insights on DX 10
Direct3D 9.L is what was/is also known as WGF 1.0 (Windows Graphics Foundation); the L stands for Longhorn. Don't expect the API to change much, if at all, the significant changes are happening under the covers with the LDDM (Longhorn Display Driver Model) and the general stability/interoperability/glitch free benefits that will bring.
Direct3D 10 is what was/is also known as WGF 2.0.
Direct3D 10 != Farenheight (though you may see the odd similarity appear).
Direct3D 10 API: lots of familiar "concepts"; some familiar names/objects; a number of new names/objects; a few new concepts.
As for how big a change/improvement, think D3D7->D3D8. Some of the changes are massive improvements in flexibility IMO, I'm really looking forward to developing with the new API!.
Think of D3D under Vista and Vista as a whole as a new next gen platform that happens to have backwards compatibility with older applications. Vista does have other features which will be applicable to games - DirectX is only a part of that. You may even want to start thinking of 2 codepaths: "enhanced for Vista with D3D10" and "legacy D3D9".
Sorry for being [deliberately] vauge, but I'm personally bound by a couple of NDAs regarding Vista and DirectX... I would say take a look at the public DirectX conference slides from Meltdown, GDC, and WinHEC, you'll find a some more detail there. (http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx/ and http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/winhec/papers05.mspx)
From what I know about DX 10 it looks like mickerosoft is doing again an attempt to force everyone into some style that doesn't look to be nice.
Unnecessary abstraction from hardware, or bad abstraction from hardware might turn itself pretty badly.
Here is 18 months old link with a little preview I didn't like it. It looked like Directx 10 would force developers to work slightly differently than is optimal for hardware.
Unnecessary abstraction from hardware, or bad abstraction from hardware might turn itself pretty badly.
Here is 18 months old link with a little preview I didn't like it. It looked like Directx 10 would force developers to work slightly differently than is optimal for hardware.
Quote:Original post by gamerking
this is a stupid question but what is coming out first?
vista or longhorn
matt
ha yes it is. but hey it's certainly better to ask a stupid question than to pretend you know it all.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/default.mspx
(notice: WindowsVista, formerly Windows code name "Longhorn")
Quote:Original post by gamerking
this is a stupid question but what is coming out first?
vista or longhorn
matt
They are the same thing. During development, microsoft uses a code name for most of their products (AKA longhorn, Whidbey, Blackcomb, etc). Then before release, they come up with the actual prosct name (Vista, XP, etc).
Quote:Original post by Raghar
From what I know about DX 10 it looks like mickerosoft is doing again an attempt to force everyone into some style that doesn't look to be nice.
Unnecessary abstraction from hardware, or bad abstraction from hardware might turn itself pretty badly.
Here is 18 months old link with a little preview I didn't like it. It looked like Directx 10 would force developers to work slightly differently than is optimal for hardware.
It sounds like you don't know very much about it - why would MS deliberately force you to do things in a slow way, after spending years and $millions creating a high-performance multimedia library set?
S1CA put down the facts in his post above... but I will add that, from what I've read, a lot of people are looking forward to the new DX10 API's and/or Vista development [smile]
Yes, it is different (but, probably not so much that it'll set you back to square-1) but it should offer a number of interesting possibilities. In many respects, it seems like they've wiped the slate clean and really thought about how the whole thing fits together - and the clean slate has allowed them to make some otherwise big changes that would've been difficult if they'd just "bolted on" new stuff to DX9.
Given that you should be able to run your DX9 applications just fine on Vista, you're not going to be forced to use DX10 if you really don't like it [wink]
How do you mean? there's more of a push towards the programmable pipeline - which, as I look at it, pushes development closer to the hardware [smile]
hth
Jack
Yes, it is different (but, probably not so much that it'll set you back to square-1) but it should offer a number of interesting possibilities. In many respects, it seems like they've wiped the slate clean and really thought about how the whole thing fits together - and the clean slate has allowed them to make some otherwise big changes that would've been difficult if they'd just "bolted on" new stuff to DX9.
Given that you should be able to run your DX9 applications just fine on Vista, you're not going to be forced to use DX10 if you really don't like it [wink]
Quote:It looked like Directx 10 would force developers to work slightly differently than is optimal for hardware.
How do you mean? there's more of a push towards the programmable pipeline - which, as I look at it, pushes development closer to the hardware [smile]
hth
Jack
With DX10, will I still be able to use 100% pure C, or are they gonna force me to use C++?
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
