Direct X 10 and windows XP

[Nothinman]

You can't have it both ways, supporting NT 5/5.1 in DX10 is just like supporting Win9X in DX9. It's legacy code that's just there to support people who don't want to upgrade. If you want people to move on and stop supporting legacy systems stop crying about DX10 not supporting XP and move on yourself.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Then why couldn't there have been a verison of DirectX that depends on the driver model of Windows 2000/XP only?

Double the work for no good reason?

Wouldn't it have been easier because thye wouldn't have had to make it compatible with multiple operating system architectures?

ummm NO....DX9 and below still has a lot of Win9x code in it...thats why.

They should have designed more of DX9 from ground up to make it Windows 2K/XP only!!!

Either way, DX9 should have been for Windows 2k/XP only!!

I hope to see some verison of DX that is for Windows 2K/XP only and doesn't require Vista before the release of DX10. Maybe a DirectX 9.1 or 9.0L?

Please, I want a version of DirectX that doesn't require Vista, but IS NOT at all compatible with POS Windows 98/ME!!

A 2K/XP only DX would have been great!!! Lets see DX 9.0L or whatever other version of DX that comes before DX10 on Vista HAVE ZERO chance of working on POS Windows 98/ME.


There was an article about a new version of DirectX before DX10 which would require Vista.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=26220

Any ideas and possible hope that this will come out and be for Windows 2000/XP only and not work at all on POS Windows 98/ME??

You can't be for real.

 

[spherrod]

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Then why couldn't there have been a verison of DirectX that depends on the driver model of Windows 2000/XP only?

Double the work for no good reason?

Wouldn't it have been easier because thye wouldn't have had to make it compatible with multiple operating system architectures?

ummm NO....DX9 and below still has a lot of Win9x code in it...thats why.

They should have designed more of DX9 from ground up to make it Windows 2K/XP only!!!

Either way, DX9 should have been for Windows 2k/XP only!!

I hope to see some verison of DX that is for Windows 2K/XP only and doesn't require Vista before the release of DX10. Maybe a DirectX 9.1 or 9.0L?

Please, I want a version of DirectX that doesn't require Vista, but IS NOT at all compatible with POS Windows 98/ME!!

A 2K/XP only DX would have been great!!! Lets see DX 9.0L or whatever other version of DX that comes before DX10 on Vista HAVE ZERO chance of working on POS Windows 98/ME.


There was an article about a new version of DirectX before DX10 which would require Vista.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=26220

Any ideas and possible hope that this will come out and be for Windows 2000/XP only and not work at all on POS Windows 98/ME??

There is no chance that Microsoft will release another version of Direct X other than 10. If there are any updates to Direct X 9 then it stands to reason that these will also update 9x machines.

Microsoft has far more important things to do than placate the likes of you

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: Link19


Because it bothers me deeply that DX9 was released for POS Windows 98/ME and that DX10 won't be released for a good quality OS like Windows XP.

Just discouraging!! Windows 98/ME should have died the painful death they deserve a long long time ago!!

BAN! :|

Yes, please BAN!!! :|

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Then why couldn't there have been a verison of DirectX that depends on the driver model of Windows 2000/XP only?

Double the work for no good reason?

Wouldn't it have been easier because thye wouldn't have had to make it compatible with multiple operating system architectures?

ummm NO....DX9 and below still has a lot of Win9x code in it...thats why.

They should have designed more of DX9 from ground up to make it Windows 2K/XP only!!!

Either way, DX9 should have been for Windows 2k/XP only!!

I hope to see some verison of DX that is for Windows 2K/XP only and doesn't require Vista before the release of DX10. Maybe a DirectX 9.1 or 9.0L?

Please, I want a version of DirectX that doesn't require Vista, but IS NOT at all compatible with POS Windows 98/ME!!

A 2K/XP only DX would have been great!!! Lets see DX 9.0L or whatever other version of DX that comes before DX10 on Vista HAVE ZERO chance of working on POS Windows 98/ME.


There was an article about a new version of DirectX before DX10 which would require Vista.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=26220

Any ideas and possible hope that this will come out and be for Windows 2000/XP only and not work at all on POS Windows 98/ME??

OMG...you really are a fvcking retard.

 

[Link19]

There is no chance that Microsoft will release another version of Direct X other than 10. If there are any updates to Direct X 9 then it stands to reason that these will also update 9x machines.

Microsoft has far more important things to do than placate the likes of you

They DON'T have to. Updates to DX9 could be for Windows 2000/XP only. SO far, there has only been tiny updates to DX9. If there is a larger update to DX9 like DX 9.1, they could make it 2K/XP and above only. POS WIndows 98/ME are not even in extended support any more. So there is no reason why MS would make any new updates to DX9 support POS Windows 98/ME.

 

[jlbenedict]

Link19 should be banned, immediately.

In NO FVCKING way was Windows 98 ever originally mentioned in this thread, yet the first fvcking post Link19 makes is
"DX9 shouldn't have been compatible with POS Windows 98/ME. DX10 should be made for Windows XP because Windows XP is still a good OS and based on NT like Vista will be.

I hope DX 10 will be hacked to work on XP. On the other hand, DX9 should have been for Windows 2000/XP/2003 and above only and not supported POS Windows 98/ME."


LINK19, READ THE FVCKING THREAD TITLE AND THE OP'S POST!! ITS ABOUT XP AND DIRECTX 10.

You are a fvcking tool; a rusty, dull one as a matter of fact.

 

[Link19]

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
Link19 should be banned, immediately.

In NO FVCKING way was Windows 98 ever originally mentioned in this thread, yet the first fvcking post Link19 makes is
"DX9 shouldn't have been compatible with POS Windows 98/ME. DX10 should be made for Windows XP because Windows XP is still a good OS and based on NT like Vista will be.

I hope DX 10 will be hacked to work on XP. On the other hand, DX9 should have been for Windows 2000/XP/2003 and above only and not supported POS Windows 98/ME."


LINK19, READ THE FVCKING THREAD TITLE AND THE OP'S POST!! ITS ABOUT XP AND DIRECTX 10.

You are a fvcking tool; a rusty, dull one as a matter of fact.

I never did anything wrong. All I did was state which verisons of DX should have been compatible with which opertaing systems and why.

You should be banned for being such a jerk.

 

[jlbenedict]

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
Link19 should be banned, immediately.

In NO FVCKING way was Windows 98 ever originally mentioned in this thread, yet the first fvcking post Link19 makes is
"DX9 shouldn't have been compatible with POS Windows 98/ME. DX10 should be made for Windows XP because Windows XP is still a good OS and based on NT like Vista will be.

I hope DX 10 will be hacked to work on XP. On the other hand, DX9 should have been for Windows 2000/XP/2003 and above only and not supported POS Windows 98/ME."


LINK19, READ THE FVCKING THREAD TITLE AND THE OP'S POST!! ITS ABOUT XP AND DIRECTX 10.

You are a fvcking tool; a rusty, dull one as a matter of fact.

I never did anything wrong. All I did was state which verisons of DX should have been compatible with which opertaing systems and why.

You should be banned for being such a jerk.

You did do wrong. You are always off fvcking topic. What the fvck do you not understand? Why should I be banned for being a jerk? I don't consider myself being a jerk. I along, with many others that come in here really get fvcking sick of you crapping in every Windows or DX thread with the same bull$hit that you continuously preach..

The OP never mentioned Windows 98, yet you seem to find some way to push your hatred toward an obsolete operating system into the mix. You are not wanted here.. good riddance @$$hat!

....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
.........\.................'...../
..........''...\.......... _.·´
............\..............(
..............\.............\

 

[Nothinman]

I never did anything wrong. All I did was state which verisons of DX should have been compatible with which opertaing systems and why.

Actually you never explained why, just that you wanted it that way.

 

[Canterwood]

Originally posted by: Link19
Ramble, moan, bitch, whine........repeat ad nauseum.

:roll:
I have never seen you help anyone in anyway on these forums regarding any problems they might have.
I guess its because you actually don't know anything.
You have never added anything worthwhile to any debate on these forums either, and go out of your way to bring threads off topic with your incessant babyish whining about Win9x.

I'm sure most here would agree that you are a troll and you should be banned!!!

Do yourself a favour and leave, you are not wanted, no-one cares about you, or anything you have to say anymore.
You simply add nothing to these forums.
Now please, p1ss off and don't come back or we'll just have to ridicule you even more.

 

[JRich]

Originally posted by: bersl2

Originally posted by: silverpig
Bah, screw directx, they should make OpenGL games

:thumbsup:

I'll mention SDL too, so that all of you trying to be pedantic can STFU.

:thumbsup:

 

[Smilin]

Potential solution to the Link problem:


http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=42&threadid=1908772&enterthread=y

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Smilin



Potential solution to the Link problem:


http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=42&threadid=1908772&enterthread=y

It's already locked :frown: :|

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Smilin



Potential solution to the Link problem:


http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=42&threadid=1908772&enterthread=y

It's already locked :frown: :|

I always miss out on the good threads

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Trinitron
Who knows what MS will do. I have heard rumors of SP3 for XP after Vista is out. If that happens I wouldn't be surprised to see DX10 lumped in with it.

MS isn't going to do/say anything right now that would make someone think it's a better idea to stick with XP - obviously they want people to feel a need to upgrade.

Why not? They did the same thing with NT4 - IIRC, they withheld DX5 from ever being released on that OS, as a way to force people to upgrade to W2K, even though it was feature-complete for NT4.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Smilin
ROFL - man nothin cracks me up like a good flame. Especially when someone clearly deserves it. Stumps - it looks like you've found my equivalent of VirtualLarry.

Hey there. I'm not nearly as immature or annoying as Link. At least my rants also have strong factual basis behind them. Not some random immature rationalization for the sake of constant ranting.

PS. I wouldn't be overly suprised to see a reverse-engineered hack to run DX10 on XP... probably by copying some of the .DLLs from Vista into an XP installation. It would be even more interesting to see DX10 games running on Wine, before ever seeing them run on XP.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: mchammer
You are the tard of all tards. DX started out on Win95 a long time ago.

It wasn't even called "DirectX" either. The first version was just called the "games SDK". (I had access to it, because I was working at a game company at the time.)

For extra credit - what was the first "games SDK"-accellerated video card? (I had that card in my machine already. Fox + Bear, running 70FPS solid. ) I'll give you a hint, it was from the Red Team.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Link19
It breaks my heart to see that there isn't even a single version of DX that is only compatible with Windows NT based operatying systems, and doesn't force you to use Vista.

Dude, you've got issues.

 

[Nothinman]

Tryin to get your post count up or something?

 

[Stumps]

can't this thread be left to die in peace?

 

[sonoma1993]

Originally posted by: Stumps
can't this thread be left to die in peace?

i agree

 

[RelaxTheMind]

Win98se:thumbsup:

 

[jlbenedict]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: mchammer
You are the tard of all tards. DX started out on Win95 a long time ago.

It wasn't even called "DirectX" either. The first version was just called the "games SDK". (I had access to it, because I was working at a game company at the time.)

Not entirely true.. but not entirely false either..

While the initial release of Windows 95 never included a version of Direct X, Direct X has always been known as Direct X; even from version Direct X 1.0: Microsoft DirectX 1.0 Questions and Answers

The Game SDK was only needed if there was a need to develop Direct X driven games.
First version of Direct X that actually shipped with an OS was back with Windows 95 OSR2 (Direct X 2.0 - June 05, 1996).

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: jlbenedict

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: mchammer
You are the tard of all tards. DX started out on Win95 a long time ago.

It wasn't even called "DirectX" either. The first version was just called the "games SDK". (I had access to it, because I was working at a game company at the time.)

Not entirely true.. but not entirely false either..

While the initial release of Windows 95 never included a version of Direct X, Direct X has always been known as Direct X; even from version Direct X 1.0: Microsoft DirectX 1.0 Questions and Answers

The Game SDK was only needed if there was a need to develop Direct X driven games.
First version of Direct X that actually shipped with an OS was back with Windows 95 OSR2 (Direct X 2.0 - June 05, 1996).

quoted FTW