Slashdot Mirror


The End Of DirectX As We Know It

socram writes "Speaking with ATI and NVIDIA at ECTS allowed us to confirm that after DX9.0, DirectX Graphics is no more. In name only. Microsoft's next set of core presentation and 3D APIs are now under the umbrella of Windows Graphics Foundation and Avalon. Microsoft will still rely on DirectX in name for the rest of the core components, but the graphics API is now under a new name. Look out for WGF 1.0 compatibility on the back of that next generation graphics card's box. Some WGF 1.0 Info!" Update: 09/06 22:27 GMT by T : David Ross of hexus.net points out that this text comes straight from hexus, and should have been credited as such.

4 of 285 comments (clear)

  1. I don't think so by Quasar1999 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is a boat load of hogwash. DirectX is here to stay. DirectX is the damned core, Avalon, or whatever the heck they end up calling it is simply a layer on top of DX. But don't take my word for it, google it. There is enough info out there, that anyone that knows how to program for DirectX will immediately realise that it is being modified with the new UI in mind. It's being done to help it hook into DirectX, and if you examine the DX API closely (especially the latest SDK release), you'll notice a trend to add APIs that allow features that are required for a fully integrated UI. And at the end of the day, game developers will still be using the DX api.

    --

    ---
    Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
  2. Re:DirectX by FullMetalAlchemist · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, it's the gamedevelopers that does that for you by checking for if your card supports the features it needs to be playable.
    It's not MicroSoft's fault, by any extension, it is however silly that you are not allowed to check if it is playable according to _your_ standard; and it's the gamedevelopers you should blame.
    I guess it's easy to point at something big, like MS if you want someone to blame, people tend to do that.

  3. Re:please them? are you sure? by Tim+C · · Score: 5, Informative

    Two things:

    1) that page, judging by the date at the bottom, is 7 years old - that's plenty of time for the situation to have completely changes
    2) judging from the logo on it and the URL, the guy is particularly anti-MS; you might want to cite a source with a little more objectivity

  4. Re:hmm...might this be the point of time... by sh0dan · · Score: 5, Informative
    Thanks, John Carmack, for keeping OpenGL alive!

    And he almost decided to kill it off. According to Carmack, the "godawful interface" for OpenGL pBuffers/Render to Texture, made him be "the closest ever to switching over to D3D".

    If you are interested in listening to an hour of video-graphics supergeeky stuff, download the one hour video of his keynote from Quakecon 2004.
    It contains an hour of tech-talk from John C. about the doom3 engine, and what he's working on now.