Because it couldn't be consumers demanding faster, better systems in order to, say, play newer games and HD movies? It has to be Microsoft and their 'evil' business practices. You conveniently forget that Vista will run perfectly well on a 1GHz machine with 512 megs of RAM, because that would ruin your petty tirade, wouldn't it?
And don't regale me on the puniness of the system that you run Linux on - nobody cares, let alone consumers. It's the nature of humans to always want more out of what they buy.
Anyhow, you'd be surprised to learn that Microsoft doesn't actually have complete control of the upgrades market. Hardware manufacturers and games producers have much more say in that when they release bigger, faster, better versions of their particular products. Do you really think that id would have been content to release every version of Quake they made on the Doom engine?
1) There is no such thing as "if you don't have PMP". It's there, in Vista, and it can't be removed or disabled.
2) There is no evidence that anyone has had home video footage downgraded by Vista. The article seems to be very thin on any evidence of anything, other than knee-jerk reactions to Microsoft press-releases.
Just to confirm, found a WMV HD video running at 1080p. Played it, and the Protected Media Path was enabled, but the content didn't degrade. Checked the file and the 'Protected' tag was off.
So it looks like Vista will run the protection path and play the video but not actually do anything to prevent copying etc. unless that Protected tag is enabled.
Off the top of my head, I couldn't tell you. I'm pretty sure that some of them have been WMV, but without going back to the place and finding out, I wouldn't be able to commit to that, and I can't particularly do it at work.
I can confirm it is most certainly not true - I've been playing downloaded HD movies (mostly game trailers) with no issues whatsoever on Vista. It does degrade quality on Blu-Ray/HD-DVD discs, but I have no intention of buying one for exactly that reason.
Except when you're talking about three progressive implementations of the same API, DirectX. I'm guessing (I haven't seen any spec, so this is a guess) that the new parts of 10.1 will be extra implementations on top of 10, so you can turn them on and off easily based on detection. You can use them or not.
You might be right that there are major differences between 9 and 10, enough that some extra investment may be required, but I severely doubt that - and even if it were true, then the difference between 10 and 10.1 is not going to be a case of having to recode an engine from top to bottom, and if it is then maybe your engine needed recoding.
It's all moot - the article was still wrong, DirectX 10 is not obsolete in the same way that DirectX 9 isn't.
since M$ said OpenGL would not be supported under Vista. That's odd, seeing as I just finished a fairly long game of City of Heroes on Vista Home Premium.
Lets see. Lost Planet - supports both DirectX 9 and 10. I see no reason why games companies can't support more than one at a time. I imagine game studios will be busier, rather than them being 'scared'.
The summary and the Inquirer article are, well, wrong.
Microsoft announced 10.1 as a side-by-side update - DirectX 10 is not obsolete, they are both fully supported. Developers and manufacturers have the option of coding for 10.1 or sticking with 10. The real quote:
Direct3D 10.1 is an incremental, side-by-side update to Direct3D 10.0 that provides a series of new rendering features that will be available in an upcoming generation of graphics hardware.
Slashdot ate half my comment. Also:
I had to keep logging in and out of my user and admin accounts all day to get anything done. then
The tasks requiring privilege are arbitrary and I have to "log on" (i.e., put in my administrator password) too much. You've changed your story halfway through here. Which is it, because plainly my original answer solves your original problem but not your new complaint.
I had to keep logging in and out of my user and admin accounts all day to get anything done. Then you really don't know enough to comment, unfortunately. Look up a little something called "Run As..." and get back to us, will you?
What, like the list you keep of the posts that I made that you don't like? That you did in your own time for nothing, and is if anything just as pointless?
It is too funny for words that someone would go through your comment history to find posts they don't like - so why did you do it to me?
Slashdot Mirror
Because it couldn't be consumers demanding faster, better systems in order to, say, play newer games and HD movies? It has to be Microsoft and their 'evil' business practices. You conveniently forget that Vista will run perfectly well on a 1GHz machine with 512 megs of RAM, because that would ruin your petty tirade, wouldn't it?
And don't regale me on the puniness of the system that you run Linux on - nobody cares, let alone consumers. It's the nature of humans to always want more out of what they buy.
Anyhow, you'd be surprised to learn that Microsoft doesn't actually have complete control of the upgrades market. Hardware manufacturers and games producers have much more say in that when they release bigger, faster, better versions of their particular products. Do you really think that id would have been content to release every version of Quake they made on the Doom engine?
You're confusing the issue.
1) There is no such thing as "if you don't have PMP". It's there, in Vista, and it can't be removed or disabled.
2) There is no evidence that anyone has had home video footage downgraded by Vista. The article seems to be very thin on any evidence of anything, other than knee-jerk reactions to Microsoft press-releases.
Just to confirm, found a WMV HD video running at 1080p. Played it, and the Protected Media Path was enabled, but the content didn't degrade. Checked the file and the 'Protected' tag was off.
So it looks like Vista will run the protection path and play the video but not actually do anything to prevent copying etc. unless that Protected tag is enabled.
Off the top of my head, I couldn't tell you. I'm pretty sure that some of them have been WMV, but without going back to the place and finding out, I wouldn't be able to commit to that, and I can't particularly do it at work.
I don't know whether it ever was the default, but it certainly isn't now.
Sorry, but that's total bollocks. WMV content that YOU encode will not have DRM on it unless you ask for it.
I can confirm it is most certainly not true - I've been playing downloaded HD movies (mostly game trailers) with no issues whatsoever on Vista. It does degrade quality on Blu-Ray/HD-DVD discs, but I have no intention of buying one for exactly that reason.
Isn't it a bit of a stretch to call Scientology a religion?
At best it's a cult.
They're not incompatible, though. Any game that runs on DX10 will run on DX10.1.
The fact that 10.1 requires a couple of implementations on top of DX10 doesn't prevent DX10 games from running on it.
I wondered where little Timmy went...
Are you geniunely that misinformed, or are you just trolling? Just curious.
Except when you're talking about three progressive implementations of the same API, DirectX. I'm guessing (I haven't seen any spec, so this is a guess) that the new parts of 10.1 will be extra implementations on top of 10, so you can turn them on and off easily based on detection. You can use them or not.
You might be right that there are major differences between 9 and 10, enough that some extra investment may be required, but I severely doubt that - and even if it were true, then the difference between 10 and 10.1 is not going to be a case of having to recode an engine from top to bottom, and if it is then maybe your engine needed recoding.
It's all moot - the article was still wrong, DirectX 10 is not obsolete in the same way that DirectX 9 isn't.
Lets see. Lost Planet - supports both DirectX 9 and 10. I see no reason why games companies can't support more than one at a time. I imagine game studios will be busier, rather than them being 'scared'.
Microsoft announced 10.1 as a side-by-side update - DirectX 10 is not obsolete, they are both fully supported. Developers and manufacturers have the option of coding for 10.1 or sticking with 10. The real quote: Direct3D 10.1 is an incremental, side-by-side update to Direct3D 10.0 that provides a series of new rendering features that will be available in an upcoming generation of graphics hardware.
10 Print GENERIC_AGREEMENT$(RND(0))
20 Print "I'm a sockpuppet too!"
30 END
And sudo isn't? A lot of Linux driver installs required root. Has this changed in the last year or so since I last checked up on it?
Fair enough, though you did quote something I didn't say.
Wow, you are absolutely hilarious.
What, like the list you keep of the posts that I made that you don't like? That you did in your own time for nothing, and is if anything just as pointless?
It is too funny for words that someone would go through your comment history to find posts they don't like - so why did you do it to me?
Then question them.
Maybe you should read the part of my post where it said "Irrelevent of whether the system sucks or not".
Under the current system, this decision is good for everyone. Is it really that hard to read what I wrote?