Direct x10 No Choice

The only reason to use Vista atm is to watch HD-DVD on it. So you
need an HDCP mobo, video card, OS (Vista) and monitor (1920by1200 res and up and HDCP capable going at R8.000 for the Dell 24 inch and up)
and then you need the actual HD-DVD drive, which no-one here sells
anyhow yet.

Vista is just another money maker for M$. M$ could have ported DirectX10 to
WinXP but they don't want to invest a few bucks in that. They want to use your love for DX10 games as reason (only reason other than HD-DVD) to
upgrade to Vista. Now why would anyone want to give money to a company with such ethics?
Click to expand...

Peter rather avoid saying things you are not even remotely sure about. HD-DVD has nothing to do with Vista, you can watch HD-DVD on XP as well. The standard is not in anyway tied to Microsoft or it's operating systems...

Oh, what is an HDCP mobo exactly?

There's no porting of any API to anything. You can't port a graphics API, it is what it is. It's platform specific or it isn't, ther is no porting. XP could not work with DX10, driver model is different amongst many other things.

Want to put facts or informed opinion forward, please be my guest, but don't just talk/type of what you do not know... Take it one step at a time...
Microsoft can't force developers to do anything. You want to use DirectX, there are guidelines, much as there are with OpenGL.

Oh and please take Toms' results in context (pun intentional). He tested DX9.0c hardware in a DX9.0Ex environment. Testing Vista on DX10 hardware proves to be faster than in XP.
 
ShockG said:
Peter rather avoid saying things you are not even remotely sure about. HD-DVD has nothing to do with Vista, you can watch HD-DVD on XP as well. The standard is not in anyway tied to Microsoft or it's operating systems...

Oh, what is an HDCP mobo exactly?

There's no porting of any API to anything. You can't port a graphics API, it is what it is. It's platform specific or it isn't, ther is no porting. XP could not work with DX10, driver model is different amongst many other things.

Want to put facts or informed opinion forward, please be my guest, but don't just talk/type of what you do not know... Take it one step at a time...
Microsoft can't force developers to do anything. You want to use DirectX, there are guidelines, much as there are with OpenGL.

Oh and please take Toms' results in context (pun intentional). He tested DX9.0c hardware in a DX9.0Ex environment. Testing Vista on DX10 hardware proves to be faster than in XP.
Click to expand...

Jeez...chill out....have a cooldrink :D

What they were trying to say is that why spend the extra money and go to all the effort to change over to Vista.....is it really worth it...at the moment ....no ;)
 
Yes it is. It's not investing in a new machine.
If you had an Athlon64 2800+ back in 2003, a Radeon 9600 and a even 512MB of RAM Vista will still run with Aero.
How Vista is tied to new hardware is new to me?

I have the same rig I had when I used XP, that I have now with Vista.
 
I'm not a MS fanboy or anything, but haven't we all realized that when MS says "JUMP!" we say "how far?". It always has been like that, I think it always will be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X