Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Microsoft Makes DirectX 11.1 a Windows 8 Exclusive

124»

Comments

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Whitebeards
    Nonsense. Windows vista was never faster,lighter and was very resource hungry. Win 8 is nothing like vista. It i a lot faster and amazingly requires very less resources than Win 7 which was a big improvement over win vista.You are just pulling stuff out of your rear to make a point.

    Yeah, the Vista comparison isn't really fair. Vista sucked. Windows 8 isn't much better than Windows 7, but it's not bag of cr@p that was Vista. The Metro UI is a questionable decision for the desktop though. With the performance being so close, the UI is going to be the make or break point and the Metro UI isn't ready for the desktop. It's up to developers whether they write Metro applications, but the OS itself uses the Metro UI and it's weak.

    I said the performance is close because it's going to be close in the end users' perceptions. We've gotten pretty close to the point that most humans aren't going to perceive the performance differences between Win7 and Win8.

    For gaming there's no difference between Win7 and Win8. In some games you get +3fps and in some games you get -3fps. Not enough to matter. Combined with the weakness of the Metro UI, for a gamer Windows 8 is a 'do not upgrade', but it is an 'ok to buy with a new machine'. At least until games are DirectX 11.1 exclusive...which is probably going to be years away.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • hfztthfztt GlostrupPosts: 840Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by WhitebeardsNonsense. Windows vista was never faster,lighter and was very resource hungry. Win 8 is nothing like vista. It i a lot faster and amazingly requires very less resources than Win 7 which was a big improvement over win vista.

    You are just pulling stuff out of your rear to make a point.

    No, I am not.

    Windows 2000 =  Windows NT 5.0

    Windows XP = Windows NT 5.1

    Windows Vista = Windows NT 6.0

    Windows 7 = Windows NT 6.1

    Windows 8 = Windows NT 6.2

    Start a command promt. Its right there. Version 6.2.xxxx. If you think that just a DOS version find c:windowssystem32kernel32.dll and do an info on that. Ups! Version 6.2. Feel free to track this back and try the same in the earler versions of windows as well. (It is easier in earlier versions though. If you looked at the windows properties page it would tell you teh actual windows version. This time around they decided to hide it though.)

    If they had made any MAJOR changes its would have been Windows NT 7. They did not. Only minor tweaks to kernal plus GUI and tools enhancements. Just like Windows 7.

    Now mind you that these tweeks can mean a lot in the day to day life. The difference between Vista and 7 in user experience was huge. But under the hood its the same engine. So if you ignore Metrp there really isnt much to Win 8 as thats where they did most of the work for this version.

  • DouganDouganDouganDougan MAdridPosts: 15Member
    and noone think 11.1 will be cracked to allow it in W7?
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,784Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

    At least until games are DirectX 11.1 exclusive...which is probably going to be years away.

    Games will probably never be DirectX 11.1 exclusive.  Assuming DirectX lasts long enough, there will probably eventually be DirectX games that will not run on DirectX 11 or earlier.  But it's probable that no such games will run on DirectX 11.1, either.  Instead, they'll require DirectX 12 or later.

    If you're going to port back to DirectX 11.1 anyway, then there's no real loss in skipping DirectX 11.1 and just making a DirectX 11 version instead.  That allows the many people who can run DirectX 11 but not 11.1 to run your game, while you don't really lose much by not having DirectX 11.1.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by lizardbones At least until games are DirectX 11.1 exclusive...which is probably going to be years away.
    Games will probably never be DirectX 11.1 exclusive.  Assuming DirectX lasts long enough, there will probably eventually be DirectX games that will not run on DirectX 11 or earlier.  But it's probable that no such games will run on DirectX 11.1, either.  Instead, they'll require DirectX 12 or later.

    If you're going to port back to DirectX 11.1 anyway, then there's no real loss in skipping DirectX 11.1 and just making a DirectX 11 version instead.  That allows the many people who can run DirectX 11 but not 11.1 to run your game, while you don't really lose much by not having DirectX 11.1.




    So the real point at which Microsoft is forcing people to go with an upgrade is DirectX 12. I would still guess years before gamers feel like they have no choice but to switch to Windows 8 from Windows 7. Anyone going with Windows 7 now probably isn't going to lose out anytime soon, but anyone going with Windows 8 isn't really losing out either, unless they really hate the Metro UI.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,784Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Harmonizer
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by lizardbones

    At least until games are DirectX 11.1 exclusive...which is probably going to be years away.

    Games will probably never be DirectX 11.1 exclusive.  Assuming DirectX lasts long enough, there will probably eventually be DirectX games that will not run on DirectX 11 or earlier.  But it's probable that no such games will run on DirectX 11.1, either.  Instead, they'll require DirectX 12 or later.

    If you're going to port back to DirectX 11.1 anyway, then there's no real loss in skipping DirectX 11.1 and just making a DirectX 11 version instead.  That allows the many people who can run DirectX 11 but not 11.1 to run your game, while you don't really lose much by not having DirectX 11.1.

    Since directX 9 is still used until today. 11 will not be that popular though/

    DirectX 11 brought tessellation, which, if used properly, is revolutionary.  I can't think of anything left for future versions to bring that will be anywhere near that important shy of a shift to alternate rendering methods rather than rasterization.

  • laseritlaserit Vancouver, BCPosts: 1,950Member Uncommon
    I aint touching W8 with a 10' foot pole. I will just have to wait and see what comes after. MS has a history of releasing stinker's in between decent releases.

    "If you make an ass out of yourself, there will always be someone to ride you." - Bruce Lee

  • skeaserskeaser Wichita Falls, TXPosts: 3,849Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by zenryoku
    Originally posted by hfztt

    As someone who has Windows 8 installed, I will say they will need gunpoint arguments to get people to switch.

    Its bad. Not even Vista bad. More like Win ME bad. Yeah really. THAT bad.

    Its not that I dont like what they are trying to do, I knda do. Its just that the products is so unfinished and bug ridden, that it is not even funny.

    LOL, what? You've clearly not even used Windows 8 at all. I've been running it since launch and have had no issues. I really enjoyed Windows 7, but 8 is clearly much faster and has some nice improvements (Task Manager). Some of the apps in Metro are quite good as well.

    Steam works perfectly as do all of the games I play. 

    Windows ME and Vista were truly awful; Windows 8 is quite nice. If anyone has any doubts about it, try going into a retail store and playing around with it for while. I demo it for customers at work all the time and the majority of them like it.

    If you don't like it after honestly giving it a try, then that's your right, but don't delude yourself into thinking that it's another Vista or ME.

    It's all about preference. I wouldn't use Win8 if they paid me and I had the Public Release beta installed for about a month. Win8 has 2 UIs on top of each other with a taskbar for programs and a hotspot for apps. I like everything consolidated.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by skeaser
    It's all about preference. I wouldn't use Win8 if they paid me and I had the Public Release beta installed for about a month. Win8 has 2 UIs on top of each other with a taskbar for programs and a hotspot for apps. I like everything consolidated.

    It seems that your point of view is shared by others. Windows 8 runs fine. The UI is a confusing mess though. I haven't really seen any complaints about the UI being non-functional, it's just not the UI that desktop users actually want to use. As a tablet, it probably works great, even on one of those laptops with tablet form factors it works great, but for a desktop PC, it's just not what users want to do.

    I look at it like this. The older Office UI was boring, but really functional. The newest Office UI certainly looks better...but even after I'm not searching for the features I need, it's still much slower. Some things are painfully slow and some things are a complete mystery. For instance, opening files from the file system in two different windows is a time saver. However, Excel doesn't do this so you have to switch windows inside Excel...and it's painfully slow. Except when Excel does open files in two different windows...which is a total mystery why it started doing this. Based on my past experience, I find it really hard to believe that Microsoft wrote something in there that saw what I was trying to do and fixed itself.

    The new Metro UI is like that. Lots of Dazzle, but any productivity is in the garbage can. Even after you figure it out, it doesn't work nearly as well as the old, boring UI.

    ** edit **
    Which has nothing to do with DirectX. Given the slow adoption of new Windows versions and some of the stuff posted in this thread, I'm not even sure DirectX 11.1 is really going to be relevant.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

124»
Sign In or Register to comment.