Slashdot Mirror
You Will Get DirectX 11.2 Only With Windows 8.1
SmartAboutThings writes "Microsoft has just announced the next version of DirectX, 11.2, on its website. But the real 'problem' is that it is going to be exclusive to Windows 8.1 and next generation consoles — Xbox One and Play Station 4. This is not news, as DirectX 11.1 was exclusive to Windows 7 & 8. But is this going to help Microsoft convince people to ugprade or will make them angry?"
Increment updates do not justify an upgrade...especially to a downgrade such as win8
Does Windows 8 have a selling point other than "touch"? Nobody's going to downgrade to Windows 8.1 just to get a game console graphics API.
Games houses know where the money is.
They still support DX9 and MSFT has done this before, eventually we all upgrade, just a matter of which version too and when but it is certinally not when they think we do.
Direct X is for games. And people who want to play their games will give up all sorts of important things in order to play them.
Recently, the always-online and amazingly intrusive Microsoft eye have caused Microsoft to back off on some things and that's encouraging, but the behavior is obvious and Microsoft wouldn't try it if they didn't think they could get away with it.
"Oh, I hate Windows 8...I'll never use that... oh? What's that? The next release of my favorite game? Only on Windows 8? I hate Windows 8... oh well... Windows 8 'just so I can play my game.'"
Where does it say the PS4 is getting it? I saw no mention of that.
"...is going to be exclusive to Windows 8.1 and next generation consoles — Xbox One and Play Station 4." When did Microsoft start developing for Playstation 4?
What? Where did that come from?
My ChromeBook is fast, my older HP running Ubuntu is fast. My new high-end HP running Win 7-64 with 32GB RAM takes 5 minutes to boot...
I use Windows 32 or 64 for my industrial control software (will not run in emulators), and use faster, lighter OSs for web browsing.
No reason to use Windows unless there is absolutely no other alternative...
Undoubtedly it will make the some people angry.
But for anyone that does Windows graphics development and knows something about the underlying system, it's not a big deal. We've known that adding some of these features to Direct3D would require making some changes to the underlying display driver stack (WDDM), which is why D3D 11.2 requires WDDM 1.3 drivers, and WDDM 1.3 requires Windows 8.1. Unless of course you want Microsoft backporting a new version of the display driver stack and breaking your old OSes...
TL;DR: D3D 11.2 requiring Win8.1 can't be helped
I haven't used a Microsoft OS in a serious way in a decade and this sort of forced upgrade situation angers me. Money grab. Bah MS. Glad to have left you behind.
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
Specifically
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/directx/
So what does DirectX 11.1 and .2 do that's so important that people will abandon Windows 7?
Steam is on Linux too now. Game companies cannot easily ignore that anymore. Unless you're a huge douchebag like EA, Activision etc...
What is next ??
11.3 !!
Lord have mercy on our soles !!
Yes I would walk a mile for uh, a uh, Camel !!
Game developers surely won't be convinced as most people still run (and will keep on running) the greatest common divisor which is Windows 7.
So I believe very few games will have features unique to DirectX >= 11.1. It just doesn't make sense to invest your money into something most people will be unable to use.
Well, it's true that I don't play a lot of games these days. I spend a lot more time pursuing my goals in life, so I don't have hours and hours to just sit down and immerse myself in all sorts of high end games. I tend to stick to a few that I like and play them from time to time, and DX 11.2 isn't required by any of them, or even the new title(s) that I'm interested in which are still WIP.
Other than that, I spend the vast majority of my time on Linux with KDE 4. Even moreso with Minecraft working on multiple platforms due to Java. The only new title I'm currently interested in is Planetary Annihilation, which if I recall correctly, will support a Linux port. So I guess my care-o-meter about this announcement is somewhere around zero.
I will say this, though. The user interface style that was developed, with a task bar and normal start-menu (not this metro start screen crap) was developed and refined over a period of 20+ years or so now. It's available across many operating systems and kernels. It's there because it works rather well. If you ask me, this touch-centric crap that Microsoft is pushing isn't much good beyond tablets and phones, where your primary mode of interface is your finger on a screen.
So, tablets and phones came along and a new interface style was designed that worked better with almost-exclusively touch-screen interface devices... Then Microsoft decided that *everything* should use this interface. I'm not interested in relearning how to use my Desktop's or Laptop's interfaces. Screw Windows 8. If I found a part of my computer's user interface to be highly inefficient, requiring a redesign to solve the problem, I'd be very aware of it. I hate wasting time. But the stuff before Metro in most cases doesn't give me that impression. Metro does.
So there's my possibly subjective rant. But hey, the article asked.
Of course, and the market using OpenGL "can't be helped".
I think MS is seriously underestimating the reluctance of its base to move off Win7 to Win8 (or even 8.1).
Bruce F. Webster (brucefwebster.com)
That's all.
Privacy is terrorism.
Yup, I was told to upgrade my xp on my lappy, so I did. Its running mint 14 now, way faster than it ever was with windoze.
I paid the microsoft tax when I bought that laptop, once was more than was sensible.
The only thing holding us back is driver bugs since not enough influential developers are using it. Let's hope Steam on Linux can make that difference.
...that doesn't want to upgrade to 8.1? It's a free upgrade and, as far as I'm aware, doesn't make any changes for the worse. The only thing I can think of is "local searches are sent to Bing," but since that's easily disabled, I can't think of a reason not to upgrade if you're already running on 8.
Wine is better.
last time they pulled that stunt with DX10 and vista, game developers began switching to openGL instead of using DX10. what makes them think game devs will use the latest DX that no players are using this time around? Any serious gamer knows enough about computers to not use windows 8
.
First Microsoft releases an awful version of Windows (8.0), then Microsoft backtracks (temporarily?) and restores some useful functionality that was removed (emphasis on some).
The question remains, how long before Microsoft has another dose of stupid, and re-removes the Start button and boot to desktop. Strategically, it is what they want to do, so you know they will keep trying to do it.
OpenGL is where you want to be. Easy porting to mac, linux, and not half as much vendor lock-in.
And with restrictions like these on directx, it's getting more and more attractive to go there.
Strap that JATO unit to your pack as you fall off a cliff, Microsoft. Already my next home machine may very well be an Android tablet. I sure as hell won't be buying a computer (or any games for that matter) that require this. Not supplying it for my Windows 7 machine will just help learn to live without it even faster.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
If you need exclusivity to sell products where is the value of that product? It's exclusivity? I don't see any reason to advice people to buy exclusive products, the price is too high, the product questionable.
Exclusivity is no basis for a rational decision, it excludes itself from decision finding.
i dont think many game developers would require their games to run on DX11.2 exclusively unless they dont want to sell many games.And Im sure most gamers wont miss the "extra" graphical eye candy they get for the " .2".Or they could run their games on linux.
...Microsoft is just so last decade, they are rapidly becoming totally irrelevant and most of their recent actions has just accelerated the problem.
The PS4 SDK will undoubtedly expose an OpenGL 4.x based API. Sony learned their lesson with the dramatic changes for devs from the PS2 to the PS3, it complicated development of launch titles that abandoned a PS2 version for a PS3 Launch version. In a number of cases was the direct result of late launches on the Sony platform.
With the increasingly large number of platforms using GL in one form or another (everything from the Steambox to the Iphone) it's a fair assumption that GL will be with us for at least the next decade.. in one form or another.
But it would appear that Microsoft are dead set on attempting to monopolizing every corner of business they're involved in. It would be better for everybody if they just used GL but instead all they're doing by sticking to their guns is causing a bomb load of extra work for devs. Certainly many great indie titles have a terrible time of being ported to MS tech. Their persistence will be their downfall.
I don't buy into this crap about DX11.2 REQUIRING Windows 8.1.
OpenGL 4.2 is supported on windows XP, it exposes all hardware functionality that DX11 exposes.
It works great, tesselation pipeline, transform feedback, GPU compute with OpenCL etc I can utilize every capability of my current card on XP with GL4.2.
So why on earth, does DX11 require windows7? DX11.1 windows 8? etc etc?
What's it doing that GL doesn't?
Maybe here and there an exotic feature that GL doesn't yet support (can't think of anything off the top of my head)
but that's not due to the OS!
So why do Microsoft require new OS releases just to support the latest features on graphics cards?
Maybe they should hire Nvidia to work on DirectX instead because they have no problem supporting the latest cards/features on the oldest supported OSes.
Are their programmers useless? is the kernel so utterly shoddy and the design so co-dependent that they have no choice but to write a new OS?
Obviously not, they're just forcing people to upgrade, standard greedy money grabbing tactic. Everybody knows it.
I'm not wasting mod points on you.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
I think people has misconception of how works Direct3D 11. Nowadays, it just Direct3D 11 with 'feature level' : 9.1 (targeting Direct3D 9), 9.2, etc to 11.1 and 11.2). Thinks a bit like OpenGL 4.1, 4.2 etc..., just some 'extensions'
The thing is that you can write Direct3D 11 apps running on a Direct3D 9.0 hardware (minus the new features like geometry shader). A bit achievement from Direct3D 10 where only Direct3D 10 only worked for Geforce 8 or better (and AMD Radeon HD). Now it could works with very old hardware and still working on latest hardware/
Forward to Direct3D 11.1 from Windows 8: It added a couple of features that nobody really uses (3D stereoscopy) and now they added Direct3D 11.2 with tiled extensions (sounds for PowerVR or Adreno chipset for Windows RT tablets). On OpenGLES, it is called GL_QCOM_tiled_rendering. MS wanted to have that on DirectX, so they add to create a new profile '11.2'
The programmers were able to write Direct3D 11 games for 'Windows Store' and 'Windows Desktop' (for Vista or superior, using the 2010 SDK) as because and new 11.1 and 11.2 minor changes will be able available for 'Windows Store' because it also targets tablets and especially GPU that supports tiled rendering (PowerVR).:
So now, it is sure that DirectX new features are now exclusive for Windows Store apps, and there will be no more update of DirectX for apps targeting Windows Desktop (the SDK was not updated since 2010 for desktop).
DirectX for Windows Desktop (games for Steam etc..) is dead for 3 years already. It is now just an API for Windows Store apps . Also making a requirement to Direct3D 11.1 or 11.2 only games is stupid for a developer, since he probably want to support at least 9.1 profile
I need a Sino-Logic 16. Sogo-7 data-gloves, a GPL stealth module...
put on his machine. I say this because my work machine takes around 5 minutes to boot into Windows 7 and when it runs it constantly hammers the hard drive. Unfortunately they have us install slow ass anti-virus(IE not Avast), log into the domain and some help desk program.(Which is especially worthless since if something needs fixing on my machine I end up fixing it anyway.) I wonder if Linux works better simply because there's less garbage on it.
Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
It's pretty hard to get excited about a DirectX release these days. We all saw the comparison screenshots between DX9 and DX10, and later DX10 and DX11. We saw the ever-so-slight improvements in texture mapping, reflections, shadows, etc. Hasn't the rise of the indie game taught Microsoft anything? It's the gameplay, stupid, not your incrementally more realistic rendering of hair. Not that I object to that kind of thing, but as a selling point for the train wreck that is Windows 8? Get real.
And this will force me to buy a product no one wants....
The harder you squeeze the rebel alliance, the more they they slip through your fingers. .....
It's amazing how much DX9 stuff we still see.
I imagine that companies that ship DirectX 9-compatible game engines are trying not to exclude some PC owners from their market. These potential customers own PCs with Windows XP, PCs with older video cards that don't support all the new features of DirectX 10 let alone 11, and PCs with no video card at all whose integrated graphics can't easily make use of new DirectX features.
AMD chips have much better Video FULL 64 bit and more MB choice at about the same price.
This question has been asked on slashdot with literally every release of Windows that I can remember back to at least 95. Yes, people will complain, no it won't hurt Microsoft's sales. No, people won't stop buying their product because getting a major new feature requires you to upgrade the whole OS. I eagerly await this exact same thread two years from now.
All the savvy game developers still code to DirectX 9.0c using MSVC 6.0 because if you're going to bother developing for th PC, that's what you do. Anything else needlessly reduces the number of people who can run your game.
New desktop touch screen monitors nearly ready. They come with a hammer and a box of nails so you can simply nail it to any desk for stability. A glue version is also planned for the metal desk. The replaceable clear plastic sheet to protect it from fingerprints is optional.
Wuddooeyeno? IITYWYBMAD? Like nuts? eclecticallyincorrect.com
And I've got a host of Steam games and Indie titles to play. Nice try though.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
99% of the new AAA games for windows are only rehashes of older ones
What video game released in the past decade isn't a rehash of another game? Even the Katamari series, which reviewers praised for its innovation, is just the obvious adaptation of the 1982 arcade game Bubbles to a 3D platformer environment.
They have new competition from browsers and mobile os's. They can't afford to NOT adopt a go forward model. If operating systems are supposed to compete with browsers -- then they will need to adopt an update model like browsers, or mobile oses. If you are going to whine then perhaps you ought to hold Mozilla and Chrome to the same standards and demand they backport previous features like webrtc, h264 etc. It's substantially more effort and slows things down. The one thing Microsoft can't do is slow down, they need to speed up if they have any hopes of remaining relevant. I for one would like to see a unified microsoft release stack that was operating system, .net framework, ie, direct x, etc. released bi-yearly or perhaps even quarterly.
They did the same bit to get people to move from XP to 7. And everyone lost their minds then, too. Why would anyone expect things to be different this time?
We should all know by now that this is part of Microsoft's business plan. Get you to keep buying the same product over and over.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
That allows it to run on Windows XP but only the 64-bit version will work.
...but are you using your browser from within Metro? I bet most people don't.
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
With Windows RT 8.1, Microsoft actually took measures to lock out the jailbreak that allowed running unsigned--and Desktop-based--code on Windows RT. I think that this more than anything shows what you're talking about: Microsoft severely cares that you're using their device designed to showcase Metro to run desktop applications.
By the way, we already have good progress on jailbreaking RT 8.1.
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
Get over it. Really, at this point I have to imagine it's not that you're still bothered by this, but just having a reflex where every time Windows 8 is brought up in conversation, you feel the need argue all your perceived weakness of the operating system just out of habit. Please stop, it getting a little old. If removing the start button from windows totally ruined your world, you were doing something wrong.
If you target DX11.3 you have a smaller fragment of the market. Makes sense.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
It's going to fail for the same reason it failed last time: Windows 7 won't magically go away overnight. DirectX is something users don't care about, nor do they need to. They don't care which version of DirectX they're using so long as their games run. Developers care about DirectX because they need to know what version(s) to target. The problem here is that, as with XP in it's day, Windows 7 is going to be a large chunk (probably even the majority) of the market for at least a year after Windows 8.1 comes out. Console game makers will be able to target whatever's on the console, but PC game developers can't just write off the majority of their market and say "Sorry, can't run our game.". That makes base DX11 the latest version PC game makers can safely target, or DX9.0c if they feel they need to keep the XP market (obsolete it may be, but ~36% of the desktop market it still is).
And if your games all require base DX11, why as a user would you feel any pressure to upgrade to get 11.2?
I don't think they are. I don't think they care. The answer is to slowly turn up the temperature until their home / small business customer base starts moving to: Win 8/9, Windows 8 hardware, Windows 8 (metro) applications.
There's a lot more wrong with 8 than merely removal of the start button. Begin with them deciding to design a desktop OS around the notion that everyone in the universe has a touchscreen interface. I don't have one on my desktop, I don't /want/ one on my desktop.
metro is just crap, which is why I specifically ordered windows 7 pro w/my shiny new haswell/780m notebook.
I order Windows 8 so that I can get three more years of "extended support", but I make sure to specify Classic Shell so that the environment formerly known as Metro is segregated in the ghetto where it belongs.
Did Microsoft take out the "slipstreamed security updates" functionality in Windows Vista or something?
Purposefully is not really the right word. There are huge tradeoffs for maintaining long term comparability. It restricts what a company can do and how best to take advantage of their system. Microsoft's big problem is a customer base that is mostly satisfied with lower performance They are buying ever cheaper hardware, they are buying less of it and replacing it with cell phones and tables, and they care keeping their PCs longer. Microsoft needs to make end users dissatisfied and to do that they need applications to be pushing against hardware limits.
So I'm not sure what problems you think Microsoft has but it is unclear given the alternatives how Microsoft is harmed by reducing backwards computability. Apple is obviously far far worse.
Yes, Microsoft do say this, but it is a lie. The real situation is that updates to previous versions of Windows (going back to vista) add the functionality to these OSes as well.
Microsoft has been pulling the same propaganda stunt for years. For the naive, it is a reason to upgrade to the new OS. For developers, the dilemma is mitigated by the fact that people with 'unsupported' versions of Windows can still run their apps/games proving they have the update service running. However, the fact that Microsoft doesn't update pirate versions of an OS confuses the issue.
The ONLY time MS introduced a true version barrier to DirectX was DX10 on Vista, that used the new driver model supported only by Vista and onwards. DX10 will never be available on earlier OSes like XP.
From a hardware POV, there is the confusion as to whether DirectX10 cards can run DirectX11 games. They can, but only because it is in no sense in making pure DirectX11 titles. The split is simple.
1) DirectX9 (XP and some older cards)
2) DirectX10+ (Vista+ and all recent cards)
Contrary to propaganda, DX10 is NOT inherently faster, nor does it have significant new features. DX9 can handle any visual effect, and only a tiny number of these will be significantly slower than the DX10 form.
DX10 did introduce better geometry processing, but too many DX10 cards had very weak hardware in this area. Relying on this feature would give sub-standard performance on too many graphics cards.
Anyhoo, MS announced the end of its DX project. The future is a universal standard, probably revolving around OpenGL ES 4.0
It is clear that with the 8.1 update, something MS has not done since Windows 3 (wow!) that they are trying to "fix" their self created problem.
True, Microsoft hasn't used the "point one" branding for a service pack since Windows 3. But I seem to remember the Mojave ad campaign to promote Windows Vista SP1.
My point comes down to this, anyone reviewing Window 8 should do so with a touch screen. Never install in a desktop. If you are doing a gaming computer, wait for MS to find a better balance between desktop use of their OS and the portable design, which metro is intended for.
In other words, Windows 8 was intended to get PC gamers to buy a touch laptop and an Xbox One instead of a desktop PC.
Sheeple, by definition, are the cretins conditioned by simple psychological ploys. Take the perfect example of 'sheeple', erroneos. Here this cretin shows the effectiveness of tribal conditioning. "What my tribe does is good and clever and godly, ug ug. What his tribe does is bad and stupid and ungodly, ug ug."
As every non-moron knows, games drive computer hardware development just as porn drives Internet development. The need to create ever more realistic open-world games has given us this years new generation of consoles, and the consequence is that Hollywood will see the market for its popcorn blockbusters disrupted at last by a vastly superior form of entertainment.
The first DirectX on the PC was the first time Microsoft seriously considered the issue of real-time performance on a non-real-time OS. The sound and video systems you enjoy on a modern PC are a direct evolution from that first attempt to handle low latency data creation and streaming on a modern OS.
People that mock DirectX are the same dim-bulbs who use programming environments that are abstracted through multiple levels, causing even the simplest algorithms to require insane amounts of CPU power to run as well as one would have experienced on a PC 15 years ago.
DirectX has served its purpose, though. The world needs an open standard now. OpenGL ES 4.0 should finally replace all forms of DirectX, but this is won't happen for a few years yet. In the meantime, publishers have only to worry about using either DX9 or DX10/11. The stupid fancy features will remain optional paths in a handful of games.
I think MS is seriously underestimating the reluctance of its base to move off Win7 to Win8 (or even 8.1).
The upgrade we're discussing here is from Win8 to 8.1.
Win7 users can upgrade or not as they please; the point here is that Win8 users can -- and frankly *should* -- upgrade to 8.1. Win 8.1 is really what Win8 should have been in the first place.
Win8 has had its share of criticism, and yes a lot of it has been deserved. 8.1 is a good effort to resolve some of that criticism. They haven't sorted everything, and if Win7 users still want to stick with Win7, I can well understand it. But Win8 users really should move to 8.1; It's a free upgrade from Win8, so there's really no reason not to upgrade.
(Spudley Strikes Again!)
Well, be using OpenGL they get all this plus easy portability to OSX, Linux
Citation needed that the market for OS X and GNU/Linux versions of a game combined exceed the market for an Xbox 360 port.
Android, iOS
Portability to Android and iOS doesn't help if your game is in a genre that uses discrete buttons rather than point-and-click interaction. iOS has no official game controller API until iOS 7 comes out, and iOS 7 won't run on any iPod touch sold more than eight months ago. And until this month (June 2013), Android had only one well-known device that came bundled with a controller, namely the Xperia Play by Sony.
I only use Windows for an IM application and gaming (not even gaming now, but I'm hoping to do some trickery with KVM and PCI passthrough). When games become significantly better in W8 than in W7 I may have to fork out some cash. Kind of a sneaky tactic of MS to tie it to an API upgrade, but I'm getting updates for W7 for free, so it's maybe fair that I should upgrade to W8 sooner or (very much) later. I wish I had bought a copy when it was on special offer. I assume that games will run well on W7 for years to come, so it doesn't even justify a "meh"
PS4 will use FreeBSD for it's OS code base. Where is there proof that it will still use DirectX?
I would think Microsoft would have a problem with a DirectX clone/port/emulation.
You and the grandparent hit it on the head. Ever since Dx10 they've been (failing miserably at) using DirectX to strongarm people into buying their latest Numerically Superior Product "or else".
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
" is this going to help Microsoft convince people to ugprade or will make them angry?'
I'm sure it will all work out fine, just like it did with the Xbox 180.
But the Start button is coming back.
This sort of exclusionary upgrade pressure is exactly why I haven't purchased an MS OS since XP, or any games requiring DX10/11. Furthermore I haven't bought new hardware...
MS shoots self in foot yet again.
True, but it wont serve the same function as the old start button. I assume those that grumble about its absence are doing so because they used to make heavy use start menu/launcher, which is not returning. The new button will take you to the metro Start screen, which is more or less a full screen replacement of the old start menu that these people miss. So ya, there will be a button there, but I doubt whether the simple addition of a button which is the equivalent of hitting the Win key will make these guys happy.
I wonder if DX11.2 really requires Win8.1 in any meaningful way or if a few nops in the installer could bring it to win7.
300kb/s transfer times on gigabit network. I don't know how they balls'd up something as simple as transferring a file but they did.
Or when you copy something like 3000 files at a time the computer would sit there for what seemed like most of the day counting the number of files and calculating the time to completion before actually starting the transfer.
No people don't look at the old Vista just like they don't look at the old Windows XP. Remember the days when Windows XP actually didn't support WiFi or have a Firewall? Vista pre-servicepacks was crap on ALL hardware even with good drivers.
Viola - I have 11.2 and didn't pay M$ a dime... All I see this doing is upping the number of copies since gamers and hackers won't buy a PoS operating system - but they will bootleg it...
I think you completely missed the entire topic of discussion here....No one was complaining about upgrading from Win 8 to Win 8.1...
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
And suddenly everybody starts to like Teh Tiles.
8.1 is a free upgrade to those running 8.0. This is a non-issue.
i only just recently upgraded to Win 7 so why would I spend a hundred or more dollars for a crap version of Windows built for device/tablet use (dont own/use either) just for a .1 update in DX? For the record recently had to make my 70 yo parents new PC work with Win 8 wasnt impressed with it and it definately confused the folks.
Isn't the 8.1 upgrade free? Why would this anger anyone?
It's the fact that it's full screen that is the problem. I intensely dislike modal interfaces for tasks that are not logically modal, and I hate the context switch, and I really hate that I need to either memorize or use a multi-monitor system to be able to follow instructions on an email message I have opened that include "hit start and type foo". I do think the start screen is better for touch on tablets but when I use a mouse I want something that is not a context switch. It really is my biggest complaint with Windows 8 that does not appear to be addressed by 8.1. The start screen is the one thing that won't even go into the 50/50 splitscreen view.
My biggest complaint which is addressed is that search wasn't unified by default -- I don't want to have to memorize whether something is an "application" or a "setting". There's clearly still work to be done on search results though.
Game makers know the sales numbers for windows 8 and are not going to bother with DX-11.2. No to mention that any console port is going to only use DX-11. So there is no point.
The removal of the start menu/metro being a hot corner, and allowing boot to desktop was necessary.
I could live with the Metro interface being the new start menu. Not a big problem for desktop users.
http://www.accountkiller.com/en/delete-slashdot-account Stop visiting Slashdot.
All I read was "bla bla bla something irrelevant about microsoft bla bla bla".
Or, if said customers have any brains, switch to OSX / iOS / Android / other forms of Linux.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
I don't know why people are complaining, this was how DX10 got adopted practically overnight... oh wait.
Their home / small business customer base is already rapidly switching to iOS and Android. That's part of what's driving their urgency. Their belief is that in 2013 Android and iOS aren't mature enough yet for the more demanding 2/3rds to switch completely. That might not be true in 2017 so better to force the switch in Windows 8 now then fight that battle against Android in 2017.
As for the Linux desktop. They are opening themselves up to a bigger establishment of the Linux desktop at the low end. OTOH the Linux desktop hasn't been so disorganized in its entire life. The pieces are there but it could take a year or two get structures back in place for unified large scale desktop projects that would command community focus. That's likely enough time. 6 mo was plenty in the case of netbooks.
Their home / small business customer base is already rapidly switching to iOS and Android. That's part of what's driving their urgency. Their belief is that in 2013 Android and iOS aren't mature enough yet for the more demanding 2/3rds to switch completely. That might not be true in 2017 so better to force the switch in Windows 8 now then fight that battle against Android in 2017.
Right, so customers with any brains better start looking for non-Microsoft future rather than be "driven" by a company without a drive.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
I don't know that Microsoft doesn't have any drive. Spend some time at: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/, they have some very cool ideas. Even for Windows-8 I think the idea of ubiquitous computing is rather cool. Not having drive would be standing by and letting the switch to Android happen. What Microsoft is doing is stepping up and leading their platform. They win, they may lose but they are fighting.
Ok, enjoy being "driven" by a corporation that has no interest in the well being of any particular customer. Hopefully sensible people are driving their own business on their own terms.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
The summary even says "This is not news", but it was still approved.
Slashdot sucks.