Slashdot Mirror
AMD Says There Will Be No DirectX 12 — Ever
mikejuk writes "This is a strange story. AMD Vice President of Global Channel Sales Roy Taylor has said there will be no DirectX12 at any time in the future. In an interview with German magazine Heise.de, Taylor discussed the new trend for graphics card manufacturers to release top quality game bundles registered to the serial number of the card. One of the reasons for this, he said, is that the DirectX update cycle is no longer driving the market. 'There will be no DirectX 12. That's it.' (Google translation of German original.) Last January there was another hint that things weren't fine with DirectX when Microsoft sent an email to its MVPs saying, 'DirectX is no longer evolving as a technology.' That statement was quickly corrected, but without mentioning any prospect of DirectX 12. So, is this just another error or rumor? Can we dismiss something AMD is basing its future strategy on?"
... it only goes to 11
We did it everyone! OpenGL won, good job everybody. Highest of fives all 'round.
July, 2013: AMD Says 'Okay, There Will Be A DirectX 12, But We're Not Supporting It'
September, 2013: AMD Says DirectX 12 Support By Next Year
March, 2014: New AMD Cards' Poor DirectX 12 Performance Disappointing
May, 2014: AMD Boss Complains About Being 'Left Out' Of DirectX 12 Development
August, 2014: Struggling AMD Says 'Just Wait For DirectX 13!'
I've been building my own computers and playing games now for almost 30 years. Not once did I ever worry about DirectX. The only time I ever think about it now is when Civ5 asks which version I want to use, which just strikes me as annoying.
Use OpenGL. It's the platform of every rising device. Furthermore you can get the benefits of open source.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
There's still stuff left to do, access to things that programmers want. If Microsoft wants to stop its API development, and give up the ghost of it's Microsoft only policy, leaving OpenGl and the Khronos group to do all the advancement, then maybe that's a good thing. While Microsoft and DirectX overtook OpenGl in terms of what the API could do since around DX10, it did so at the cost of being locked into Microsoft stuff if you wanted to use it. But if things go a little slower now in order to have only one, open API advancing then maybe that's a good thing.
There will be a DirectX 12 just in time for Windows 9. Don't believe me? There's a great page up on MSDN that confirms DirectX is now a part of new releases of the Windows SDK starting with Win8.
As it stands this is confirmation from the GPU manufacturer that the new Xbox will not be using anything better than DX11, and that people using toasters with XP are finally getting cut loose. It's good news for gamers, too: you won't have to upgrade your DX11-compatible video card for DX11.1 or purchase future versions of Windows for DirectX support for at least another decade. We're witnessing the next generation of console games disappoint before they've even been written.
So what, are they going to skip 12 and go to 13? They've done it before, with DirectX 4, so it's not a new idea. Maybe 12 turned out to be a huge mess.
I don't see DirectX being discontinued in favor of OpenGL/OpenAL/etc, since the GUIs in their latest products and frameworks all seem to use DirectX to some extent.
(asbestos underpants on) Or maybe they switched to FOSS-style versioning, and just don't see anything new that would demand a major version number. We're going to see abominations like DirectX 11.1.25.4-r6.3 for the rest of time.
If memory serves this was also linked in the related article above. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee663275.aspx
DirectX is just becoming part of the Windows 8 SDK. Then presumably the Windows 9, etc, SDKs as well. On until death.
For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
The API and the hardware became so close that none of them can change without breaking eachother, since directx 9 (and the equivalent opengl versions) there were no real improvements. That's a real shame, because I've been waiting for a decade to something more flexible, more suited to emulate console graphics pipelines, but as it stands now, software rasterizers will be the future.
I am sure 10 years ago someone could have easily said there would never be an OS 11.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
You'll notice that in those 30 years you were building computers and playing games, you either pirated or bought a copy of Windows to run on that same system. I've been doing the exact same thing and I've been using Linux for at least 10-12 of those...why? I know one OS is good for games and one OS is good for everything else, and you know it too, you're just glossing over it in order to make a point.
DirectX doesn't drive the market because it's good, it drives the market for the same reason Microsoft does...a considerable investment of time and money already made on Microsoft's platform. The real news in this article, I think, is the lack of response by Microsoft. One of the last remaining reasons that I have for even purchasing Windows is so that I can play Windows games, and DirectX was more or less a means by Microsoft to ensure that they controlled a vital part of the game ecosystem (the libraries that developers use to build them) and never porting it across platforms. The lack of response by a huge manufacturer like AMD making an announcement like this...if I were to take a guess, I'd say that they're right, everyone knows it and there's not much point in Microsoft refuting it any longer because they're already in trouble.
I've never written to the API, but from a user persepective the only thing I found annoying about DirectX was every game on the planet wanted to distribute its own copy/version of it. Which I never did understand, as far as I can tell its the one API that M$ took great pains to keep backward compatible, so why couldn't all these games simply use the version that was installed (unless it was too old.) Other than that, I never had a problem with it, it worked fine, and in some cases appeared to be superior to OpenGL, until lately. Certainly OGL has made some great strides and really is the defacto gfx library for everyone else, Windows machines can even use the Win32/64 port if the user choose. Still, I have to wonder what the big problem for AMD/Microsoft. No longer an evolving technology? Are they planning on dumping it for something new in the works? Have they decided they can't compete with OGL? Smells to me like another sign (as I've been talking about) that Microsoft is NOT as innvative as they were, or thought they were. And AMD? Christ, might as well put a fork in it.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
So they could either go with the... Video games: DirectX Cars: DirectX-2014 Windows: DirectX Vision Apple: Bobcat Google: Marshmallow X OpenGL's dream : RIP DirectX
What exactly does "top quality game bundles registered to the serial number of the card" mean? Have I missed something else in this conversation?
OpenGL everywhere? Imagine also if the manufacturers would be able to write stable, functioning drivers *for their own hardware*, then things could get great.
Taylor discussed the new trend for graphics card manufacturers to release top quality game bundles registered to the serial number of the card.
Are they already doing this with their current bundles? I just recently bought a Radeon 7770, but wasn't particularly interested in the Far Cry 3 game that came with it, was was planning to sell the coupon to someone who could make better use of it.
Does anything besides Direct3D change with new versions anymore? It's not as if there are groundbreaking developments in XInput or DirectSound, and things like DirectShow have been depreciated for other Windows methods.
First the "silly point" to confuse people: ;-)
"Since X only went only to version 11, I don't see how they could make a DirectX12 without making X12 first."
Then the second more serious point:
I still remember the "Sound-card upgrade cycle" back in the 1990s, where gamers were also were after the newest developments there to get a better gaming experience. But for the last decade or so there were no basically no "new sound features" that were added to improve the sound, since sound is "good enough" for basically everything that needs sound.
At some time graphics cards will reach (or perhaps are reaching now) the point where that is true for graphics also.
Just deal with it.
"Most games" on the PC are written for the Windows OS, which means if you make it DirectX, you get marketing money from Microsoft.
When those games are cross-platform but only to the XBox, it has to be DirectX, because that's all that's available.
Neither indicate that Direct X is what would have been chosen in a free market.
It is only "preferred" by Microsoft, who PAY YOU to write games to DirectX.
OpenGL was multithreading capable from the get go. DirectX until 11.2 was single threaded only.
DirectX uses a very different object graph proposition that puts the scene as the major component and for most indoor FPS, that is an easier concept, but those choices mean taking it outside where the scene (in a 3D construction context) is not the primary container for the "world" realised, you've got a much worse system to program. OGL was much better at the open world 3D and a little worse at the enclosed box-room preferred for early FPSs.
DirectX development was only slightly easier, and only for a small segment of what is being done.
I have it on good sources (IE: I just made this up) that DirectX will be skipping directly to DirectX 13 like how Leisure Suit Larry 4 was skipped.
The thing with Valve is that they are not exactly an unbiased source. For one, their engine is pretty outdated. They are all DX9 stuff in their games. Now fair enough from a market point of view (though there are been more than a couple very successful DX10+ only titles) but talking technically that is looking at things in a rather outdated fashion. DX10 changed the way you deal with graphics cards and most developers seem to think quite a bit for the better.
Also there's the fact that they are pushing Linux because they are really worried about the future of Steam. Valve makes stupid amounts of money doing very little with Steam. However if the Windows store takes off (something that is not at all certain, but could happen) their money pit dries up. Hence they are looking at bringing Steam to a new platform, that bring Linux.
Finally note that their criticism was that Windows is becoming "not open". Now maybe that will end up being the case, but it is not at this point. Steam still works real well for Windows, as do all other stores. That aside they weren't saying Linux was technically superior, at least not in that talk, they were saying that it had what they needed on a technical side.
Vista lost the DirectSound API. Almost every game uses OpenAL for that now. DirectInput is no more part of a game than the Intellimouse driver does. And given you had to use "and other" shows how used anything else is.
There's nothing, NOTHING AT ALL, that is done by DirectInput that needs to be done by directinput.
I know this news comes in the context of gaming, but DirectX has other uses, including audio & video editing. I've recently been thinking of upgrading to a new version of Sony Vegas (video editing) and notice that since the last time I bought it (~5 y.a.) they have stopped shipping it with DirectX effects (though they still support them) and are bundling OpenFX plugins instead.
Why is heise.de no hyperlink, slashdot?
DirectX is not going away, Microsoft are just moving it into Windows and no longer supplying updates separately. This is just a dirty marketing strategy to force gamers and other users to now have to buy/downgrade to the latest Windows OS (which to many of the more consumer-minded, translates into buying a whole new PC) if they want the latest graphics API.
I guess this really just translates into yet another reason/opportunity for Linux to take over the PC gaming market from Windows.
Microsoft will never again get to set or create any 'standards'. DirectX has ended as an ongoing project. DirectX 11 is already in the process of accepting proprietary GPU hacks from Intel, despite Microsoft's promise this would never happen, for precisely this reason. DirectX can only get new features via proprietary hacks, so Microsoft has silently dropped the 'no hack' property of DirectX 11, returning to the old policy followed by previous versions.
The future of GPU API support is open standards. OpenGL ES (1.0, 2.0, 3.0) is now a more important API by volume than DirectX. GPGPU (using the GPU as a general maths engine) APIs are increasingly open, with only Nvidia's successful CUDA as a notable exception.
Microsoft is not sorry to have given up on future versions of DirectX. DX10 and DX11 were largely disasters, including hacky hardware features that were usually slower than the DX9 path, or badly conceived, like the 'auto-tessellation' hardware support that never did anything useful. DX11 promised two big things. Shader access to the MSAA sample buffer (mostly useless in practice) and multi-threaded instruction flow to the GPU (useless when it depended on Windows dreadful scheduler engine). True GPU improvements are the business of Nvidia, AMD, and the graphics/GPGPU community- not Microsoft, and Microsoft now accepts this.
The good news is that the non-DX APIs that connect to the REAL thin driver layers are now being improved at an excellent rate, mostly due to pressure in the mobile space where GPU efficiency relates to battery life. The death of DirectX will bring no notable changes to the end users. DX9/DX11 code paths will continue to be used for years to come thanks to the new consoles from MS and Sony later this year (Sony may not be DX, but the AMD GCN hardware in that console is essentially DX11 class). Meanwhile OpenGL ES and other open APIs will continue to improve and gain in popularity and efficiency until they are ready to fully replace DirectX.
I still only use at most DX9.0c as I am loving my XP experience until they unfuck newer editions of Windows.
Classic Shell mostly unfucks Windows 8, I'm told.
Finally note that their criticism was that Windows is becoming "not open". Now maybe that will end up being the case, but it is not at this point. Steam still works real well for Windows, as do all other stores.
Steam doesn't work on Windows RT. As on Windows 8, only Windows Store applications run in the "immersive" environment of Windows RT. But unlike on Windows 8, only IE and Office run in Windows RT's desktop. Perhaps Valve is trying to extrapolate Microsoft's direction from the policies that Microsoft enforces on the owner of a Windows RT device.
What, you're skipping all the twos for Ryu?
SF2 iterated through SF2, Champion, Turbo, Super, then settled on Super Turbo. ("Turbo", "Hyper", and "Special Champion" referred to the same iteration.) Then Capcom went and made the Alpha series as prequels to SF2 before SF3.
But Valve fell into the same trap as Capcom: One, two, two episode one, two episode two, portal one, portal two, team fortress one, team fortress two. Valve had an opportunity to make "no threes" official (Left 4 Dead, Left 5 Dead) but left it on the table.
But there will surely be a Direct3D 12 inside the Windows Platform SDK.
Microsoft is basically removing the individual "DirectX" brand and absorbing it into the platform SDK. Now Direct3D is just another Windows component like GDI. The idea that there will never be an update beyond what we have now is positively absurd and I feel he was either misunderstood or the translation is inaccurate.
But that's because it got absorbed into Direct3D. Probably the same thing going on here.
...because they write DirectX, oh, snap! Microsoft does don't they? That's like saying tomorrow will be the day that Ford gives up Mustang.