You are right that supporting older OS's does cost money, the DX10 requirement for SOME games is an artificial constraint.
Take Halo2 for the PC (when it comes out). It is going to require DX10 (and therefore Vista). But halo2 was of course a game for the original X-BOX, same as Halo 1. There can't possible be anything in Halo2 (graphics API wise) that was not also available in in Halo1, and Halo1 runs fine with DX9. DX10 wasn't even around when the X-Box was developed, so how is it possible that the PC port of Halo2 "requires" DX10?
The only why is if Microsoft purposely added references to DX10 to prevent it from working with DX9. And the only reason for that is to sell copies of Vista. All because like sex, Halo Sells.
>>"The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners...
Nope. He ment U.S. Science. the "US" is completely capitalized and makes sence to mean the Unitied States.
Slashdot Mirror
You are right that supporting older OS's does cost money, the DX10 requirement for SOME games is an artificial constraint. Take Halo2 for the PC (when it comes out). It is going to require DX10 (and therefore Vista). But halo2 was of course a game for the original X-BOX, same as Halo 1. There can't possible be anything in Halo2 (graphics API wise) that was not also available in in Halo1, and Halo1 runs fine with DX9. DX10 wasn't even around when the X-Box was developed, so how is it possible that the PC port of Halo2 "requires" DX10? The only why is if Microsoft purposely added references to DX10 to prevent it from working with DX9. And the only reason for that is to sell copies of Vista. All because like sex, Halo Sells.
>>"The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners ...
Nope. He ment U.S. Science. the "US" is completely capitalized and makes sence to mean the Unitied States.