Slashdot Mirror
Hacked DX10 for Windows Appears
Oddscurity writes "According to The Inquirer someone managed to write a wrapper allowing DirectX 10 applications to run on platforms other than Vista. The Alky Project claims to have reverse-engineered Geometry Shader code, allowing Windows games to run on Windows XP, MacOSX and Linux. The Inquirer is understandably cautious about these claims, urging readers to investigate the releases themselves to ascertain whether or not it's a hoax."
Even if he really managed to do this (which I doubt, look how long wine has been around and it still doesn't run everything), won't he get sued immediately for something like this?
----
Squirrel
well, you're going to need those cards to run DX10 anyway.
The article claims to have a software implementation of DirectX 10 Geometry Shaders, so no, you wouldn't.
We are hacking Windows apps to run them on Windows OS's.
Let the sadness ensue.
I can't ignore this comment as it seems Slashdot keeps perpetuating this myth...
Why do people keep perpetuating this misnomer?? If you don't use Aero and instead switch to Windows Classic Appearance, Vista works great on a wide variety of machines.
Now, if you had said it as below you would have had a point:
"No thanks. I'd like to be able to use my computer without needing five top-of-the-line graphics cards just to run the OS in 'fancy graphics' mode.
If only windows were like Linux. I don't really mean in the open-source way, but more in the separate projects way. If DirectX was a separate project from the windows OS, then it would work on windows XP without us having to go hack it. There's no reason why DirectX 10 can't work on windows XP. It's just an artificial limitation that MS through in to get people to buy Vista. MS does this a lot, with IE, IIS, MS Office, DirectX, and many other tools. I don't see why people put up with it.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
So rather than a top-of-the-line GPU, you'd have to compensate with a top-of-the-line CPU to handle the load brought on by software rendering.
Kinda how no one sued DVD Jon?
. . but this screams "Getting gullible people to give me $50 for mostly snake oil"
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
I'd be the first to agree that the UI in Mac OS X is quite limited in terms of customisability.
If you like the OS X GUI, great! If you don't, you'd be forced to use third party apps to change even the most basic elements.
Me, I'm happy with the way things are, but if there was an easier way to change the appearance, I might consider changing. All in all, it doesn't play that big a role though, the increase in productivity has been well worth the decrease in UI customizability.
B.
Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
Nope, all that EULA says, is in order to install DirectX, I have to own a license to a Windows OS. It says nothing about not being able to install this on another OS. And I'm pretty sure that everyone here has at least a Windows 95 license somewhere...
Nephilium