What is Digg?153 Comments
- vsujohn2, on 07/11/2008, -5/+77Already? Geez, I've barely even got used to DirectX10
- SSUK, on 07/12/2008, -1/+28Don't worry, DirectX 11 is still a good few years off release. What they're going to do at the XNA GF is outline the software's specifications and functionalities so developers can analyse if they want to use DirectX 11 in up-coming projects (although probably projects in the early stages of development). It also gives hardware manufacturers a good idea what to expect from DX11 and move towards wide-spread support of the new platform.
For the end user, this unveil will mean next to nothing. The more technical savvy may get a sharp pain in their stomach as they think about the price of their next graphics card to support DX11. - iofthestorm, on 07/12/2008, -14/+41All the stupid fanboy comments are making me sick. If you're not a graphics programmer (and judging by the intelligence level of the comments, none of them are), how can you say an API sucks and it flopped? DirectX 10 has been available for a year and a half, and seen a few good uses as hardware is finally able to implement it with good speeds. And now any new graphics card and even most new integrated graphics chipsets (Radeon 3200, Geforce 8200, Intel has one that supports DX10 too) will support DX10, although maybe not at useful speeds. Also, Vista is much better than XP usability wise, integrated search is an incredible productivity booster, and the only major annoyance (UAC) can be turned off by anyone with half a brain. Day-to-day performance is even faster than XP, and now that drivers have matured gaming performance is the same too.
- iofthestorm, on 07/12/2008, -1/+24Actually, a Vista version has been confirmed: http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_conte ...
It's been common knowledge that DX11 will come out before Windows 7 for a while, which wouldn't make sense otherwise. Also, the reason DX10 wouldn't work on XP was because the driver model in Vista is very different, which is why early Vista drivers sucked, but since Windows 7 is more an evolution of Vista, DX11 will work on Vista too. - sensor, on 07/12/2008, -3/+25What overhead? They made it Vista only to REMOVE some overhead in the architecture.
- iofthestorm, on 07/12/2008, -4/+24Do you have no sense of history whatsoever? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX#Release_histo ...
This is just on schedule for any DirectX. This is just an announcement, and it's probably not coming out for a year at least. Also, how does an API flop? Stupid fanboy. - chillypacman, on 07/12/2008, -2/+20ran out of edit time:
"Personally, I say bring on the OpenGL! It's just as capable as DirectX"
Being experienced in both DirectX and OpenGL I'm going to have to say DirectX is a lot more kinder to the game dev than OpenGL is...
Also DirectX is not hindered by patents or legal/business nonesense, you can go download the API from Microsofts website and make a multimillion dollar game with it without any problems.
"easily portable between Windows, Mac, and Linux"
Even so the quesiton remains if there is much of a market with Mac/Linux to bother porting, there's more to game dev than the API you use.
"and can implement even new DX10 GPU features using extensions"
Possibly but extensions are vender specific, if nVidia provides an extension for something doesn't mean ATi will support it. OpenGL is geared towards engineering applications which is why extensions come in handy (since you would be working on a target platform) on the other hand DirectX can run on many different GPUs without extensions (though with shaders anythings possible).
"I've had more problems with DX drivers and games (in Windows obviously) than OpenGL drivers and games, though that was an ATi issue, but still'
It's an ATi issue but still, let's blame Microsoft for it, congratulations. - chillypacman, on 07/12/2008, -10/+27ah *sigh* I'm not going to refute what you are saying, I'll just go along with it.
yeah you're right, it sucks because vista has too much overhead and directx 10 is useless and can't do anything properly because microsoft made it... blah blah blah. - fremeer, on 07/12/2008, -1/+17umm dx10 was never really meant for the end user. Their are some slight benefits for gamers but not much, mainly it was designed to make programming of certain stuff that took too long in dx9 to be done faster. It actually will only really start being important as more game utilise the new shaders and such. So dx10 is not a failure in the eyes of coders and the only reason it can be seen as a failure is because MS made it vista only which will force people to change in about a years time. Vista is not a bad operating system, its not great and i think for the price its a rip since it has barely enough over XP to warrant the upgrade but to me it seems like MS are trying to transition the back end to something new and by releasing vista they are trying to kink out the troubles with drivers, functions, programming before the new windows comes out.
- lacronicus, on 07/12/2008, -1/+15Really? how'd you manage that?
- grumpyrain, on 07/12/2008, -2/+16Exactly. Some people just don't get it. They seem to be surprised that a driver that has been rushed to market will result in the same fps as a driver that has been around for years. Rest assured that the PC you buy today will perform as well with Vista or XP.
In fact, Vista SP1 equals or outperforms XP SP2 and XP SP3 (and on occasions significantly outperforms) in PCMark, 3DMark, World In Conflict, Supreme Commander and Crysis.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302500 ...
... oh sorry, didn't mean to interrupt the Vista FUD. Please, carry on. - iofthestorm, on 07/12/2008, -0/+14All DirectX versions add new hardware features that must be implemented by graphics cards to get the new features. Also, the new DX10 cards can actually run DX10 at good speeds (Radeon 4800 series owns, and new nVidia stuff is good too but way overpriced).
- AndrewDB, on 07/12/2008, -1/+14They still haven't shown the raw untapped potential of DX10 and now your asking them to show what DX 11 can do?..
LoL. That's a good one. Thanks for the laugh. - CalcProgrammer1, on 07/12/2008, -15/+28Does this mean we need new GPU's to support DX10, or will DX11 be compatible with the current DX10 line of GPU's? If it's just a software only improvement, bring it on, if it implements more GPU-specific stuff (like DX10 did, while we upgraded from 7 to 8 to 9 just fine on our old GPU's), then it's ridiculous. Seeing how DX10 isn't even used much (only high end games like Crysis even use it, the only thing I've used with DX10 on my 8600M GS is a tech demo from nVidia), I don't see it getting much use. Unless you happen to have an 8800GTX or higher (as in SLi) system, just including DX10 can make for a laggy experience, even with a lower 8000-series card.
Personally, I say bring on the OpenGL! It's just as capable as DirectX is, not hindered by patents and other legal/business nonsense, easily portable between Windows, Mac, and Linux, and can implement even new DX10 GPU features using extensions. I've had more problems with DX drivers and games (in Windows obviously) than OpenGL drivers and games, though that was an ATi issue, but still. - SSUK, on 07/12/2008, -1/+13You misunderstand. This is the normal life cycle of DirectX. New version is released, start work on a newER version. Since DirectX is a platform, developers need a heads-up well in advance to the release of the platform to know what they should expect and what they should develop towards to work on the new platform.
- mvent2, on 07/12/2008, -1/+11DX9 is available for Windows 98.
- Rudegar, on 07/12/2008, -4/+14i pref opengl
it's open it's gl whats not to love? - Ravatar, on 07/12/2008, -5/+15Yeah dude, stick it to the man by continuing to use one of their products. You're a rebel.
- Tishiablo, on 07/12/2008, -2/+11Why WOULDN'T they make it work with Windows 7? They stated it'd work with Vista.
- mtekk, on 07/12/2008, -0/+8OpenGL 3.0 is coming out this fall. It is a major change from 2.1 however, kinda like the DX9 to DX10 change.
- dsmx, on 07/12/2008, -1/+9Directx 15645643214987651655798765165 is where it's at.
- inactive, on 07/12/2008, -1/+8many, many years = 1.5 years.
- DigitAl56K, on 07/12/2008, -2/+9"Personally, I say bring on the OpenGL! It's just as capable as DirectX is, not hindered by patents and other legal/business nonsense"
What are you talking about? OpenGL is full of patent traps. Google "OpenGL patents" and see.
Microsoft got a bunch of the applicable patents from SGI in 2002, in fact. - Evi1d33d, on 07/12/2008, -7/+14XP support this time?
- inactive, on 07/11/2008, -3/+10Two questions: A- When will it be released? B- Will it be available as an update, or will it be part of Windows 7?
In any case, looking forward to see the visual enhancements =) Thanks for sharing that with us. - deadbaby, on 07/12/2008, -0/+6To correct the things that made DirectX 10 flop. I'm not a DX expert but it seems to me not supporting DX10 on XP put game developers into a tough spot. Most of their customers are on XP -- they don't care if you upgrade to Vista or not so why should they go out of their way to aggressively support DX10 and spend a lot of time optimizing their DX10 code? If 11 is such a huge leap forward that it will actually sell more games for these developers they will get on boardt -- or we'll have to wait until Vista surpasses XP in market share and supporting DX9 becomes less important.
- gzboli, on 07/12/2008, -1/+7 jpetrie at the GameDev forums offered an explanation of DX11 I liked...
"I would bet that the changes between 10 -> 11 will look more similar to those between 10 -> 10.1 than those between 9 -> 10. Remember, one thing that changed in 10 was the removal of device caps in favor of functionality guarantees based on API version -- as such, in order to change, add, or remove said functionality guarantees the underlying specification must be revised, which means the API must be revised and the version number changed.
"11" likely reflects a new methodology for versioning the SDK that started with 10 and 10.1 -- I suspect that it will be largely a superficial difference, that the actual changes to the API will be on the order of those changes in 10.1 or between 9b and 9c, et cetera. In other words, not a big deal -- not anything that renders D3D10 'obsolete' or anything." - krystalo, on 07/12/2008, -1/+7Yes, it will be part of Windows 7: http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2008 ...
It is currently unknown if there will be a Vista version. - CCmachined, on 07/12/2008, -3/+8and how many exclusive games are there at this point in time even for directx10? i hear 2 or 3? oh wait, Halo 2 didnt even use DirectX10 yet requires Vista...
Microsoft is Fail. - victorc26, on 07/12/2008, -1/+6They're setting a plan for DX11. This isn't new. Companies are constantly planning for the future.
I'm mean, we're at the very start of DX11 development, which is the planning to start development stage. I don't see what's so "horrible" about this. - Lassan, on 07/12/2008, -2/+7The biggest change with DirectX 10 was that introduced and used Unified Shader Processing, which is why the GPUs had to be different. But I don't there's going to be that big of a change with DX 11. It is probably based on DX10 with improvements.
- fearlessfx, on 07/12/2008, -10/+15will i need to buy a new graphics card? i dont want to have to sell another internal organ.
- inactive, on 07/12/2008, -2/+6Great to hear that. About time that Ubuntu ate Linux.
- Cyber_Akuma, on 07/12/2008, -0/+4Gates: You can't use XP forever, mwah ha ha ha ha!
- iofthestorm, on 07/12/2008, -0/+4Why don't you just go back to sleep?
- c0ldr0ses, on 07/12/2008, -3/+7would be mildly interesting if they showed ANYTHING AT ALL that dx11 could do...
- trippinlikegod, on 07/12/2008, -2/+6In many cases DX10 apps run faster than their DX9 counterparts.
- aywwts4, on 07/12/2008, -1/+5And why would anyone trust them if they did show off what it could do, they have completely faked comparison screenshots in the past. If anything this just reveals how irrelevant Microsoft's Xes are. DX9 took us from 2003 till the present day.
- trippinlikegod, on 07/12/2008, -5/+9Stop hanging on to the past. Your favorite song is on the oldies station now and your OS is dated. Just deal with it. Come to the dark side with the rest of us. Kthxbai.
- fuzzynyanko, on 07/12/2008, -0/+4Your internal organs are only worth $100-200?
- Cyber_Akuma, on 07/12/2008, -0/+4Think of the average eating habits of most Diggers...
- 12340987, on 07/12/2008, -0/+4is windows 7 really coming out in 2009?
- roflbrothel, on 07/12/2008, -2/+6Dude! I heard that too! I heard Ubuntu is actually going to BUY Linux in a hostile takeover!
- trippinlikegod, on 07/12/2008, -9/+12So don't use Vista JUST for DirectX 10, if you'd stop guzzling the haterade you'd realize it's not a bad OS at all. And yeah I'm a hardcore gamer and DirectX 10 is completely worth it in my opinion. If that was the only thing Vista had going for it I'd use it just to get the highest possible image quality out of my games and the hardware I payed for. Running XP on a next gen machine with a high end video card is like buying a Porsche and then mixing a little water into your gas.
- chillypacman, on 07/12/2008, -0/+3It's safe to say unlike what happened with DX10 DX11 will be backwards compatible up to DX10. The reason DX10 dropped backwards compatibility was because of a lot of excess code that was piling up with dx8 and 9, MS approached various manufacturers game devs to essentially start from scratch with dx10.
- atliberty2say, on 07/12/2008, -2/+5MS abandoned the PC to sell Xbox for gaming, so what's the point in having a new version of directX that no developer, including MS gaming studios will ever use on the PC? I abandoned the PC for OS X (never looked back) when they abandoned PC gaming. I have no reason to own a PC anymore, as for games I have a PS3. MS you can stick DX up your arse I couldn't give a flying *****.
- Ravatar, on 07/12/2008, -0/+3The classic retort... noooow you're a rebel.
- trippinlikegod, on 07/12/2008, -3/+6the 5 year old dated feature set?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 155 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is