It's the same thing that gaming had to deal with when video game consoles started having newer versions come out Before that, people had their same television/radio sets for 20+ years. Now all of a sudden they had to buy new video game consoles even though they bought one 3-4 years ago. It's not worth the investment if your forced to change/update it every cycle. Most people buy these kind of things as INVESTMENTS. I expect it to last a good long time if it costs more than 200 bucks.Kahani said:
Rumor: Sorry Folks, There Will be no DirectX 12 Support For Windows 7 - Update
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I might upgrade to Windows 10 if the old rule of "every other Windows version is worth it" holds up. But I won't be forced to upgrade, the games I own run fine now so I don't really care about improving performance. I might have to go from ultra settings to high settings? Tragic.
I think you've forgotten about Windows ME....Strazdas said:
I don't really care about directx 12 being windows 10 exclusive, its not like game devs are going to drop support for whatever version windows 7 supports.
I'll upgrade to windows 10 whenever I get around to it but it probably won't be because "ERMEGERD I NEED DIRECTX 12"
They had to go to 10 after 7 ate 9.Zhukov said:
I'm not sorry.
Anyway, between devs probably not moving to the newest stuff right away because it'd take time and money, and the userbase not moving to 10 right away because of time, money, and inconvenience, I don't see people budging on this until they just drop support for 7 entirely.
This might be the final push that will make OpenGL fully relevant in games again. It's already highly relevant (see: everything Valve does these days).
As an actual professional graphics programmer, I think OpenGL is perfectly fine for games on PC. Depending on hardware level you can get some truly impressive performance with OpenGL these days. The stuff you can do on Kepler generation+ cards with bindless rendering and multidraw indirect seems really promising.
I guess the big problem is the console market. We'll see how the PC market looks in a few years, and see if Sony/Nintendo choose to go the OpenGL route (disclaimer: I have no clue at all about consoles). I mean, considering the way console hardware has been going the last generations, they're starting to look more and more like normal PCs with less and less specialized hardware.
As an actual professional graphics programmer, I think OpenGL is perfectly fine for games on PC. Depending on hardware level you can get some truly impressive performance with OpenGL these days. The stuff you can do on Kepler generation+ cards with bindless rendering and multidraw indirect seems really promising.
I guess the big problem is the console market. We'll see how the PC market looks in a few years, and see if Sony/Nintendo choose to go the OpenGL route (disclaimer: I have no clue at all about consoles). I mean, considering the way console hardware has been going the last generations, they're starting to look more and more like normal PCs with less and less specialized hardware.
It won't be such a big deal, mentioned earlier here, most games support directx 9, 10 and 11, so in the future newer games will support 9, 10, 11 and 12. The userbase for directx12 only games will not be big enough to justify dropping the development of earlier versions.
In the future (windows 13, think about 9 or 10 years from now) we will have the same discussion about directx 15 or 16, and why support for dx12 will possebly be dropped in the near future.
Things move on and will change because of it. Introduction of new features sometimes comes with loss of previous and now lesser used functionality.
In the future (windows 13, think about 9 or 10 years from now) we will have the same discussion about directx 15 or 16, and why support for dx12 will possebly be dropped in the near future.
Things move on and will change because of it. Introduction of new features sometimes comes with loss of previous and now lesser used functionality.
"Huddy continued to say that the number of users using Windows 7 is actually growing, which may explain the decision to "force" consumers to upgrade by holding the latest DirectX at ransom."
Yeah, I saw that dick move coming forever ago.
Doesn't hurt to have been a tech journalist for ten years, but I assume it was obvious to most Escapists anyway?
CAPTCHA: "jump over". Lol, probably not Captcha!
Yeah, I saw that dick move coming forever ago.
Doesn't hurt to have been a tech journalist for ten years, but I assume it was obvious to most Escapists anyway?
CAPTCHA: "jump over". Lol, probably not Captcha!
I didn't realize support for win7 ends in january; granted they still have extended support going after that and there are machines still selling with 7 pro on them. I think the reason people are so upset is that there's no legimate reason to force users to update to a new OS. Windows 7 meets the needs of current desktop users. One of the reasons Vista failed as bad as it did is because there was no need for it in the market (it was a couple of years early for the 64-bit changeover in the mainstream). The only thing 8 brought was touchscreen support, which has caught on with desktops about as well as 3D monitors. I doubt 10 will have any sort of magic bullet that will justify the upgrade; a new OS should only come when there's a corresponding change in the technology that demands it. Microsoft isn't responding to the needs of the market, rather they are doing the exact opposite and making the market respond to their needs.Kahani said:
People just want to use what they have instead of being forced into obsolescence so someone can try to make a quick buck.
The only problem is OpenGL is rubbish compared to *Direct3D* (OpenGL only competes with one area of DirectX). Not only that OpenGL as it currently stands doesn't even compare to Mantle, Metal and DirectX 12 now that it has also ditched the traditional GPU pipeline model.Doom972 said:
Get Steam OS, its Linux which is what Mac OSX is built off anyway (well Unix)EiMitch said:
OT: Yeah not a wise move Microsoft, Linux is looking more and more appealing by the day, basically shoving your customers towards your competition is a STUPID move.
This should hopefully change with OpenGL Next, which is a complete departure from OpenGL. In fact, they asked AMD for Mantle, which they willingly gave...So it should be on par with Mantle, at the very least.MorphingDragon said:
Whilst it will likely remain true if you have an Nvidia card, you won't be able to run Mantle, I just want to point out that this is self inflicted by Nvidia.KisaiTenshi said:
AMD is being surprisingly generous with Mantle, they're actually giving away the code to anyone who asks...If Nvidia wanted to, they could ask AMD for the code and be able to completely support Mantle, and their cards would see very worthwhile improvements.
The only thing stopping them is pride, essentially. There is no way in hell they're take anything from their competitor, even if it benefits the entire industry as a whole. It doesn't even benefit AMD in the slightest if they support it or not.
It's a real shame too, Intel has already asked for it, as have the developers of OpenGL Next. The big one is that so has Microsoft...DX 12 is pretty much just tweaked Mantle, as in it actually pulls code from it.
So...Thanks for keeping us in the Microsoft dark ages, Nvidia. Just. Great.
Meh. Windows 8.1 is a good solid OS. The only thing holding it back for private users is the Start/Metro interface and the lack of a traditional Start button, and there are a dozen work arounds for that.
For business users the OS is dead in the water as the interface requires a learning curve that will eat into productivity for months and for some employees years. Those same work arounds that are fine when using a couple of machines are a headache when rolling out for a large company.
It is a mind boggling that MS didn't offer a legacy interface for enterprise users, but then no-one would have used the new interface, and they would be faced to admit it is rubbish.
Basically Win 8.1 is the best Windows so far, but they hid it behind a terrible interface.
For business users the OS is dead in the water as the interface requires a learning curve that will eat into productivity for months and for some employees years. Those same work arounds that are fine when using a couple of machines are a headache when rolling out for a large company.
It is a mind boggling that MS didn't offer a legacy interface for enterprise users, but then no-one would have used the new interface, and they would be faced to admit it is rubbish.
Basically Win 8.1 is the best Windows so far, but they hid it behind a terrible interface.
Khronos themselves are a massive problem with OpenGL. Even if you fix the *spec* doesn't mean the GPU manufacturers will suddenly change their sloppy habits.Mr.Savage said:
They need to update this story again.
AMD got their fingers smacked by Microsoft for speaking out of turn and AMD redacted everything that their engineer said
AMD got their fingers smacked by Microsoft for speaking out of turn and AMD redacted everything that their engineer said
Y'know, considering the PC is what brought Microsoft to where it is today, their current disdain (bordering on hatred) of it as a platform is bizarre. They seem bound and determined to drag us all, kicking and screaming if necessary, to a PC-less future where everyone is playing games on phones and tablets. (Probably so that they can lock our platforms down more easily and monetize everything.)
But Microsoft has tried this before, and gotten their teeth kicked in as a result. Why do they think it'll work this time? Do they really still think that gamers blindly believe "higher numbers are always better" and will follow along this time when they didn't before?
I do have one piece of advise for the company, though: If your OS is so reviled that you have to try to coerce people into adopting it, maybe you should be rethinking that OS's design.
But Microsoft has tried this before, and gotten their teeth kicked in as a result. Why do they think it'll work this time? Do they really still think that gamers blindly believe "higher numbers are always better" and will follow along this time when they didn't before?
I do have one piece of advise for the company, though: If your OS is so reviled that you have to try to coerce people into adopting it, maybe you should be rethinking that OS's design.