new capabilities over DX 9 just as DX 9 offered new capabilities over DX 8. Some of the technical specifications and capabilities of DX 10 look great on paper and are very exciting, some are suspect and yet to be seen how beneficial or realistic they are. Thus is the way of any new technology whether of the software or hardware variety. AS DX10 stands now one of the better features is proving un-doable by NVIDIA so MS has dropped it - that feature being virtual memory addressing for GPUs which in and of itself would be a great thing. But NVIDIA screwed the pooch and hasn't been able to get it working right so MS dropped the requirement, or so it seems it will happen at this point. This could happen with other elements, still others could look good on paper but offer less benefit in real application, and so on and so on. Until some real DX 10 games get out there it is hard to really say what the benefit will be. Surely, MS has always done a good job with DX 9 and there is no reason to think DX 10 will not be superior to DX 9 - but is it so much better to justify the move to Vista? that becomes a discussion for the advertising and marketing people at this point because the only real, clear cut innovation that vista offers over XP is Direct X 10 - thus it is getting allot of hype from MS marketing writers like Mr. Nick White.
DX 10 is certainly worth being excited about - any such advancement in the technologies governing and supporting games are. However, this time around the generational shift is filled with tones that are quite non-technical as Vista is in desperate need of selling points (particularly for performance PC users) so allot is said about DX 10 that is probably best checked with your technically inclined acquaintances. As things stand right now - driver support for DX 10 hardware form both NVIDIA and ATI is so piss poor terrible (partly the fault of those companies, partly the fault of MS in terms of DX 10 complexities and/or Vista issues, partly the nature of a change like this from XP to Vista) that I don't care if DX 10 is programatically capable of full on holodecks - the hardware/software needed to run it is not capable of delivering. Will it get fixed - probably. But there is a problem to that - the longer it takes to get accepted the less reason there is to develop for it which is what is needed to drive adoption - a bit of the chicken and egg thing. SP1 is looking to be as late as 2008 which means that widespread adoption is likely to be put off until at least the end of 2008 which means games cannot possibly fully go DX 10 before 2009 which means we are well into the end of vista life cycle before the thing they say sis the reason to get it is going to be used fully. And thus is the problem of modern software - development and deployment cycles that are so large that they defeat themselves.
So we shall leave it there, think what you will but I suggest if you have limited funds, patience, or operating systems that you stick with XP for gaming for at least a while. The time for DX 10/Vista will come and when it does, as is allways the case, it will be unavoidably clear that the time has come. In the mean time - get DX10 hardware as it is solid and far outperforms comporable DX 9 hardware - and being prepared is allways a good thing.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
Andorae
Kind of two things to say from the points you make :
1. Directx10 maybe faster better, etc.. though there is still little reason to upgrade to vista from XP. In fact making directx10 vista only is a key marketing point in selling vista which has little or no other advantages over XP. As outlined above vista has a modified XP kernel with added security layer. All othe other new features were removed from Vista as the software was well overdue. Vista is also due to be replaced quite quickly with another OS only a few years after. In essence Vista isnt value for money.
On top of this is debate about whether directx10 could be with some effort backported to XP. Of course M$ probably isnt interested in even tihnking this.
2. Companies lie sometimes, actually most of the time. Well by lie ... I mean spin the truth pretty darned far. The truth is that vista isnt an amazing new OS. Unix / Linux have been secure and stable for years and XP provides many, many features for the home users. Fact is as amazing as M$ presents vista underneath many as not impressed. This is mroe true of the transition between vista and xp than say 98 and XP. *
* On the other note does anyone remeber windows ME edition. What a joke that was !
I think your reading things I'm not seeing other people type. I never saw anyone say that DX10 Makes notepad run better. He basicly copied what Nvida said about DX10, It's a rebuilt system that changes the way the CPU and GPU work together, allowing for a more efficent data transfer.
I'd also like to note that it is VERY likely that DX10's full potential will only be reachable with Vista, because based on what Microsoft did in the past with DX8, and 9. Yes they made it so Windows 98 and ME COULD run a dumbed down version of them, however it wasn't the same version as XP. " DirectX 8.1 (RC7) This version for the down level operating systems. Windows 98, Windows ME, and Windows 2000"
Lets look back.
DX9 Released December 19, 2002.
DX9.00.0904 Released October 2004 Included support for Windows ME. (Note: It wasn't the same version as XP, and didn't include yield the same benchmark scores, as it's XP counterpart. )
Maybe Microsoft did make Vista just to make money, but there are good features to it. Just because people hate change doesn't mean its not going to happen. Did anyone here know that Vista at is 6 month of release date has FAR FAR fewer published security flaws then the best version of Linux at the 6 month point? Read this.
www.tgdaily.com/content/view/32596/108/
The original comment I replied to:
There where several comments indicating that DX10 somehow makes the whole PC faster when, in fact, it is just a more advanced 3d rendering API - so it only affects 3D applications and offers new capabilities with as of yet unknown performance implications. That is why I chimed in, it was at best a mis-characterization and at worst an outright falsehood.
DX10 does NOTHING to make your PC faster. It ONLY affects games, nothing else - and to date all games in Vista run substantially slower than they do in XP. Taking the highlighted comments above you can see the fallacies.
The comment that Dx10 does something other than affect graphics - it doesn't. DX 10 is only applicable to 3d rendering, in short - games. In the quoted comment from the MS marketing dufus an error is made in referring to DX 10 as accelerating "applications', it should read "3d applications" to be accurate. A convenient marketing error. Later the same MS moron claims you get more pixels with DX 10. This is just so patently false it is curious he could even suggest something like this. How would a software program like DX10 add more pixels to a consumers monitor? LCDs are physically built with a fixed resolution, nothing can change that short of taking out the panel and replacing it, even CRTs have fixed resolutions that they can display. Claiming you get more pixels with DX 10 is just ridiculously wrong.
Lastly, the poster I was responding to outright claims that DX 10 "makes your PC faster", this is not only theoretically or esoterically wrong it is functionally wrong. DX 10 just adds more capability in terms of a Vista computer's 3d rendering capabilities over an XP computer's 3d rendering capabilities. It is possible that DX 10 will add these capabilities and increase the performance as well but that is speculation and will take years to achieve as the programming interface is so new it will take time for developers to shake out what is possible with it. What is more likely, is that the new API will do as other versions of DX have done over their predecessors, it will increase the capabilities while making things more efficient so that the resulting increase in image quality is not as taxing as it would have been to achieve with the old version. In short, DX 10 will give us more and its under the hood improvements will hopefully reduce the cost of that 'more'.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
There where several comments indicating that DX10 somehow makes the whole PC faster when, in fact, it is just a more advanced 3d rendering API - so it only affects 3D applications and offers new capabilities with as of yet unknown performance implications. That is why I chimed in, it was at best a mis-characterization and at worst an outright falsehood.
DX10 does NOTHING to make your PC faster. It ONLY affects games, nothing else - and to date all games in Vista run substantially slower than they do in XP. Taking the highlighted comments above you can see the fallacies.
The comment that Dx10 does something other than affect graphics - it doesn't. DX 10 is only applicable to 3d rendering, in short - games. In the quoted comment from the MS marketing dufus an error is made in referring to DX 10 as accelerating "applications', it should read "3d applications" to be accurate. A convenient marketing error. Later the same MS moron claims you get more pixels with DX 10. This is just so patently false it is curious he could even suggest something like this. How would a software program like DX10 add more pixels to a consumers monitor? LCDs are physically built with a fixed resolution, nothing can change that short of taking out the panel and replacing it, even CRTs have fixed resolutions that they can display. Claiming you get more pixels with DX 10 is just ridiculously wrong.
Lastly, the poster I was responding to outright claims that DX 10 "makes your PC faster", this is not only theoretically or esoterically wrong it is functionally wrong. DX 10 just adds more capability in terms of a Vista computer's 3d rendering capabilities over an XP computer's 3d rendering capabilities. It is possible that DX 10 will add these capabilities and increase the performance as well but that is speculation and will take years to achieve as the programming interface is so new it will take time for developers to shake out what is possible with it. What is more likely, is that the new API will do as other versions of DX have done over their predecessors, it will increase the capabilities while making things more efficient so that the resulting increase in image quality is not as taxing as it would have been to achieve with the old version. In short, DX 10 will give us more and its under the hood improvements will hopefully reduce the cost of that 'more'.
Spot on. I'd say that about covers it.