Xp pro here. Will eventually have to go to some form of vista for large memory awareness, however. No, DX 10 can't really function under XP. "taking DirectX 10 back to XP would be equivalent with rewriting the operating system's kernel in order to be similar to Vista's." By the time you got done, you would basically have a little gimped Vista. There's really no point in even trying.
I'm no expert on this matter, but my guess is micro$oft wont write dx10 code for XP because they want gamers to move to vista, which will help to support it. It makes sence though, the cost of development plus the loss of vista sales by enabling gamers to use DX10 on XP = piling up a bunch of money and burning it. Some people say there are features in DX10 that make it almost impossible to work on XP, but who knows for sure besides microsoft?
I'm a PC and I run Vista Home Premium 64 bit, lol. For my needs it works for me. I use it mainly for gaming, the internet, and I have it hooked up to my XBOX 360 for media center. I guess I could have gone with xp media center, but Vista does have DX 10. So in the long run as I said before, it works for me.
When we get back from where we are going, we will return to where we were. I know people there!
Xp pro here. Will eventually have to go to some form of vista for large memory awareness, however. No, DX 10 can't really function under XP. "taking DirectX 10 back to XP would be equivalent with rewriting the operating system's kernel in order to be similar to Vista's." By the time you got done, you would basically have a little gimped Vista. There's really no point in even trying.
I'm no expert on this matter, but my guess is micro$oft wont write dx10 code for XP because they want gamers to move to vista, which will help to support it. It makes sence though, the cost of development plus the loss of vista sales by enabling gamers to use DX10 on XP = piling up a bunch of money and burning it. Some people say there are features in DX10 that make it almost impossible to work on XP, but who knows for sure besides microsoft?
Look, I'm no fan of Microsoft, but not every tin-foil hat theory is correct.
Vista is required for DX10 because of the way it works....the XP kernel is incompatible with DX10's instructions.
In order to make DX10 work on XP, the kernel would have to be re-written entirely. I don't know how to say this in any simpler terms.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"
Currently I have 2 internal hard drives, running Windows XP for most purposes including gaming, surfing the web, and Java/C++ programming. Dual boot Ubuntu on the other hard drive, which I mostly use for C/Perl programming.
Only thing holding me back from upgrading to vista is the dread of having to reinstall all of the software I have on this computer. Otherwise I would to take advantage of DX-10 and all of my Ram, because I can get Vista Ultimate for free
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Running XP Pro for gaming, other OS's to play around with and see what can be done with them. Honestly have to say that if more games would be made for Mac, that is what I would run.
I love OS X, like it a lot more than windows... but I like windows since I love gaming. So pretty much I like both, I do most of my coding, chatting, surfing etc on my mac... and use my PC only for gaming.
EDIT: Oh yeah.. Dx 10... love it
___________________ Give me a good skill based sandbox game, and i'll give you a cookie!
XP pro at work XP pro for home gaming Ubuntu for day to day stuff. There is a reason why businesses have not adopted Vista in any flavor, Millinium taught everyone a lesson about buying eyecandy from MS. Some people like "pretty", others like performance and substance (DRM doesn't count as substance).
Couldn't agree more... if I had a choice, id go with XP Pro 64-bit right now.
___________________ Give me a good skill based sandbox game, and i'll give you a cookie!
Windows XP Pro SP3 ( which has been extended yet again, what a surprise ). I'll be running XP until Vienna ( Windows 7 ) hits late next year/ early 2010.
Windows XP Pro SP3 ( which has been extended yet again, what a surprise ). I'll be running XP until Vienna ( Windows 7 ) hits late next year/ early 2010.
Beta starts in december this year
Yeah, they're going to be handing it out early at the next developers conference in November? ( not looking at my e-mail right now ), so I'm hoping to get an early look at it. Been playing with the alpha builds so far. I think people are really going to see the Vista/ME comparison when Vienna hits, just like they did between 2000 and XP.
Windows XP Pro SP3 of course...until Windows 7 can "unVista" itself (if that's even remotely possible, judging from these milestones I've read and seen about..) or if it becomes an Ubuntu derivative done right OR when Ubuntu can finally figure out how to run DirectX apps properly with less to no performance tradeoffs, completely fixed hardware drivers' support and nail user friendliness so that people would only have to deal with command lines when they want to.
Originally posted by robby5403 Still the problem with windows is that if you want more then 4Gb ddr you need the 64bit which has sometimes trouble with certain games :S
Must be pretty rubbish games. I never had any problems with the games i play, e.g. eve, civ4, supreme commander etc. The only thing that's meh is that, unlike most linux distros, windows can't use 32bit drivers with a 64bit kernel..
Running XP 64 bit is the worst of the bunch, for many reasons. If you want a 64 bit Windows, Vista is the only viable option for a gamer.
Vista got a bad reputation from the brainwashing of the media and a few lazy companies not writing their drivers (NVIDIA) correctly at the release of Vista. The Vista core is extremely powerful, stable, and secure. Turn off all the useless eye candy and idiot proofing and you have the best OS on the market.
OSX, I also run, its pretty like Vista but dumbed down and locked down to the point I can't stand using it.
Linux, is great, but the lack of gaming support is reason I avoid it. I don't need an entire OS just to chat and browse webpages when Windows does it perfectly fine.
I do run all three operating systems and as stated Vista 64bit SP1 gets my vote, by a long shot. Most of the Vista hate comes from the uninformed simple parroting what they hear from the media.
BTW: Unless you're playing LOTRO in DX10, you're not REALLY playing lotro. The difference is substantial. I have three boxes and one is running XP with similar hardware to another box running DX10 vista. The visual difference is substantial, anyone telling you different is wrong.
Comments
I'm no expert on this matter, but my guess is micro$oft wont write dx10 code for XP because they want gamers to move to vista, which will help to support it. It makes sence though, the cost of development plus the loss of vista sales by enabling gamers to use DX10 on XP = piling up a bunch of money and burning it. Some people say there are features in DX10 that make it almost impossible to work on XP, but who knows for sure besides microsoft?
"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun."
XP 64 here
cant stand vista, linux doesnt game (though i have it on my laptop)
XP for gaming.
Ubuntu for everything else.
I'm a PC and I run Vista Home Premium 64 bit, lol. For my needs it works for me. I use it mainly for gaming, the internet, and I have it hooked up to my XBOX 360 for media center. I guess I could have gone with xp media center, but Vista does have DX 10. So in the long run as I said before, it works for me.
When we get back from where we are going, we will return to where we were. I know people there!
windows server 2008. it's vista without the bloat.
I'm no expert on this matter, but my guess is micro$oft wont write dx10 code for XP because they want gamers to move to vista, which will help to support it. It makes sence though, the cost of development plus the loss of vista sales by enabling gamers to use DX10 on XP = piling up a bunch of money and burning it. Some people say there are features in DX10 that make it almost impossible to work on XP, but who knows for sure besides microsoft?
Look, I'm no fan of Microsoft, but not every tin-foil hat theory is correct.
Vista is required for DX10 because of the way it works....the XP kernel is incompatible with DX10's instructions.
In order to make DX10 work on XP, the kernel would have to be re-written entirely. I don't know how to say this in any simpler terms.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"
Xp for 2-3 years, now using 64 bit vista (a god send compared to xp 64 bit); once I get another hard drive I think im gonna dual boot ubuntu again.
Currently I have 2 internal hard drives, running Windows XP for most purposes including gaming, surfing the web, and Java/C++ programming. Dual boot Ubuntu on the other hard drive, which I mostly use for C/Perl programming.
Only thing holding me back from upgrading to vista is the dread of having to reinstall all of the software I have on this computer. Otherwise I would to take advantage of DX-10 and all of my Ram, because I can get Vista Ultimate for free
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Running XP Pro for gaming, other OS's to play around with and see what can be done with them. Honestly have to say that if more games would be made for Mac, that is what I would run.
i'm running vista and i have had a little trouble with it but its getting better and better in my opinion.
Since SP1 for Vista released (few months ago) I had already 30 updates of over 300mb
Vista, and have a Macbook with Mac OS X.
I love OS X, like it a lot more than windows... but I like windows since I love gaming. So pretty much I like both, I do most of my coding, chatting, surfing etc on my mac... and use my PC only for gaming.
EDIT: Oh yeah.. Dx 10... love it
___________________
Give me a good skill based sandbox game, and i'll give you a cookie!
I have 3 copies of XP, I have 1 Vista but I don't like it so I used XP besides, it cost a fortune to buy more Vista.
XP pro at work
XP pro for home gaming
Ubuntu for day to day stuff.
There is a reason why businesses have not adopted Vista in any flavor, Millinium taught everyone a lesson about buying eyecandy from MS.
Some people like "pretty", others like performance and substance (DRM doesn't count as substance).
Couldn't agree more... if I had a choice, id go with XP Pro 64-bit right now.
___________________
Give me a good skill based sandbox game, and i'll give you a cookie!
Still the problem with windows is that if you want more then 4Gb ddr you need the 64bit which has sometimes trouble with certain games :S
Windows XP Pro SP3 ( which has been extended yet again, what a surprise ).
I'll be running XP until Vienna ( Windows 7 ) hits late next year/ early 2010.
I use Ubuntu linux on all of my computers.
But I use Windows XP dualbooted for my game and music-composing fix... Only because linux is rubbish for games...
Beta starts in december this year
Beta starts in december this year
Yeah, they're going to be handing it out early at the next developers conference in November? ( not looking at my e-mail right now ), so I'm hoping to get an early look at it. Been playing with the alpha builds so far. I think people are really going to see the Vista/ME comparison when Vienna hits, just like they did between 2000 and XP.
XP, the most stable among all os..
Windows XP Pro SP3 of course...until Windows 7 can "unVista" itself (if that's even remotely possible, judging from these milestones I've read and seen about..) or if it becomes an Ubuntu derivative done right OR when Ubuntu can finally figure out how to run DirectX apps properly with less to no performance tradeoffs, completely fixed hardware drivers' support and nail user friendliness so that people would only have to deal with command lines when they want to.
**slides away for more reading**
Must be pretty rubbish games. I never had any problems with the games i play, e.g. eve, civ4, supreme commander etc.
The only thing that's meh is that, unlike most linux distros, windows can't use 32bit drivers with a 64bit kernel..
Running XP 64 bit is the worst of the bunch, for many reasons. If you want a 64 bit Windows, Vista is the only viable option for a gamer.
Vista got a bad reputation from the brainwashing of the media and a few lazy companies not writing their drivers (NVIDIA) correctly at the release of Vista. The Vista core is extremely powerful, stable, and secure. Turn off all the useless eye candy and idiot proofing and you have the best OS on the market.
OSX, I also run, its pretty like Vista but dumbed down and locked down to the point I can't stand using it.
Linux, is great, but the lack of gaming support is reason I avoid it. I don't need an entire OS just to chat and browse webpages when Windows does it perfectly fine.
I do run all three operating systems and as stated Vista 64bit SP1 gets my vote, by a long shot. Most of the Vista hate comes from the uninformed simple parroting what they hear from the media.
BTW: Unless you're playing LOTRO in DX10, you're not REALLY playing lotro. The difference is substantial. I have three boxes and one is running XP with similar hardware to another box running DX10 vista. The visual difference is substantial, anyone telling you different is wrong.
Must be pretty rubbish games. I never had any problems with the games i play, e.g. eve, civ4, supreme commander etc.
The only thing that's meh is that, unlike most linux distros, windows can't use 32bit drivers with a 64bit kernel..
Nop also some normal games could have problems with that version i heard.