I'm glad there's finally an article with references that I can point people to and say "Yes, XNA is dead (as in no longer being developed or maintained by MS)" (which we all knew, and there are things suggesting this (like some posts on Promit's blog), but I like that I can finally link to something that says it clearly, concisely, and bluntly)
The interesting thing about that article? It has the following:
However, a Microsoft spokesperson said that there are no plans to discontinue the DirectX for its Windows and Xbox platforms.
“Microsoft is actively investing in DirectX as the unified graphics foundation for all of our platforms, including Windows, Xbox 360, and Windows Phone,” the spokesperson said.
“DirectX is evolving and will continue to evolve. We have absolutely no intention of stopping innovation with DirectX.”
I'm not entirely sure how to reconcile that with the earlier statement "DirectX is no longer evolving as a technology." I didn't think they'd completely axe DirectX (or more specifically, I didn't think they'd axe D3D), but there seems to be some conflicting statements about whether or not it's evolving. Perhaps what they're really trying to say is "DirectX (as a whole) is not evolving, but D3D (a specific part of DirectX) is, so we're going to trim the stagnant limbs (the 'dead' parts of DirectX) and focus on evolving the healthy heart (D3D)." I think that's a sensible interpretation, given the Microsoft spokespwerson said "...DirectX as the unified graphics foundation..." (sounds like only D3D is really the important part to me, the other parts are not (at least not explicitly stated in the quote) being actively invested in). Or perhaps the first statement was just piss-poor wording and misleading.
They really just need to rip D3D out of DirectX and kill DirectX so we can stop pretending like DirectX is D3D and vice versa.